Sakurai "aiming to make Super Smash Bros. best character game in the world"

[ChikoLad]

Main reason I avoid this thread lol. It became a character argument that I care not for. I am still disappointed with his stance of finding a middle ground then immediately after restating he thinks it is only a party game.

What he thinks the game is does not necessarily equal what he develops it as, especially considering he is not the sole member of the dev team. He merely stated what he views Smash as personally, more how he plays it than how he develops it. It doesn't contradict anything, it's just his opinion of the game.

It reminds me of the time Miyamoto stated that he views the Mario cast as actors, who actually are all good friends but just put on a show in every game - he may view it as that, but he doesn't necessarily develop each Mario game he works on with that mindset, nor does he ever say it's canon, or that we have to view it as that.

I'm pretty sure if Sakurai was developing the game without at all considering the opinion of others and what they want Smash to be, there would be at least 5 more Kid Icarus, Kirby, and Fire Emblem characters, and turning items off would not be an option. You're not supposed to take "I view it as a party game" as "I'm developing it as a party game and nothing more". That's just twisting his words. He quite blatantly is trying to find a middle ground, and has been taking steps to appeal to the more serious players in the form of balancing and fine-tuning or even getting rid of flawed mechanics for serious play (e.g. tripping) as well as having a balancing team that's four times the size of what he had in Brawl, while still appealing to the more recreational audience by adding new features like Amiibo and adding some new items. Then he is adding things that might tickle the fancy of both, such as the new online modes, custom move sets, and equipment.

 

[pizzapie7]

What he thinks the game is does not necessarily equal what he develops it as, especially considering he is not the sole member of the dev team. He merely stated what he views Smash as personally, more how he plays it than how he develops it. It doesn't contradict anything, it's just his opinion of the game.

It reminds me of the time Miyamoto stated that he views the Mario cast as actors, who actually are all good friends but just put on a show in every game - he may view it as that, but he doesn't necessarily develop each Mario game he works on with that mindset, nor does he ever say it's canon, or that we have to view it as that.

I'm pretty sure if Sakurai was developing the game without at all considering the opinion of others and what they want Smash to be, there would be at least 5 more Kid Icarus, Kirby, and Fire Emblem characters, and turning items off would not be an option. You're not supposed to take "I view it as a party game" as "I'm developing it as a party game and nothing more". That's just twisting his words. He quite blatantly is trying to find a middle ground, and has been taking steps to appeal to the more serious players in the form of balancing and fine-tuning or even getting rid of flawed mechanics for serious play (e.g. tripping) as well as having a balancing team that's four times the size of what he had in Brawl, while still appealing to the more recreational audience by adding new features like Amiibo and adding some new items. Then he is adding things that might tickle the fancy of both, such as the new online modes, custom move sets, and equipment.

There's a difference between Sakurai and Miyamoto in that Miyamoto's view does not effect the games themselves, only his interpretation of canon. The argument could be made that Sakurai's design philosophy has effected how the game's have been designed. Sakurai clearly developed Brawl with that mindset, he's made it clear as such.

He's not quite blatantly been trying for some middle ground outside of what he's been saying. Tripping was fundamentally flawed in every since imaginable, not only competitively. He's removing something that should have never existed. That's not something we're supposed to be giving him kudos for. That's something we're supposed to expect at a minimum. A balance team isn't going to change whatever Sakurai designs, they're just going to balance the game, another thing that we're supposed to expect.

Actions speak louder than words. Sakurai should know this.

 

[Bauske]

Exactly. Like I said, it's a talking point he expects people to actually believe just because he's saying it.

And people defend it and attack people who call out this obvious bull****.

People defend it because the game hasn't even released yet. Others are jumping to conclusion that it won't be a competitive-viable game when they haven't even played the final build yet. It's jumping to conclusions. Yeah, the game won't be as complex as Melee, but that doesn't mean it won't have a competitive aspect to it.

I think the game is shaping up amazingly, both from a casual and competitive stance, but I see so many people slamming it when they haven't even played more than 5 minutes of it, which is incredibly short-sighted.

 

[ChikoLad]

There's a difference between Sakurai and Miyamoto in that Miyamoto's view does not effect the games themselves, only his interpretation of canon. The argument could be made that Sakurai's design philosophy has effected how the game's have been designed. Sakurai clearly developed Brawl with that mindset, he's made it clear as such.

He's not quite blatantly been trying for some middle ground outside of what he's been saying. Tripping was fundamentally flawed in every since imaginable, not only competitively. He's removing something that should have never existed. That's not something we're supposed to be giving him kudos for. That's something we're supposed to expect at a minimum. A balance team isn't going to change whatever Sakurai designs, they're just going to balance the game, another thing that we're supposed to expect.

Actions speak louder than words. Sakurai should know this.

I thought this was the Smash 4 boards, not the Brawl boards. It's true he developed Brawl with the intention of solely appealing to a new audience, but that doesn't mean he's doing it with Smash 4.

