Reasons I think Sm4sh can become the highlight Smash game @ EVO

[Ulevo]

How come that in every thread I see you post, the topic gets derailed into melee vs brawl in some way or form? I think you are ruinig alot of good discussions with the mindset you enter threads. It plagues this forum a bit.

Like, just think to yourself "hmm, what am I commenting on here. Is this I just wrote really relevant to the thread Im posting in?" before you hit the post button.

The forum is also plagued with stereotypes and misinformation, particularly ones that wind up derailing the threads on their own. If you don't want me to post, I suggest you think about what you're saying before peering eyes have a chance to correct you.

Brawl being mentioned as a failure by some in this thread...
That is like the people saying the wii was a huge failure for Nintendo. Just like the wii broadened the gaming industry and introduced an insane ammount of non gamers to video games, Brawl introduced alot of casuals and even non gamers to the series. It was catered with this in mind and became a huge succes in the way it was ment to be. Just like the wii was a huge succes and did exactly what they wanted it to do.

People need to stop confusing their personal affection to a product with it being a failure or succes in general.


PS: This thread got derailed, as most threads do on smash boards lately. I think we are over thinking and trying to discuss things that honestly, isn't discussable yet (and won't be untill the game is released or atleast a lot of more information has been shown).

You believe that sales dictate whether or not the game is a success? What about the games design integrity, or how loyal its fan base is? The proof is in the pudding I'm afraid. There are reasons people criticize Brawl, and reasons that the only time the majority criticize Melee is when it is compared to (and are defending) Brawl.

Sales do not imply a good game, nor do they imply the game was made without any design errors.

This right here is something I wanted to say earlier in this thread, but never got around to saying. Melee is a game filled with mistakes, because a lot of the things people love about the game weren't intentional. He tried to rectify those "mistakes" with Brawl, but went a little too far for some and made the game too different from Melee. It wasn't to destroy everything the Melee players loved about the game, he did it because Melee wasn't supposed to be what it ended up being in the first place. The difference between Brawl and what Capcom did with Marvel 3 is that Capcom, as a huge fighting game company, embraced the Marvel 2 competitive scene and built on that, but Sakurai, as a very proud game designer of many genres, decided to go along with his own vision. I think with Smash 4, he better understands just how loud the minority of competitive Smash players are, and is going to cater to them/us a lot more than he did with Brawl.

Speaking of strereotypes that are incorrect.

I would like for you to point out these mistakes in Melee that were "fixed", because I assure you there really are none.

Secondly, Sakurai has directly stated himself that he intentionally catered Melee to hardcore players, while Brawl was directed towards a larger, more casual demographic.

Melee wasn't just some accident that Sakurai had to clean up. lol

 

[Xigger]

1) The game is highly likely to be the most balanced Smash game yet. Multiple people will be included in the balancing and Sakurai is open to patches

2) With Mega Man in Sm4sh, Capcom will probably want to promote a game with their character in it

3) It will have a larger character selection and most likely a larger audience/fanbase (especially considering it'll be available on two platforms)

4) After Melee's performance at this year's EVO, Nintendo may take notice and want to promote the newest game in the series

5) The fact that it will be the newest game with tons of hype

Maybe, does Capcom have an influence at Evo?, so did Brawl, maybe, so did Brawl.

 

[greenluigiman2]

does Capcom have an influence at Evo?

I don't think they have any "say" in the matter, but they at least have a little bit of influence.

so did Brawl.

Brawl was at EVO the year it came out, it just didn't last. 3 and 5 are still points in the game's favor for at least the first year.

1, 2 and 4 are some of the reasons I think Sm4sh could LAST at EVO. There are more reasons though.

 

[Mr.Showtime]

I don't think they have any "say" in the matter, but they at least have a little bit of influence.


Brawl was at EVO the year it came out, it just didn't last. 3 and 5 are still points in the game's favor for at least the first year.

1, 2 and 4 are some of the reasons I think Sm4sh could LAST at EVO. There are more reasons though.

