Scar on the Melee vs Brawl debate: What does competitive really mean?

[AlphaZealot]

What would have to be done to convince you that Brawl is a bad game, in terms of things that might possibly be demonstratable? A snake winning a tournament using nothing but ftilt? A luigi sex-kicking as soon as possible after being up-b'd by falcon and having it hit?

When I don't feel the best player is the one who wins. If the results start becoming wildly inconsistent, then the anti-Brawl side may finally start to have evidence.

And the way everyone talks about technical skill, you would think that 1)Smashers are athletes and that 2)Guitar Hero is the most competitive game out there.

I've also found that any game where you are fighting the opponents mind beats any game based on execution, like Guitar Hero. Sure, it takes loads of skill to play Guitar Hero, but what happens is static, there is no metagame development, and in terms of depth, there is nothing beyond playing the song, there is no thinking required, and thinking, not technical skill, is the key to depth.

DEFENSE is even more important. Defense and shield camping

Please view the videos I posted earlier, particularly of Pikachu beating quite possibly the best camper in the country, OS. This is a myth that was perpetuated early and is based more on theory than fact. Yes, there are more defensive options, but no, defense is not over powered nor are their strategies that can't beat it and punish it, making the strategy not worth while.

 

[NoVaLombardia]

And the way everyone talks about technical skill, you would think that 1)Smashers are athletes and that 2)DDR is the most competitive game out there.

Fixed...

Sorry, had to... :>

 

[hippochinfat!!]

I can't even begin to count how many times I've seen this said in this thread:
"If technical skill was all that mattered, Silent Wolf would be the best"
Just thought it was funny =P
Judging from that, this thread is going in circles. Haven't read any of it, but I can safely say, Brawl sucks comparatively. Defend it all you want, it does. I really hope no one takes it as seriously as anyone took Melee, that would be sad.

Like I said, I didn't read anything in this thread other than posts that had my name. Brawl's gay all day.

I must agree with you because your opinion is a fact.

Also you like anime so WTF.

 

[redzoneNRG]

I think people who support melee just generally have their thoughts already made up, so its not going to do any good to talk pro-brawl, because they will just shoot it down with their normal comments.

Balance in Brawl to me, and being a more competitive game is a truth in my eyes. Its a different game, with different physics so its going to have different playstyles than melee did.

People who complain about Meta-Knight and Solid Snake being by far the best are just resulting to that because thats their opinion on the game. When people say Fox and Falco were cheap in Melee, they disregard it and mention Peach,Marth etc., but when people in brawl State Dedede,Rob, etc, they talk about how MK and Snake are still oh so superior to them.

Brawl is not about memorizing combos and just getting reflexes down. Slower pace tends to equal more thinking and more strategies because due to the increased defensive tools characters have, timing,spacing, and predicting moves are key in Brawl. Trying to force people where you want them to be so you can punish them is one of the top things in Brawl, because you cant blindly rush in and start a combo.

People who say edgeguarding is gone, I dont know what they are talking about. Recovery is amped up in Brawl, so if you want to score those quick K.O's , Its essential you practice your edgeguarding. Now that people can survive well into the 100's, the need to learn how to edgeguard increases, and because recovery is easier, its not as risky to take the chance, which increases the amount of times people might want to edgeguard.

Brawl I feel on the character select screen, is more balanced as well. Of course not everybody is going to be equal to one another, but people act as if the gap is wider than melee, which it for sure is not. Snake and Meta-Knight are good, but the argument that beginnner snakes can beat pro- other characters is just stupid in every way. If you dont know how to play Snake, your not going to be good no matter what. I demolish some Snakes, I lose to others. It depends more on tactics and player skill.

To me, just because brawl is slower and hitstun doesnt exist, doesnt make it less competitive, it just alters how one is suppose to approach the battles and require them to flesh out more different ways to attack and defend.

 

[arrowhead]

And the way everyone talks about technical skill, you would think that 1)Smashers are athletes and that 2)Guitar Hero is the most competitive game out there.

there's a correlation between more options and more technical. that may be what you're seeing. because i don't see pro-meleers/anti-brawlers complaining that brawl isn't technical enough

Please view the videos I posted earlier, particularly of Pikachu beating quite possibly the best camper in the country, OS. This is a myth that was perpetuated early and is based more on theory than fact. Yes, there are more defensive options, but no, defense is not over powered nor are their strategies that can't beat it and punish it, making the strategy not worth while.

what other characters can play offensively safe enough to counter brawl's amazing defensive game?

btw i watched the matches and they're pretty cool. i'd like to see some more data though. there may be lurking variables :0

 

[Ted PJs]

i are am agreed. yer

 

[Matsuyama]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6viaa76cAo

Just watch that and let's all go back to ****ing Melee.