Tripping wasn't fundamentally flawed in Brawl when you consider the standpoint of how it was developed - as a fun party game. In that context, the tripping was fine. It was funny in the same way throwing a Blue Shell at the person in first place is in Mario Kart, or how the Lightning functions in Mario Kart. It was unfair, but it led to ridiculously funny situations. Remember how I said that if Sakurai wanted people to play a certain way, and no other way, he'd do something that pretty much forces them to? That's what tripping was for in Brawl. However, he's removing it in Smash 4 because his design philosophy has changed from Brawl. He doesn't want to force people into a game dictated by too many random factors and make it strictly for light hearted fun anymore, he wants it to be a game where everyone can experience it how they want to, so he's providing ways to do so.

And of course a balance team can change what Sakurai designs - when Sakurai designs flawed mechanics, the balance team is there to do their best to call him out on that, and suggest changes and try to make him follow through. You think they're there just for the fun of it, for Sakurai to ignore?
And like I said before, he's quadrupled the balance team. From Melee to Brawl, he tripled it (it was only him in 64 and Melee, Brawl had a balance team of three). Thinking that wasn't sufficient after Brawl's release, he has now quadrupled it from 3 to 12. Are you going to brush this off too? Are you going to brush off the obvious effort to improve from Brawl to Smash 4?

And I find it ironic you tell me actions speak louder than words, when you focus on twisting his words and nothing else, poorly address two of the actions of his I presented, and ignore the other six.

 

[Senario]

I thought this was the Smash 4 boards, not the Brawl boards. It's true he developed Brawl with the intention of solely appealing to a new audience, but that doesn't mean he's doing it with Smash 4.

Tripping wasn't fundamentally flawed in Brawl when you consider the standpoint of how it was developed - as a fun party game. In that context, the tripping was fine. It was funny in the same way throwing a Blue Shell at the person in first place is in Mario Kart, or how the Lightning functions in Mario Kart. It was unfair, but it led to ridiculously funny situations. Remember how I said that if Sakurai wanted people to play a certain way, and no other way, he'd do something that pretty much forces them to? That's what tripping was for in Brawl. However, he's removing it in Smash 4 because his design philosophy has changed from Brawl. He doesn't want to force people into a game dictated by too many random factors and make it strictly for light hearted fun anymore, he wants it to be a game where everyone can experience it how they want to, so he's providing ways to do so.

And of course a balance team can change what Sakurai designs - when Sakurai designs flawed mechanics, the balance team is there to do their best to call him out on that, and suggest changes and try to make him follow through. You think they're there just for the fun of it, for Sakurai to ignore?
And like I said before, he's quadrupled the balance team. From Melee to Brawl, he tripled it (it was only him in 64 and Melee, Brawl had a balance team of three). Thinking that wasn't sufficient after Brawl's release, he has now quadrupled it from 3 to 12. Are you going to brush this off too? Are you going to brush off the obvious effort to improve from Brawl to Smash 4?

And I find it ironic you tell me actions speak louder than words, when you focus on twisting his words and nothing else, poorly address two of the actions of his I presented, and ignore the other six.

A larger balance team doesn't mean they'll do their job better. The larger balance team was largely responsible for brawl's terrible imbalance with Meta Knight and a lot of infinites. They developed preferences and favorites and honestly getting a bunch of people who likely don't understand the game competitively to balance it doesn't sound that appealing to me. A higher number of players doesn't mean a quality number of players to playtest balance.

Other than Sakurai's word we have nothing to go off of that he has actually changed his design philosophy besides some shoddy "LOOK I'VE CHANGED!" interviews and consequently backtracking on it. Tripping was fundamentally flawed in brawl, even my casual friends think it was stupid because nobody wants to trip ever. Unlike the blue shell it was not designed to give a feeling of power as a consolation for being far in last place so you didn't feel so bad for losing(because a lot of people like to win regardless of actual competitiveness). It was instead designed to punish you for moving or dashing too much. An absolutely ridiculous concept even in fighting games that aren't very deep by design.

Again, actions speak louder than words and we will know on the 13th of next month when the japanese version of the 3ds comes out. I'm sure we will have a lot of info to go off of. It would be great if he actually is designing it so it is fun competitively, but I highly doubt he even understands what makes the game competitive.

 

[Johnknight1]

I hate what this thread devolved into, to finalize this idea on how I feel about large casts.

Large casts aren't necessarily a good thing, MvC2 has a large cast but it's balance is horrendous, even a casual can see the difference between servebot and Roll vs Sentinel and Storm.

I was more thinking of different kinds of playstyle approaches and gameplay variety which MvC2 has a lot of, as well as how many "fun" characters there were to play as or against.

I mean, I still get excited to play Mario in 64 and Fox in Melee, but at the same time I still get hyped to play Blanka in Street Fighter II (yes, I'm that guy) and Wolverine in MvC2.

And yes, MvC2 is very imbalanced. However, one could say the same thing about Brawl. The point remains that both games have a lot of variety (whereas Dragon Ball Z games do not, especially since half of the games are quick time events).

Of course the key difference is one is a 3v3 tag and assist fighting game that one player controls based on teamwork and making an optimal team that works together while the other is a game that you control 1 character with multiple match up possibilities with 2, 3, or 4 players.

===

BTW, kinda off topic, but I still wish both Brawl and MvC2 had a balance patch though. I wanted to see all the mid tiers compete, as the mid tiers in both games were the kind of characters I enjoyed the most.