A larger character roster shouldn't determine if a game is competitive viable. There is more than that which takes into effect of selecting games at EVO. Also, I don't believe Nintendo really cares for EVO, or at least Sakurai. He knows the competitive group exists, but doesn't really put the game's emphasis on them. Instead he wants to treat the game as a battle royal...so honestly, why does he care about balance so much? He seems pretty contradictory to himself and its almost impossible to understand what is going through that man's head. We'll just see when the game comes out.

 

[greenluigiman2]

A larger character roster shouldn't determine if a game is competitive viable. There is more than that which takes into effect of selecting games at EVO.

Ummm... I already know this. I never said a larger roster determines if a game competitively viable. The reason a larger roster is an advantage is because people will want to play as the new characters competitively. Melee players envy Brawl players. That's why Project M exists. Smash 4 will be the closest thing to Project M that can be played at EVO.

Also, I don't believe Nintendo really cares for EVO, or at least Sakurai. He knows the competitive group exists, but doesn't really put the game's emphasis on them. Instead he wants to treat the game as a battle royal...so honestly, why does he care about balance so much? He seems pretty contradictory to himself and its almost impossible to understand what is going through that man's head. We'll just see when the game comes out.

I don't know what Sakurai would think about EVO, but I think Nintendo might have a new found interest in it. Considering their quick turnaround in allowing Melee to stream, and then its remarkable performance. They'll probably see it as an opportunity to push Smash 4. Nintendo won't want its brand new game to be overshadowed by an old game.

 

[Mr.Showtime]

Ummm... I already know this. I never said a larger roster determines if a game competitively viable. The reason a larger roster is an advantage is because people will want to play as the new characters competitively.



I don't know what Sakurai would think about EVO, but I think Nintendo might have a new found interest in it. Considering their quick turnaround in allowing Melee to stream, and then its remarkable performance. They'll probably see it as an opportunity to push Smash 4. Nintendo won't want its brand new game to be overshadowed by an old game.

Well I think they didn't want their game streamed just to keep people from thinking the Smash is for competitive players. Just a possibility. I don't know what their exact reasons for trying to take down the stream in the first place.

 

[greenluigiman2]

Well I think they didn't want their game streamed just to keep people from thinking the Smash is for competitive players.

After how much Brawl sold and how much casual hype there is for Smash 4, I don't think Nintendo has an issue with people thinking Smash is a competitive game. Everybody knows what Smash is by now. I think they didn't want it streamed because they can't gain anything from it. Melee is an old game that came out two generations ago, I don't think Nintendo wanted Brawl to get upstaged, which is why I think/hope they'll push Smash 4 more than they did Brawl competitively.

 

[Jaedrik]

Well I think they didn't want their game streamed just to keep people from thinking the Smash is for competitive players. Just a possibility. I don't know what their exact reasons for trying to take down the stream in the first place.

After how much Brawl sold and how much casual hype there is for Smash 4, I don't think Nintendo has an issue with people thinking Smash is a competitive game. Everybody knows what Smash is by now. I think they didn't want it streamed because they can't gain anything from it. Melee is an old game that came out two generations ago, I don't think Nintendo wanted Brawl to get upstaged, which is why I think/hope they'll push Smash 4 more than they did Brawl competitively.

I think it was just the legal department acting with autonomy. From the accounts I've seen in customer service and Nintendo representatives, that's the way it seems. No broad generalization can be made about Nintendo due to the actions of a few of their components. I doubt Nintendo, as an entity, and the final decision making consciousness, knew much about this, somewhat like how the spine reacts in a certain irrational way and sends back immediate orders without first consulting the slower brains.
It's sad if that is indeed the way their nervous-system is structured I'm really interested in their corporate structure at this point.