 

[Corigames]

Why do I beat everyone that plays the game day-in day-out by camping with Pit? It should be apparent that the people who constantly play should win, the ones that practice all the time and train against each other. But every couple of weeks I walk in on them playing Brawl and win every single match whether it be 1v1 or FFA. It's not fair to them and not fun to me, but Pit is the only character that I've come to like and the strategy I've been using is nearly unbeatable (mainly because... it hasn't been beaten), except when I played against a MK that JUST picked the game up that day. All he did was spam moves and I couldn't do anything.

It's examples like these that make me, and I'm sure other people who agree with me, not like Brawl. Someone that invests more time and energy into something than someone else should get more out of it. That's not always true in Brawl as it was in Melee.

 

[Zankoku]

Please view the videos I posted earlier, particularly of Pikachu beating quite possibly the best camper in the country, OS. This is a myth that was perpetuated early and is based more on theory than fact. Yes, there are more defensive options, but no, defense is not over powered nor are their strategies that can't beat it and punish it, making the strategy not worth while.

I was actually there for that. After Anther 2-0'ing OS early in the bracket, OS went on to 3-0 and 3-1 Anther in the finals.

 

[Demon Kirby]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6viaa76cAo

Just watch that and let's all go back to ****ing Melee.

I hear we need tournaments for that.

Also can someone inform what this "GRAZE" is?

 

[Boxob]

Camping isn't game breaking, it's just tedious to fight campers. Nothing broken. All it really is is abusing spacing.

My friend mains Wario, he ***** every camper he fights. I use Sonic, I do the same.

Camping isn't a problem.

 

[D20]

Brawl is not about memorizing combos and just getting reflexes down. Slower pace tends to equal more thinking and more strategies because due to the increased defensive tools characters have, timing,spacing, and predicting moves are key in Brawl. Trying to force people where you want them to be so you can punish them is one of the top things in Brawl, because you cant blindly rush in and start a combo.

Wow. Please stop. You are about the 252432523rd (little bit of a hyperbole) person to talk about how Brawl has more strategies. WHAT STRATEGIES? I asked this question about 6-7 pages back, and I got zero answers (besides camping).

Sorry to just quote you... I could have quoted many other people. You were just the last person to bring up this unsupported argument.

 

[AlphaZealot]

Lets reverse the question, what strategies were there in Melee? Now explain how these no longer exist in Brawl.

 

[redzoneNRG]

Wow. Please stop. You are about the 252432523rd (little bit of a hyperbole) person to talk about how Brawl has more strategies. WHAT STRATEGIES? I asked this question about 6-7 pages back, and I got zero answers (besides camping).

Sorry to just quote you... I could have quoted many other people. You were just the last person to bring up this unsupported argument.

Its cool...the strategies in Brawl are pretty much similar to Melee in alot of ways.

You can focus on ground game, aerial game. Do you abuse the grab? Do you sit back , dodge,and wait for opponenet to approach you? Do you approach the opponent and go on the offensive? What moves do you do to get him out of him shielding habits? Do you feel like projectile spamming? Do you abuse your quicker, higher priority moves to do damage, or do you try using the K.O moves, etc. Each character also has there own fair ways of strategy[ Lucas PK fire spam, or use for spacing , etc ]

Asking what strategies are in brawl is pretty much the same thing as asking what strategies are in Melee. I just said since its slower paced, you have more times to think out your plan of action, and different strategies at once before you implement one.

 

[Aesir]

Lets reverse the question, what strategies were there in Melee? Now explain how these no longer exist in Brawl.

Burden of proof.

 

[AlphaZealot]

Wouldn't the same standard apply to both games? Or are you afraid that after everything is listed in Melee, it can be listed in kind for Brawl?

Consider that the strategy argument exists for both games, not just Brawl. Melee players are claiming Melee has strategy. Brawl players are claiming Brawl has strategy.

Here is the thing, I think all of us know they both have strategy. I merely want to here these Melee strategies because I'm curious which ones people think no longer exist in Brawl (in D20's case, every strategy).

 

[D20]

Its cool...the strategies in Brawl are pretty much similar to Melee in alot of ways.

You can focus on ground game, aerial game. Do you abuse the grab? Do you sit back , dodge,and wait for opponenet to approach you? Do you approach the opponent and go on the offensive? What moves do you do to get him out of him shielding habits? Do you feel like projectile spamming? Do you abuse your quicker, higher priority moves to do damage, or do you try using the K.O moves, etc. Each character also has there own fair ways of strategy[ Lucas PK fire spam, or use for spacing , etc ]

Asking what strategies are in brawl is pretty much the same thing as asking what strategies are in Melee. I just said since its slower paced, you have more times to think out your plan of action, and different strategies at once before you implement one.

Ok, I buy most of that.

Lets reverse the question, what strategies were there in Melee? Now explain how these no longer exist in Brawl.

That's easy. For one... being aggressive is an option in Melee. You can switch up your style from aggressive to defensive quickly and EFFECTIVELY (meaning you can do it without being punished). Fox and Falco can sheild pressure with shines, dairs, and jabs... and then flip back to being "campy" by mixing up lasers. They can do this seemlessly because there is enough hitstun on the end of their combos to start retreating with reverse lasers.