 

[Renji64]

A larger balance team doesn't mean they'll do their job better. The larger balance team was largely responsible for brawl's terrible imbalance with Meta Knight and a lot of infinites. They developed preferences and favorites and honestly getting a bunch of people who likely don't understand the game competitively to balance it doesn't sound that appealing to me. A higher number of players doesn't mean a quality number of players to playtest balance.

Other than Sakurai's word we have nothing to go off of that he has actually changed his design philosophy besides some shoddy "LOOK I'VE CHANGED!" interviews and consequently backtracking on it. Tripping was fundamentally flawed in brawl, even my casual friends think it was stupid because nobody wants to trip ever. Unlike the blue shell it was not designed to give a feeling of power as a consolation for being far in last place so you didn't feel so bad for losing(because a lot of people like to win regardless of actual competitiveness). It was instead designed to punish you for moving or dashing too much. An absolutely ridiculous concept even in fighting games that aren't very deep by design.

Again, actions speak louder than words and we will know on the 13th of next month when the japanese version of the 3ds comes out. I'm sure we will have a lot of info to go off of. It would be great if he actually is designing it so it is fun competitively, but I highly doubt he even understands what makes the game competitive.

People should read his interviews it gives a good idea where he is going with smash 4.

 

[HeavyLobster]

A larger balance team doesn't mean they'll do their job better. The larger balance team was largely responsible for brawl's terrible imbalance with Meta Knight and a lot of infinites. They developed preferences and favorites and honestly getting a bunch of people who likely don't understand the game competitively to balance it doesn't sound that appealing to me. A higher number of players doesn't mean a quality number of players to playtest balance.

It's not just the size of the balance team, it's the fact that the development team for Smash 4 has actual experience with designing tourney fighters that aren't Smash. The hodgepodge team that made Brawl had a few veterans from Melee, but most of the developers that contributed had more of an RPG background, and none that I'm aware of had any extensive experience with games specifically designed to be competitive tournament fighters. Sakurai has done more to acknowledge the competitive scene in Smash 4 than ever before, and more attention will likely be dedicated to the competitive side of Smash than ever before. (Not that either statement is saying all that much)

 

[ChikoLad]

A larger balance team doesn't mean they'll do their job better. The larger balance team was largely responsible for brawl's terrible imbalance with Meta Knight and a lot of infinites. They developed preferences and favorites and honestly getting a bunch of people who likely don't understand the game competitively to balance it doesn't sound that appealing to me. A higher number of players doesn't mean a quality number of players to playtest balance.

Other than Sakurai's word we have nothing to go off of that he has actually changed his design philosophy besides some shoddy "LOOK I'VE CHANGED!" interviews and consequently backtracking on it. Tripping was fundamentally flawed in brawl, even my casual friends think it was stupid because nobody wants to trip ever. Unlike the blue shell it was not designed to give a feeling of power as a consolation for being far in last place so you didn't feel so bad for losing(because a lot of people like to win regardless of actual competitiveness). It was instead designed to punish you for moving or dashing too much. An absolutely ridiculous concept even in fighting games that aren't very deep by design.

Again, actions speak louder than words and we will know on the 13th of next month when the japanese version of the 3ds comes out. I'm sure we will have a lot of info to go off of. It would be great if he actually is designing it so it is fun competitively, but I highly doubt he even understands what makes the game competitive.

3 people was still an inadequate size for a balance team, but 12 is a much better number, as it's more people to chime in and give feedback. The numbers do matter. The more people there are, the more chance there is of at least one of those people finding something flawed and suggesting fixes. It also helps that we know the dev team of this game has a lot of experience with figthers, unlike Brawl (and it's likely Sakurai didn't form such a team with Brawl because he simply wasn't aiming to make a serious fighting game at all).

Your casual friends not liking tripping doesn't make it fundamentally flawed, my own brother is a casual player and loves how tripping was in Brawl. And I'm a serious player who did actually enjoy it in casual matches, but wished I could turn it off and wished it was always off in single player. And I think the Blue Shell is a much worse mechanic since it actively punishes you for being good at the game specifically, and doesn't take any skill for the person who attains it to utilise, it's just instant ability to screw with someone who is not even their immediate target. It's really down to subjective opinion on whether or not tripping was fun. The only truly flawed thing about tripping was that it was something you couldn't turn off, but I already pointed out how it was like that because Sakurai didn't want people to take the game seriously, and how him removing it entirely evidences him gravitating closer to actually trying to strike a balance and give all kinds of players the freedom to play how they want.

I highly doubt he even understands what makes the game competitive

competitive
kəmˈpɛtɪtɪv/
adjective

1. 1.
   relating to or characterized by competition.
   "a competitive sport"

All Smash games are inherently competitive regardless of things like tripping being present, or regardless of the mode being played.

 

[Johnknight1]

The problem with Brawl is that HAL Laboratories (aka the 64 and Melee development team, that by and large did a pretty great job at balancing Melee) were initially involved a bit, then had to drop out a bit making a Kirby game that became a part of multiple Kirby games, and then became basically lowly bug testers (and they made their interns do that work).

So yeah, it was left in Game Arts' hands, aka a third party that really only ever made RPG's and was only brought on for programming purposes and to help build up the SSE (a huge chunk of which was cut from Brawl during development, hence the huge gaping holes in the story to where it doesn't mane any cohesive sense).