 

[Mr.Jackpot]

This right here is something I wanted to say earlier in this thread, but never got around to saying. Melee is a game filled with mistakes, because a lot of the things people love about the game weren't intentional. He tried to rectify those "mistakes" with Brawl, but went a little too far for some and made the game too different from Melee. It wasn't to destroy everything the Melee players loved about the game, he did it because Melee wasn't supposed to be what it ended up being in the first place. The difference between Brawl and what Capcom did with Marvel 3 is that Capcom, as a huge fighting game company, embraced the Marvel 2 competitive scene and built on that, but Sakurai, as a very proud game designer of many genres, decided to go along with his own vision. I think with Smash 4, he better understands just how loud the minority of competitive Smash players are, and is going to cater to them/us a lot more than he did with Brawl.

This part right here.
How you can even say this baffles me to no end. Who is WE? The 338 Brawl players who entered Apex2013? WE are a part of this community too. Please don't try to speak for people who don't share your opinion, for all you know.
And the point about MvC2, and even Melee, is that they weren't meant to be played how they are today, and they are played the way they are today because of exploits, bad game design, glitches, etc. It just seemed relevant to add that tidbit because "mistakes" can end up making the best of games.

What in Melee is a mistake (no, L-cancelling and wavedashing are not mistakes) and what in MvC2/Melee do you guys consider bad game design? MvC2 had a lack of game design if anything else but just because something is accidental or left completely in the open doesn't mean that it's bad.

 

[Mr.Jackpot]

This right here is something I wanted to say earlier in this thread, but never got around to saying. Melee is a game filled with mistakes, because a lot of the things people love about the game weren't intentional. He tried to rectify those "mistakes" with Brawl, but went a little too far for some and made the game too different from Melee. It wasn't to destroy everything the Melee players loved about the game, he did it because Melee wasn't supposed to be what it ended up being in the first place. The difference between Brawl and what Capcom did with Marvel 3 is that Capcom, as a huge fighting game company, embraced the Marvel 2 competitive scene and built on that, but Sakurai, as a very proud game designer of many genres, decided to go along with his own vision. I think with Smash 4, he better understands just how loud the minority of competitive Smash players are, and is going to cater to them/us a lot more than he did with Brawl.

This part right here.
How you can even say this baffles me to no end. Who is WE? The 338 Brawl players who entered Apex2013? WE are a part of this community too. Please don't try to speak for people who don't share your opinion, for all you know.
And the point about MvC2, and even Melee, is that they weren't meant to be played how they are today, and they are played the way they are today because of exploits, bad game design, glitches, etc. It just seemed relevant to add that tidbit because "mistakes" can end up making the best of games.

What in Melee is a mistake (no, L-cancelling and wavedashing are not mistakes) and what in MvC2/Melee do you guys consider bad game design? MvC2 had a lack of game design if anything else but just because something is accidental or left completely in the open doesn't mean that it's bad.

 

[greenluigiman2]

just because something is accidental or left completely in the open doesn't mean that it's bad.

It's not bad at all, but that doesn't change the fact that it's accidental. Just like the exploits used to beat Super Mario 64 in a short amount of time are accidental. It's bad game design in my opinion, even though that doesn't make it a bad game.

 

[Mr.Jackpot]

It's not bad at all, but that doesn't change the fact that it's accidental. Just like the exploits used to beat Super Mario 64 in a short amount of time are accidental. It's bad game design in my opinion, even though that doesn't make it a bad game.

That part was more directed at kackamee and not really at you, but what in Melee do you consider an accident? All the fundamental techniques (short hopping, wavedashing, L-Cancelling, and variations) were intended by Sakurai and I only glitches I can really name are wobbling (which is arguably grab release mechanics working exactly as intended) but only one player has made any impact with it and he's retired now, and Ness's YYG but it's situational and he's still low tier.

 

[Ulevo]

That part was more directed at kackamee and not really at you, but what in Melee do you consider an accident? All the fundamental techniques (short hopping, wavedashing, L-Cancelling, and variations) were intended by Sakurai and I only glitches I can really name are wobbling (which is arguably grab release mechanics working exactly as intended) but only one player has made any impact with it and he's retired now, and Ness's YYG but it's situational and he's still low tier.

Wobbling isn't a glitch. It's just utilizing hitstun between Popo and Nana during a grab. Your character can't break free from a grab while being hit, so if you alternate between the two characters and perfectly time it, it creates an infinite loop.

A glitch is a specific event that happens in a game where the designer didn't code for the game to know what to do when in that situation, so it acts in an unexpected manner as a result. An example of this is the superwavedash by Samus. Another is Ness's YYG. Another would be Link's boomerang jump, where you throw the boomerang off the stage and cling to a wall with the hookshot, then as the boomerang returns to you, you try to climb up the wall by pressing A. This results in a kind of super jump and you go really high.

 

[greenluigiman2]

All the fundamental techniques (short hopping, wavedashing, L-Cancelling, and variations) were intended by Sakurai.

Those techniques weren't intended by Sakurai, they were just exploits based on Melee's physics/mechanics. If those things were put in for a specific reason Sakurai would have named them himself. He named shielding, he named dodging, he named sidestepping. < Those are intentional techniques. Competitive Melee is essentially user created. Which is fine, plenty of games have been exploited for the better.

 

[Ulevo]

Those techniques weren't intended by Sakurai, they were just exploits based on Melee's physics/mechanics. If those things were put in for a specific reason Sakurai would have named them himself. He named shielding, he named dodging, he named sidestepping. < Those are intentional techniques. Competitive Melee is essentially user created. Which is fine, plenty of games have been exploited for the better.

Except they were named. Short hopping is...short hopping. It always has been, and its in the manual. L-Cancelling has been in the manual since 64. Wavedashing was a name we gave to the physics that happen when an airdodge glides across the ground, which was given a name specific name called LANDFALLSPECIAL in the games coding. It's design was intended, he just didn't think it had user application. He's stated that in an interview.

Even if you want to discount Wavedashing, that's...1 thing.

Here's the reference: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjjVqqbCLf

EDIT: Here's a cool one for L-Cancelling as well. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVA4PuYQNko

 

[Mr.Jackpot]

Those techniques weren't intended by Sakurai, they were just exploits based on Melee's physics/mechanics. If those things were put in for a specific reason Sakurai would have named them himself. He named shielding, he named dodging, he named sidestepping. < Those are intentional techniques. Competitive Melee is essentially user created. Which is fine, plenty of games have been exploited for the better.

L-Cancelling was on the Smash 64 website under the name "Smooth Landing", Wavedashing was intentional as said by Sakurai in a Nintendo Power interview. Just because they're not in the intructional manuel doesn't mean that they're not intentional. Is perfect shielding a glitch now too?

I'm seen this kind of **** posted literally hundreds of times on these fourms now, I think it's time to make an FAQ...

 

[greenluigiman2]

L-Cancelling was on the Smash 64 website under the name "Smooth Landing", Wavedashing was intentional as said by Sakurai in a Nintendo Power interview. Just because they're not in the intructional manuel doesn't mean that they're not intentional. Is perfect shielding a glitch now too?

I'm seen this kind of **** posted literally hundreds of times on these fourms now, I think it's time to make an FAQ...

I didn't say anything was a glitch man. Basically, the point I'm trying to make is Melee isn't the Smash game that Sakurai is most fond of. I don't think he regrets making it, but if he could do it again he'd probably make a different game.

Anyway, this thread isn't about Melee, it's about Smash 4 and if/how much the community will accept it. Let's get back on topic.

 

[Mr.Showtime]

Here's a PDF of the manual...

http://www.gamesdbase.com/Media/SYS...mated/Super_Smash_Bros.-_Melee_-_Nintendo.pdf

Short hopping is even in Brawl....its an intended technique bro...Also in the N64 manual.

Wavedashing is probably the only thing that wasn't intentional, and there is an article somewhere where Sakurai admits that he knew it existed before release, just really did not care to take it out.

Shield Grabs were intentional, both are in Melee and Brawl. Even in the Melee's instructional manual.