Maybe this has to do with me being born in the late 90's, maybe Mega man was just that big in the NES era, but it does confuse me a bit.

Mega Man's best selling game sold about 2 million copies.

Mega Man is not as well known as Snake or Kirby, let alone Mario, Donkey Kong, Pac-Man, Sonic and Pikachu.

I say that and I'm a huge Mega Man fan, lol.

The thing about Mega Man is he has extremely dedicated fanbases and the games various Mega Man incarnations were the main characters in helped make the NES, SNES, Game Boy, N64, GBA, GameCube, DS, and Wii better consoles in terms of game library.

 

[Senario]

3 people was still an inadequate size for a balance team, but 12 is a much better number, as it's more people to chime in and give feedback. The numbers do matter. The more people there are, the more chance there is of at least one of those people finding something flawed and suggesting fixes. It also helps that we know the dev team of this game has a lot of experience with figthers, unlike Brawl (and it's likely Sakurai didn't form such a team with Brawl because he simply wasn't aiming to make a serious fighting game at all).

Your casual friends not liking tripping doesn't make it fundamentally flawed, my own brother is a casual player and loves how tripping was in Brawl. And I'm a serious player who did actually enjoy it in casual matches, but wished I could turn it off and wished it was always off in single player. And I think the Blue Shell is a much worse mechanic since it actively punishes you for being good at the game specifically, and doesn't take any skill for the person who attains it to utilise, it's just instant ability to screw with someone who is not even their immediate target. It's really down to subjective opinion on whether or not tripping was fun. The only truly flawed thing about tripping was that it was something you couldn't turn off, but I already pointed out how it was like that because Sakurai didn't want people to take the game seriously, and how him removing it entirely evidences him gravitating closer to actually trying to strike a balance and give all kinds of players the freedom to play how they want.



competitive
kəmˈpɛtɪtɪv/
adjective

1. 1.
   relating to or characterized by competition.
   "a competitive sport"

All Smash games are inherently competitive regardless of things like tripping being present, or regardless of the mode being played.

I should rephrase, it isn't interesting to watch as an esport/fighting game. Anything can be competitive if you want it to be, it just isn't pretty. Oh and competitive brawl was not fun for a lot of people as well, that is also a big important point.

The problem is that most fans actually do not care about the deeper mechanics, I know my friends do not. They just want a new smash game. Having the basis for comeptitive play won't hurt them at all since the two are so far apart already due to bans. If landing lag was simply low across the board nobody would notice same with better mobility options like dash dancing or more moves that have IASA frames.

It's not just the size of the balance team, it's the fact that the development team for Smash 4 has actual experience with designing tourney fighters that aren't Smash. The hodgepodge team that made Brawl had a few veterans from Melee, but most of the developers that contributed had more of an RPG background, and none that I'm aware of had any extensive experience with games specifically designed to be competitive tournament fighters. Sakurai has done more to acknowledge the competitive scene in Smash 4 than ever before, and more attention will likely be dedicated to the competitive side of Smash than ever before. (Not that either statement is saying all that much)

Well I wouldn't say Sakurai is responsible for that. I usually thank Nintendo of America for being the ones who are clearly reaching out to competitive players while sakurai keeps repeating the same thing that he doesn't think it should be competitive. While having the team be from other fighting game balance teams is interesting I'm not how well their experience in traditional/3d fighting games will translate over to smash as smash has it's own unique things that make it a fighting game. I'm not saying they are useless but it is indeed questionable how well they can balance a smash game properly especially when it is the only type of game of it's kind and relies on different things to make it competitive compared to a 3d fighter or traditional fighter.

P.S. You took my quote out of context. Sakurai does not seem to understand or want to understand what makes smash a good competitive game.

 

[ChikoLad]

I should rephrase, it isn't interesting to watch as an esport/fighting game. Anything can be competitive if you want it to be, it just isn't pretty. Oh and competitive brawl was not fun for a lot of people as well, that is also a big important point.

The problem is that most fans actually do not care about the deeper mechanics, I know my friends do not. They just want a new smash game. Having the basis for comeptitive play won't hurt them at all since the two are so far apart already due to bans. If landing lag was simply low across the board nobody would notice same with better mobility options like dash dancing or more moves that have IASA frames.


Well I wouldn't say Sakurai is responsible for that. I usually thank Nintendo of America for being the ones who are clearly reaching out to competitive players while sakurai keeps repeating the same thing that he doesn't think it should be competitive. While having the team be from other fighting game balance teams is interesting I'm not how well their experience in traditional/3d fighting games will translate over to smash as smash has it's own unique things that make it a fighting game. I'm not saying they are useless but it is indeed questionable how well they can balance a smash game properly especially when it is the only type of game of it's kind and relies on different things to make it competitive compared to a 3d fighter or traditional fighter.

And as people have pointed out, we may very well be getting those better movement options in the final game:

 

[pickle962]

A larger balance team doesn't mean they'll do their job better. The larger balance team was largely responsible for brawl's terrible imbalance with Meta Knight and a lot of infinites. They developed preferences and favorites and honestly getting a bunch of people who likely don't understand the game competitively to balance it doesn't sound that appealing to me. A higher number of players doesn't mean a quality number of players to playtest balance.

Other than Sakurai's word we have nothing to go off of that he has actually changed his design philosophy besides some shoddy "LOOK I'VE CHANGED!" interviews and consequently backtracking on it. Tripping was fundamentally flawed in brawl, even my casual friends think it was stupid because nobody wants to trip ever. Unlike the blue shell it was not designed to give a feeling of power as a consolation for being far in last place so you didn't feel so bad for losing(because a lot of people like to win regardless of actual competitiveness). It was instead designed to punish you for moving or dashing too much. An absolutely ridiculous concept even in fighting games that aren't very deep by design.

Again, actions speak louder than words and we will know on the 13th of next month when the japanese version of the 3ds comes out. I'm sure we will have a lot of info to go off of. It would be great if he actually is designing it so it is fun competitively, but I highly doubt he even understands what makes the game competitive.

*facepalm* please for the last time, cease the negativity! Having the top devs from Tekken/Soul Caliber courtesy of Namco who all have legitimate credentials in designing a very good fighting game as opposed to the knuckleheads who helped "balance" Brawl (for the record, do not EVER hire an RPG guy to help make a fighting game) is the equivalent of having all of your favorite action movie actors from when you were a kid star in an Expendables movie. Seriously though, that is the best comparison I can make.

If Sakurai still didn't care about us the competitive community, he would not have bothered removing Brawl's scrappy mechanics (tripping, acting out of hitstun, gliding, etc) that weighed it down like an anchor in many a competitive and even casual's eyes, making sure there's a bigger emphasis on roster balance so that we hopefully don't have another MetaKnight problem on our hands, (and speaking of the devil, he's already being nerfed from the sound of it due to the absence of gliding in 4 thus cutting down TWO of his many recovery options he had in Brawl i.e MK's up special was basically a free glide for that character and could even be used to glide UNDER certain stages), and even go out of his way to make Online a lot more enjoyable for both parties this time with "For Fun" and "For Glory".

You can still say what you want about the guy Senario about how he still views smash as a quirky party game, but at the same time, you cannot ignore/deny how the man's actually trying to appeal to both casuals and competitives as opposed to just the former like Brawl sadly did.

 

[pupNapoleon]

This thread has exploded, and here I am just being a little turd elsewhere all day!
This is important.
It really just was the icing on the cake for any fan needed character.

C'mon guys, do we need more proof for Ridley, K Rool, Mewtwo?
Sure you do. I don't
Hell, I'm pretty sold on Rayman and Bomberman now.

 

[RascalTheCharizard]

And as people have pointed out, we may very well be getting those better movement options in the final game:

Sorry man, but that video poses literally NO evidence whatsoever. There's speculating based on known information and then there's just Wild Mass Guessing.

 

[ChikoLad]

Sorry man, but that video poses literally NO evidence whatsoever. There's speculating based on known information and then there's just Wild Mass Guessing.

The evidence is right there. A Nintendo rep who's played a later build quite a bit, obviously attempted to dash-dance in an earlier build.

If you can't see why that's evidence, you are blind to the obvious.

 

[RascalTheCharizard]

The evidence is right there. A Nintendo rep who's played a later build quite a bit, obviously attempted to dash-dance in an earlier build.

If you can't see why that's evidence, you are blind to the obvious.

We've seen Bowser make those movements in the April Direct, it's nothing new for a Nintendo rep to attempt it exactly one time.

Plus the point of my post was to draw attention to how weak your argument was, which I see you do not care for. I wouldn't call ANYTHING obvious at this point. Let's just see what happens.

Let me put it this way:

Speculation based on evidence - Well we saw Ridley's shadow on the Pyrosphere stage as well as the tip of his wing. Maybe he's the stage boss. But maybe he's actually playable!

Flinging ideas like a monkey flings **** - WELl GAiz maYbE ITz JuSt FR0M a Bu1LD oF Teh GAYM tHat nO-OnE HAs evEr sEeN TahT MAy oR MAy nOT evEn ExiST! illuminati emirite?

 

[Eternal phoenix Fire]

*facepalm* please for the last time, cease the negativity! Having the top devs from Tekken/Soul Caliber courtesy of Namco who all have legitimate credentials in designing a very good fighting game as opposed to the knuckleheads who helped "balance" Brawl (for the record, do not EVER hire an RPG guy to help make a fighting game) is the equivalent of having all of your favorite action movie actors from when you were a kid star in an Expendables movie. Seriously though, that is the best comparison I can make.

If Sakurai still didn't care about us the competitive community, he would not have bothered removing Brawl's scrappy mechanics (tripping, acting out of hitstun, gliding, etc) that weighed it down like an anchor in many a competitive and even casual's eyes, making sure there's a bigger emphasis on roster balance so that we hopefully don't have another MetaKnight problem on our hands, (and speaking of the devil, he's already being nerfed from the sound of it due to the absence of gliding in 4 thus cutting down TWO of his many recovery options he had in Brawl i.e MK's up special was basically a free glide for that character and could even be used to glide UNDER certain stages), and even go out of his way to make Online a lot more enjoyable for both parties this time with "For Fun" and "For Glory".

You can still say what you want about the guy Senario about how he still views smash as a quirky party game, but at the same time, you cannot ignore/deny how the man's actually trying to appeal to both casuals and competitives as opposed to just the former like Brawl sadly did.