L-Canceling was in N64 (known as Z-Canceling back then). In N64 it canceled the full lag time of an aerial. Sakurai knew this existed. In Melee, he decided to half that lag time because canceling the full lag time from an aerial was a little bit too broken. In Brawl he decided to remove the mechanic altogether. and even made fun of it with DeDeDe saying that if you L-Cancel one of his attacks it will cause more lag time. He knew this existed, he just wanted to give casual players a chance at the game too.

Dash dancing is just a phrase made up by us, but once again Sakurai knew such a thing existed. All it honestly is, is moving your control stick back and forth. All we did was call it something rather than saying "DASH BACK AND FORTH!" How did he know this existed?: By adding tripping into Brawl, it was impossible for players to constantly run back and forth without tripping. The more you ran back and forth, the higher risk of tripping.

Sakurai isn't an idiot. He knows these things existed. I'm sure he has done a crazy amount of testing for this series. He knew things existed in 64 and ported them over to Melee. How could he possibly replicate the same engines (heck even change some aspects about it) without it being on purpose. Just a coincidence? I think not...

 

[greenluigiman2]

Anyway, this thread isn't about Melee, it's about Smash 4 and if/how much the community will accept it. Let's get back on topic.

 

[Mr.Showtime]

Well this topic still effects how Smash can take some of these traits back so it can be competitive to EVO. I don't see how its really off-topic. =/

I don't exactly want them to copy and paste what they done in the past. Maybe make new ATs based around the information they collected. I'm just looking for a competitive worthy game.

 

[RoxburyGuy58]

You can't replace Melee. Ever.


Although I can see both being played there if Sm4sh gets big enough.

 

[Mr.Jackpot]

I didn't say anything was a glitch man. Basically, the point I'm trying to make is Melee isn't the Smash game that Sakurai is most fond of. I don't think he regrets making it, but if he could do it again he'd probably make a different game.

Anyway, this thread isn't about Melee, it's about Smash 4 and if/how much the community will accept it. Let's get back on topic.

You're talking about replacing Melee. That's relevant and blasphemy dude.

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

Just read page 13 of the manual. Yeah, he definitely made Melee to be a more competitive fighter, he even made a section on combos.

"Once you strike an opponent, they take damage and are unable to move for a brief moment. Combos are consecutive attacks that you string together during that time to prevent them from recovering their balance"

Hell, even in the special video he showed characters doing combos, like Peach doing D-throw, Utilt, SH Float Dair, Up B, Umbrella hit.

 

[greenluigiman2]

You're talking about replacing Melee.

You can't replace Melee. Ever.

Obviously. You can't replace 64 either. That's not what I'm talking about though.
Can Smash 4 become the main Smash game at EVO is what I'm asking. This thread has nothing to do with it replacing Melee. My wording may have been confusing.

 

[Ulevo]

You can't replace Melee. Ever.


Although I can see both being played there if Sm4sh gets big enough.

I think its possible for Smash 4 to eliminate Melee from the competitive scene at most tournaments if it has enough of the traditional mechanics restored or left in tact. The reason people still play Melee is because it was a better quality game by a fair margin, and Brawl was also drastically different from Melee as well. But if we get a game that is similar enough in both quality and familiarity, it might blur the lines enough for people to make the transition over to the next Smash game and leave Melee behind for most people.

I'm not sure how likely that is mind you, but it is possible.

 

[Lemonwater]

I don't think any game can replace Melee, nor should attempts be made to 'replace' it. In fact, this applies to all the Smash games. Each one should be played as a different game on its own, and judged as such.

I do believe it is possible for the new Smash to draw attention away from Melee and Brawl to become a worthy successor in the series. 'Replace' isn't really the right word for it, though.

 

[greenluigiman2]

I don't think any game can replace Melee, nor should attempts be made to 'replace' it. In fact, this applies to all the Smash games. Each one should be played as a different game on its own, and judged as such.

I do believe it is possible for the new Smash to draw attention away from Melee and Brawl to become a worthy successor in the series. 'Replace' isn't really the right word for it, though.

And another person missed my actual point...

I'm strictly talking about it being replaced as the highlight Smash game at EVO. I'm not insinuating that Melee should be replace as a whole.

 

[IsmaR]

You could always go back and edit your post, y'know. Reword it, as you so humbly put it.

 

[Lemonwater]

And another person missed my actual point...

I'm strictly talking about it being replaced as the highlight Smash game at EVO. I'm not insinuating that Melee should be replace as a whole.

And I'm not saying Melee should be....and I think the new Smash CAN steal the spotlight if properly executed, so to speak.

 

[Priap0s]

You believe that sales dictate whether or not the game is a success? What about the games design integrity, or how loyal its fan base is? The proof is in the pudding I'm afraid. There are reasons people criticize Brawl, and reasons that the only time the majority criticize Melee is when it is compared to (and are defending) Brawl.

Sales do not imply a good game, nor do they imply the game was made without any design errors.

You are free to post however much you want mate. Just try to learn to ignore people that rile you up since I often see you plunge into a debate about melee and brawl. When the thread or discussion has nothing to with it.

About the sale things. You totally missed my point. Never did I say that brawl was a succes just because of it sales. What I said, in short, was: Wii = casual console with alot of non gamers. Brawl = very casual friendly game wich got alot of non gamers/non smashers to play it and get introduced to the series. It did the job it was intended to do perfect. Instead of saying reason why you think brawl is bad (they are not essential to my point, wheter I agree or not).
Please explain how it was a failure for Nintendo as a company and how it didn't do what they wanted it to do? It did even reach great critical acclaim. It was the perfect stepping stone for its series, just like the wii was such a great stepping stone console for Nintendo.

 

[Ulevo]

You are free to post however much you want mate. Just try to learn to ignore people that rile you up since I often see you plunge into a debate about melee and brawl. When the thread or discussion has nothing to with it.

About the sale things. You totally missed my point. Never did I say that brawl was a succes just because of it sales. What I said, in short, was: Wii = casual console with alot of non gamers. Brawl = very casual friendly game wich got alot of non gamers/non smashers to play it and get introduced to the series. It did the job it was intended to do perfect. Instead of saying reason why you think brawl is bad (they are not essential to my point, wheter I agree or not).
Please explain how it was a failure for Nintendo as a company and how it didn't do what they wanted it to do? It did even reach great critical acclaim. It was the perfect stepping stone for its series, just like the wii was such a great stepping stone console for Nintendo.

First of all, I'm not taking any of these discussions personally, or being riled up. I enjoy conversation and debate, and if I think a point is important to make then I will typically attend to that.

You're also strawmanning the argument. You're assuming that when I say Brawl was a bad game, I'm judging this on a value set based off of its intended goals for Nintendo to reach. I've made it perfectly clear that's not what this is about, nor what I'm talking about at all. You can't definitively prove what Nintendo's specific intended desires were for Brawl as a product (or in this case most likely Sakurai's.) They have nothing to do with whether or not the game was in fact designed well.

Whether or not IGN or other sources gave this game a 10/10 or whatever has little barring on the topic.

 

[Priap0s]

First of all, I'm not taking any of these discussions personally, or being riled up. I enjoy conversation and debate, and if I think a point is important to make then I will typically attend to that.

You're also strawmanning the argument. You're assuming that when I say Brawl was a bad game, I'm judging this on a value set based off of its intended goals for Nintendo to reach. I've made it perfectly clear that's not what this is about, nor what I'm talking about at all. You can't definitively prove what Nintendo's specific intended desires were for Brawl as a product (or in this case most likely Sakurai's.) They have nothing to do with whether or not the game was in fact designed well.

Whether or not IGN or other sources gave this game a 10/10 or whatever has little barring on the topic.

Just to show my point one last time:
Reasons I think Sm4sh can replace Melee @ EVO (eventually)

And here we are talking about, atleast i thought we where, Brawl being a succes. Doesnt have to be a good game to be a succes. Even thou brawl was a damn good game in the aspects it strived to be good. Mario Kart is a pretty horrible game if you gonna rank it among competetive racers. But it is an amazing game in every field it strives to be amazing. Therefor brawl was bad for you, since it didn't strive to be what you wanted. It's still a great game, saying otherwise is naive.