I still don't take Sakurai's word at face value, regardless of what he says. He said he was making Brawl to be balanced, but that didn't turn out as well as he had "planned".

The removal of random tripping was not for the sake of apprealing to the competitive community, as the majority of people who have played the game were infuriated by it. Personally, I'm not going to take something that is essentially damage control and accept it as catoring to the needs of the competitive players.

Smash 4 is turning out great, but Sakurai is receiving too much credit for doing things he should have done a long time ago and fixing things that should have never happened in the first place.

 

[ChikoLad]

We've seen Bowser make those movements in the April Direct, it's nothing new for a Nintendo rep to attempt it exactly one time.

Plus the point of my post was to draw attention to how weak your argument was, which I see you do not care for. I wouldn't call ANYTHING obvious at this point. Let's just see what happens.

Let me put it this way:

Speculation based on evidence - Well we saw Ridley's shadow on the Pyrosphere stage as well as the tip of his wing. Maybe he's the stage boss. But maybe he's actually playable!

Flinging ideas like a monkey flings **** - WELl GAiz maYbE ITz JuSt FR0M a Bu1LD oF Teh GAYM tHat nO-OnE HAs evEr sEeN TahT MAy oR MAy nOT evEn ExiST! illuminati emirite?

-y

 

[Deleted member 245254]

There's a difference between Sakurai and Miyamoto in that Miyamoto's view does not effect the games themselves, only his interpretation of canon. The argument could be made that Sakurai's design philosophy has effected how the game's have been designed. Sakurai clearly developed Brawl with that mindset, he's made it clear as such.

He's not quite blatantly been trying for some middle ground outside of what he's been saying. Tripping was fundamentally flawed in every since imaginable, not only competitively. He's removing something that should have never existed. That's not something we're supposed to be giving him kudos for. That's something we're supposed to expect at a minimum. A balance team isn't going to change whatever Sakurai designs, they're just going to balance the game, another thing that we're supposed to expect.

Actions speak louder than words. Sakurai should know this.

The force of entitlement in this post could solve world peace if channeled through the proper outlets.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

I'm one to say I still think some ideas from Brawl were good for balance and creativity.

Tripping is not one of them, even back in 08 I hated it and so do my casual friends. Tripping wasn't a good idea even from a party game standpoint. All it does is piss people off not really make them enjoy it.

 

[pupNapoleon]

Also, watch Sony make a new Playstation All-stars and try to include Mario, Sonic, PAC-Man, and Megaman.
But instead of Mario they'll have Rayman.

I would not be shocked if Nintendo put a clause into the contract keeping those characters out of other similar games. And of course they would oblige.

hahahah what a joke

he already failed: Robin And Lucina instead of Chrom, Rosalina instead of Bowser Jr or Toad; possibly not having both of Dixie and K.rool, high chances of the zelda newcomer NOT being Pig ganon...

seriously.

This has been addressed. I just find it funny, because it is entirely just things you want, so you are angry.

now, for the Mario reps: Bowser Jr is more important than you think, to the point of being the MAJOR VILLAIn (just like Ridley in his normal games) of Sunshine and the first NSMB (where he lead the koopa troop himself after bowser died ingame, AKA 90% of the damn game); which is a more noteworthy role than Rosalina had in both galaxy games, since she did basically nothing during most of G1, being only relevant at the ending and prologue... and was basically an extra in 2, doing nothing truly noteworthy.

and that's obviously not considering Bowser Jr did more stuff in the galaxy games than Rosalina. Sadly, Playable > Villain, but If we are to believe Aonuma, 3DW should've had a lesser development cycle than Smash, and as such Sakurai decided on Rosalian being playable fore that decision was made for 3DW. and villain > story NPC. That's obviously ignoring that Jr also had a lot of roles in previous Mario games, specifically NSMBW which outsold both Galaxy games TOGETHER. (why did my font shrink?!?!)

As for toad, i suppose being in almost all mairo games ever, being plaayble in 3, including one of the most succesful games ever: NSMBW, and having bigger roles than Roslaina in all non-galaxy games they were in together (especially 3dW) is meaningless.

He outclassed Jr too, which is why i don't want him in smash right now., though he is a better choice than Rosalina. As for your metroid-theme insult; I want Ridley. I wanted both him AND Dark Samus tho, but i'm fine with Ridley alone. Sylux and Rundas would be cool, though
undeserving

Sorry if this has been pointed out in the pages since it has been addressed...
So, playable is more important than villain, yet Rosalina, the new playable character in Mario main games, is less important than Jr, who is only playable in the spinoff games which Rosalina is also playable in?
Rosalina did a lot in Galaxy- plot wise, she is the mentor to Mario, the the first he has ever had in any game mind you, and the one who gives him what he needs, one who sets him off on his journey. Legitimately the fact that she is the first person to ever be the Gandalf to Mario's Bilbo is enough reason to add her- the fact that she ushers in an enitre rennaissance of Mario characters to the game, a move set Sakurai wanted to add, and is female-- well, shoe-in.

As for Toad, thank goodness we did not get him! I'm so much happier we will have Captain Toad and a move set for him, creative and environmental based, rather than a generic Toad move set. AND I WANTED TOAD!

 

[ChikoLad]

I'm one to say I still think some ideas from Brawl were good for balance and creativity.