Bah! Can you and I just drop this? As often when I follow your posts I eventually don't even know what you are arguing or discussing anymore. It certainly isn't on topic so lets move along.




On topic: I think that thanks to brawl going such a casual route, letting melee hang in there 5-6 more years, smash4 does have a big chance of replacing melee as the true tournament contender of the series. Brawl will probably become more like a mario party game. It was great fun for everyone having that console but I don't think many people will dwell on it instead of adapting the new game. Even if they think the last was better.

 

[Renji64]

The standards are set pretty low for smash 4. Removing tripping and being faster has already made it better than brawl. After reading that interview where he said brawl was made towards casuals and he pretty much left all melee heads hanging or people who just loved the other entries styles. From the actually match footage it still looks like brawl. Mario has fludd not much was really changed. It will take attention from Melee and Brawl since it is the new thing and it will get new players. But it is impossible for it to replace anything unless it is better than melee.

 

[Priap0s]

The standards are set pretty low for smash 4. Removing tripping and being faster has already made it better than brawl. After reading that interview where he said brawl was made towards casuals and he pretty much left all melee heads hanging or people who just loved the other entries styles. From the actually match footage it still looks like brawl. Mario has fludd not much was really changed. It will take attention from Melee and Brawl since it is the new thing and it will get new players. But it is impossible for it to replace anything unless it is better than melee.

Smash4 will for sure have a pretty easy time as a newcommer in the series. The expactations are close to zero since people had no idea brawl would take the direction it took. This time we have that in mind and know that this could become very different than what to expect.


As chances for EVO goes I think being new does more than you think. It could replace melee if it was a slightly worse game to. Just as long as there is no huge difference in quality. People always enjoy something fresh and Im sure most could sacrifise some for it =)

 

[Jaedrik]

I'm strictly talking about it being replaced as the highlight Smash game at EVO. I'm not insinuating that Melee should be replace as a whole.

See below.

And here we are talking about, atleast i thought we where, Brawl being a succes. Doesnt have to be a good game to be a succes. Even thou brawl was a damn good game in the aspects it strived to be good. Mario Kart is a pretty horrible game if you gonna rank it among competetive racers. But it is an amazing game in every field it strives to be amazing. Therefor brawl was bad for you, since it didn't strive to be what you wanted. It's still a great game, saying otherwise is naive.
Bah! Can you and I just drop this? As often when I follow your posts I eventually don't even know what you are arguing or discussing anymore. It certainly isn't on topic so lets move along.
On topic: I think that thanks to brawl going such a casual route, letting melee hang in there 5-6 more years, smash4 does have a big chance of replacing melee as the true tournament contender of the series. Brawl will probably become more like a mario party game. It was great fun for everyone having that console but I don't think many people will dwell on it instead of adapting the new game. Even if they think the last was better.

You thought wrong, I reject your premise of success, as likely Ulevo does, success instead being determined by the game's specific merit, in the context we were speaking, this should be obvious, but you maintain this false, outside of context definition.
Brawl was not a success, if you choose to continually refuse the variety of success we've been using then let me rephrase, Brawl was not a success in the fact that it was nowhere near as deep, technical, or competitive as Melee. As I have pointed out before, good and bad, especially when talked about in this, is objective, not subjective, it was bad for you and bad for him, you simply value the competitive nature of the game less, and intent of the developer, as for what it strives for, has little to do with it. The main and only reason it is objective is that we have been using a specific operative and characteristic of success this whole time, and now I hope you understand that, this operative characteristic has a certain objective quality -- like green or loud, which in this case we call competitive, deep, technical. Those are the terms used to define success.