Tripping is not one of them, even back in 08 I hated it and so do my casual friends. Tripping wasn't a good idea even from a party game standpoint. All it does is piss people off not really make them enjoy it.

 

[Flaxr XIII]

And people claim that's the best one.

 

[Shiliski]

Exactly. Like I said, it's a talking point he expects people to actually believe just because he's saying it.

And people defend it and attack people who call out this obvious bull****.

I did notice that he basically said that he wanted to find a balance, but then in the same sentence he put the focus on "new players".

Classic political maneuver really.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Smash isn't a board game with mini games. And when bad stuff happens it can still be fun.

Trying to run forward, basic movement option, and then trip into something that kills you is not fun no matter how people try to spin it.

 

[ChikoLad]

Smash isn't a board game with mini games. And when bad stuff happens it can still be fun.

Trying to run forward, basic movement option, and then trip into something that kills you is not fun no matter how people try to spin it.

Come on, I can't be the only one who, when playing a casual match, finds it hilarious when someone trips into my Falcon Punch.

It's not dissimilar to a Bob-Omb spawning into someone's attack.

 

[Aunt Jemima]

Come on, I can't be the only one who, when playing a casual match, finds it hilarious when someone trips into my Falcon Punch.

It's not dissimilar to a Bob-Omb spawning into someone's attack.

Bob-ombs spawning on people mid-match is just too good. Whenever I play with items on and I see somebody run into a Bob-omb that just spawned, or have it spawn right on them is just so fun to watch. Also, Bob-ombs spawning in the air while somebody is flying away.

 

[Retroend]

The problem with Brawl is that HAL Laboratories (aka the 64 and Melee development team, that by and large did a pretty great job at balancing Melee) were initially involved a bit, then had to drop out a bit making a Kirby game that became a part of multiple Kirby games, and then became basically lowly bug testers (and they made their interns do that work).

a great job at balancing melee? please tell me you're being sarcastic about this. melee was horribly balanced. i saw more variety of characters at brawl tournaments than at melee ones. not saying brawl isn't unbalanced as well, but melee i felt like i was seeing more of the higher tiers like falco and fox more and brawl i at least saw some more variety, even mid tiers at tourneys.

 

[pizzapie7]

The force of entitlement in this post could solve world peace if channeled through the proper outlets.

Wait, expecting a good game qualifies as entitlement these days? The **** is going on around here?

 

[ChikoLad]

Wait, expecting a good game qualifies as entitlement these days? The **** is going on around here?

There's a difference between expecting a good game that is generally designed well for it's intents and purposes that appeals to a wide audience, and expecting a good game where "good game" classifies as something that adheres to each and everyone of your extremely particular desires and does nothing but that.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Come on, I can't be the only one who, when playing a casual match, finds it hilarious when someone trips into my Falcon Punch.

It's not dissimilar to a Bob-Omb spawning into someone's attack.

A large majority, even among casuals, still hated it.

Even without items on you can still trip into Marth's tipper end Fsmash. Items spawning is to be expected and can be controlled, tripping isn't and it feel dirty when it happens usually with both sides.

 

[Shiliski]

a great job at balancing melee? please tell me you're being sarcastic about this. melee was horribly balanced. i saw more variety of characters at brawl tournaments than at melee ones. not saying brawl isn't unbalanced as well, but melee i felt like i was seeing more of the higher tiers like falco and fox more and brawl i at least saw some more variety, even mid tiers at tourneys.

Melee wasn't balanced all that great. The difference between Mewtwo and Fox is huge. It's just that Brawl was even worse with its God-tier character. You can honestly just feel how weak Zelda is compared to Meta Knight when you play them. Every move that Meta Knight makes is a good one, whereas some of Zelda's moves might be horrendous except in some situations depending on the matchup.

I feel like Sakurai's balancing methods are a bit naive and don't really take into account the kinds of things that actually happen in the game. For example: trading power for speed is not always an even trade (Slower characters like Ganondorf or Bowser vs. Fox or Marth in Melee), nor is trading damage potential for KO potential (Meta Knight in Brawl). Having 3 more (possibly naive) people only made things worse. Having 12 good people will hopefully make it better.

 

[Retroend]

Melee wasn't balanced all that great. The difference between Mewtwo and Fox is huge. It's just that Brawl was even worse with its God-tier character. You can honestly just feel how weak Zelda is compared to Meta Knight when you play them. Every move that Meta Knight makes is a good one, whereas some of Zelda's moves might be horrendous except in some situations depending on the matchup.

I feel like Sakurai's balancing methods are a bit naive and don't really take into account the kinds of things that actually happen in the game. For example: trading power for speed is not always an even trade (Slower characters like Ganondorf or Bowser vs. Fox or Marth in Melee), nor is trading damage potential for KO potential (Meta Knight in Brawl). Having 3 more (possibly naive) people only made things worse. Having 12 good people will hopefully make it better.

true, i don't disagree. and i wonder if there are gonna be patches for this game if something looks unbalanced.

 

[pizzapie7]

There's a difference between expecting a good game that is generally designed well for it's intents and purposes that appeals to a wide audience, and expecting a good game where "good game" classifies as something that adheres to each and everyone of your extremely particular desires and does nothing but that.

I was right in the middle of responding to your previous post.