Please understand, I do not mean to harp on you nor bring this subject up uselessly and continuously, I wish only to point out the misunderstanding so that we may all grow in knowledge, and that's what it is, in fact many of the arguments and debates here are huge misunderstandings, heck, I'd go so far as to say that most of the pain and suff'ring of man has been caused by the flaws of language.

I would contend that as a completely natural evolution of the discussion we are having about the proper topic, it is on topic.

@GreenLuigiMan2 and Priap0s's "On topic": I do not believe we are sufficiently dispensed at this time to make such judgements. I think we (read: the FGC) learned from last time, last time when Brawl turned out to be a colossal failure (read: competitively), not to replace Melee so quickly, and I really don't think the distinction you make between the highlight Smash game and as a whole is important either, for those you're responding to replacing as the main event might as well be replacing as a whole, side events have nowhere near the power of a main event. I believe that Smash4 has a relatively low chance of replacing Melee as the main stage Smash event at the first EVO after Smash4's release.
But! As I have said cheerily before; We. Shall. See.

 

[greenluigiman2]

From the actually match footage it still looks like brawl. Mario has fludd not much was really changed. It will take attention from Melee and Brawl since it is the new thing and it will get new players. But it is impossible for it to replace anything unless it is better than melee.

It only looks like Brawl on the surface, but as someone who primarily plays Brawl, it looks a lot faster. The part at the beginning where Mario jumps and then falls down pretty fast was particularly noticeable. Considering the fact that the game wasn't played by any "pro" Smash players, it looked darn good competitively.

 

[Jaedrik]

It only looks like Brawl on the surface, but as someone who primarily plays Brawl, it looks a lot faster. The part at the beginning where Mario jumps and then falls down pretty fast was particularly noticeable. Considering the fact that the game wasn't played by any "pro" Smash players, it looked darn good competitively.

Agreed, but I thought Jason "M2K" Zimmerman got to play it at E3. . .
Edit: Oh you mean the gameplay we saw.

 

[greenluigiman2]

Agreed, but I thought Jason "M2K" Zimmerman got to play it at E3. . .

HE DID?
Has he shared his thoughts anywhere?

 

[Jaedrik]

HE DID?
Has he shared his thoughts anywhere?

Probably had to sign an NDA.

 

[Priap0s]

Agreed, but I thought Jason "M2K" Zimmerman got to play it at E3. . .
Edit: Oh you mean the gameplay we saw.

He never got to unfortunantly. It was a hoax


In response to your earlier post with generalisation about succes:
I am very certain the word "succes" in a dictionairy would not be described as you do it. You are describing what succes, regarding to this topic, is to YOU. Not what the word succes is in itself. "competitive, deep, technical. Those are the terms used to define success.". Those terms doesnt neccesarily have anything to do with succes, even if they can be part of and contribute to succes. IM pretty sure that in some cases they could just as well be part of "failure".

You also add "you simply value the competitive nature of the game less" when I myself have never played Brawl more than the first months after its release. To this day I still only play melee because I am more into the competetive aspects it offers. I just wont call Brawl a failure because it wasn't a succes to me personally. Why does this suprise you? It is how everyone should discuss imo. With an open mind and not only make conclusions out of ones own opinions.

You bring up it didn't have the technical depth and competetivity melee has. Agreed, yt sure as hell doesn't. But was it intended to? Was the game aimed at that? Succes is reaching the goal you have, not the goal of someone else.



Instead of just saying that your idea of what a succesfull smash game would be, is the correct idea of succes. Take your time to explain why and who are you to descide that? Why is your idea of succes the true one when you are such a small factor in the bigger picture of smash as a series? Surely Sakurai or others that have worked with the game, published it, reviewed it, people who have bought it (no, they didn't all get dissapointed like us. Its a loved game) or sold it even, have much more important saying about this than you?

If you are just talking about it not being a succes as a competetive fighter... well duh, it wasn't ment to be so why would it?


Edit: This is so off topic and just blocking people from seeing posts on topic. Feel free to answer me in PM instead if you wish MonK4. Ill edit this post out completly after your answer even, to not spam the thread up with my ramblings