Tripping is poor game design. Wanting tripping removed is not something that I would consider an extremely particular desire, and that's all he was quoting from me. What extremely particular desires of mine are you talking about?

Tripping is not comparable to compare to a Blue Shell or Lightning Bolt because in that case you're still fighting against your opponent, not the game itself. A better example would be if when you are turning left your kart randomly decided to go right. Would you argue that that is good game design? Would you even argue that that is fun? This is something nearly everyone, casual and competitive player, can agree on when they can agree on almost nothing else.

 

[Flaxr XIII]

Wait, expecting a good game qualifies as entitlement these days? The **** is going on around here?

Well gee, when you **** on the developer's efforts and call the game trash BEFORE IT'S EVEN RELEASED and before YOU have personally played it just because it doesn't LOOK to adhere to YOUR super specific standards and act like the game is fundamentally broken and unplayable, then yes it comes off as entitled.

 

[HeavyLobster]

As far as what Sakurai wants to accomplish with Smash 4, it's pretty obvious that he's trying to add as many customization options to the multiplayer as possible in order to give players as many options as possible. Whether it's custom movesets, custom equipment, Smash Run, or the ability to train your own Amiibo, Sakurai wants to make players feel as though their chosen characters are extensions of themselves and their preferred playstyles. Sakurai's main critique of the traditional "competitive" fighter is that it ultimately tends to boil down to repeating a few optimal strategies to win, and becomes repetitive. That's why he's always interested in finding new elements to mix things up and make each match feel unique. (Random tripping was a really stupid way to try to make this happen)
Interestingly, Melee's success and longetivity has a lot to do with it's versatile movement options which allow for a lot of variety in playstyles, so Sakurai unintentionally succeeded at implementing this aspect of his philosophy.(Whether he realizes this is unknown) Where Melee seems to have frightened him, however, is the fact that competitive play is highly demanding and inaccessible to newer players, and that conflicts with his second critique of the traditional fighter, which is the fact that they tend to be difficult for new players to pick up and learn. Brawl was a reaction to this fear of the series becoming too exclusive and restricted to hardcore players. With Smash 4, Sakurai wants to keep Brawl's accessibility while incorporating new elements to allow for a greater variety of playstyles, and to keep the game fresh for years.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Melee wasn't balanced all that great. The difference between Mewtwo and Fox is huge. It's just that Brawl was even worse with its God-tier character. You can honestly just feel how weak Zelda is compared to Meta Knight when you play them. Every move that Meta Knight makes is a good one, whereas some of Zelda's moves might be horrendous except in some situations depending on the matchup.

I feel like Sakurai's balancing methods are a bit naive and don't really take into account the kinds of things that actually happen in the game. For example: trading power for speed is not always an even trade (Slower characters like Ganondorf or Bowser vs. Fox or Marth in Melee), nor is trading damage potential for KO potential (Meta Knight in Brawl). Having 3 more (possibly naive) people only made things worse. Having 12 good people will hopefully make it better.

If I'm going off win % right now, brawl actually has a lot more characters show up, in number and percentage.

Fox is actually more dominant in Melee than MK is in Brawl.

Still I think MK is far more broken in Brawl but number wise I can't deny Fox is worse in terms of dominance right now.

 

[pizzapie7]

Well gee, when you **** on the developer's efforts and call the game trash BEFORE IT'S EVEN RELEASED and before YOU have personally played it just because it doesn't LOOK to adhere to YOUR super specific standards and act like the game is fundamentally broken and unplayable, then yes it comes off as entitled.

Please quote where I did that. All I did was say that he shouldn't be applauded for removing a **** mechanic that nobody wanted, nobody (aside from apparently one poster in this thread) liked, and nobody is going to miss. Is it really all that super specific?

I haven't even talked about Smash 4 as a game in this thread. I've only talked about Sakurai's blatant two-facedness. Something that I have every right to call out and something that is plain as day. Something that is incredibly blatant if you've read this interview in conjunction with a lot of the other things he's said.

Or am I not allowed to question glorious mashed potato samurai-sama?

 

[ChikoLad]

I was right in the middle of responding to your previous post.

Tripping is poor game design. Wanting tripping removed is not something that I would consider an extremely particular desire, and that's all he was quoting from me. What extremely particular desires of mine are you talking about?

Tripping is not comparable to compare to a Blue Shell or Lightning Bolt because in that case you're still fighting against your opponent, not the game itself. A better example would be if when you are turning left your kart randomly decided to go right. Would you argue that that is good game design? Would you even argue that that is fun? This is something nearly everyone, casual and competitive player, can agree on when they can agree on almost nothing else.

I wasn't referring to your desires, I was explaining "entitlement" to you.

Tripping wasn't poor game design in the context of it's implementation. It was designed for a specific purpose (as a random, oddball mechanic that kept things unpredictable and zany), and it served said purpose well. Only thing flawed about it was that it wasn't optional, but in the context of why it was added, I understand why it was mandatory. I don't agree with it being mandatory personally, but technically, it did exactly what Sakurai wanted it to do.

And no, Blue Shells and Lightning are very much the game screwing you over, like tripping. The game decides when someone gets these items, and they require so little thought to use (you literally just hit the button as soon as you see the item in your item slot) that they may as well be random events that happen without that player input. They are just the same as tripping.