Another aspect that opens up strategies in Melee is edgegaurding... and recovering. For most characters in Brawl, recovery is straight forward and safe. However, in Melee, every time you character is off the stage is a chance for your opponent to KO you. The number of EFFECTIVE edgegaurding strategies is so much greater in Melee. Just looking at Marth, you can jab to force you opponent to recover from below you... which can lead into anything from a standing fsmash to ledgehog to dair. You can get creative and do things like counter to reverse up-b against Fox. With a character like Young Link or Samus, your projectiles can actually be used to force your opponent to recover in a certain way or can create a difficult situation to sweetspot. In Brawl, characters typically just float out of harm's way. Also, sweetspoting is a non-issue. Another element that opens up strategies is the airdodge. Instead of being an easy way to escape combos in Brawl, it becomes a tool to return to safety in Melee. At high levels of play in Melee, edgegaurding and recovering is truly a chess match. You have to predict, take chances, and protect yourself all at the same time

Characters can also ledgehog to force characters onto the stage instead of the ledge. Also, since you can get back onto the stage from the ledge almost instantly in Melee, you can use this strategy to punish characters like Shiek that have laggy recovery moves.

Additionally... many characters suffer from substandard grabs and throws in Brawl. In Melee pratically every character could get a decent combo (or KO) out of a grab. This was part of the rock, paper, scissors nature of Melee. You could grab a sheilding opponent and punish them. However, in Brawl, too many characters have ineffective throws that lead to nothing. An opponent can just camp and sheild and not be punished when they are finally grab. The rock in rock, paper, scissors is gone for many characters. Less choices = less strategy.

Is this a complete list of strategies... not even close. Have I mentioned wavedashing or dashdancing? I'll spare that for the moment. Anyhow, while many strategies still exist in Brawl, they are less effective. In general, I feel that the risk/reward is less balanced in Brawl, and the game suffers because of it.

 

[Reaver197]

Edgeguarding has become a lost art in Brawl.

Baiting and punishing is now a shadow of what it used to be. The inability to be extremely agile and maneuverable has extremely detracted from this type of game play.

Then there's the lack of reward for playing aggressively, and the general stifling of any natural talent/advantages that people might have towards such games.

Plus, in Brawl, certain characters can completely obviate whole other characters by the meanest and simplest tactics. Any knuckleheaded Joe can use a Marth to destroy a Ness/Lucas, regardless of how skilled the Ness/Lucas player is. Such a level of shallowness was unheard of in Melee or 64.

 

[D20]

Wow... nice post Reaver! It is the The Spark Notes version of my post. High five!

 

[AlphaZealot]

That's easy. For one... being aggressive is an option in Melee. You can switch up your style from aggressive to defensive quickly and EFFECTIVELY (meaning you can do it without being punished).

Then there's the lack of reward for playing aggressively, and the general stifling of any natural talent/advantages that people might have towards such games.

Just pick a video: www.youtube.com/alphazealot

Baiting and punishing is now a shadow of what it used to be. The inability to be extremely agile and maneuverable has extremely detracted from this type of game play.

Fox and Falco can sheild pressure with shines, dairs, and jabs... and then flip back to being "campy" by mixing up lasers. They can do this seemlessly because there is enough hitstun on the end of their combos to start retreating with reverse lasers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEm-rQHRtvQ

With a character like Young Link or Samus, your projectiles can actually be used to force your opponent to recover in a certain way or can create a difficult situation to sweetspot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQ5NL8Gr1Ig

Additionally... many characters suffer from substandard grabs and throws in Brawl. In Melee pratically every character could get a decent combo (or KO) out of a grab. This was part of the rock, paper, scissors nature of Melee. You could grab a sheilding opponent and punish them. However, in Brawl, too many characters have ineffective throws that lead to nothing. An opponent can just camp and sheild and not be punished when they are finally grab. The rock in rock, paper, scissors is gone for many characters. Less choices = less strategy.

Last I checked, people want D3 CG banned, IC CG banned, Falco CG banned, Snake can tech chase, Ness can KO, Diddy can KO, the list goes on, the number of useless grabs in Brawl is far exagerated, and even for the ones that don't set anything up, they still keep the opponent from always shielding, which is how you make sure the opponent can't just shield camp all day, you need to grab to keep the rock[paper-scissors still viable, the grab does more than just 10% damage, it makes sure the opponent knows he can't just shield every approach.

Another element that opens up strategies is the airdodge.

Multiple air doding opens up other strategies, like double jump feints or short hop feints to force premature air dodges, or short hopped double air attacks to hit the end of an air dodge, or nairs with large hit boxes, or simply approaching and not doing anything, so many ways to punish multiple air dodging.

Plus, in Brawl, certain characters can completely obviate whole other characters by the meanest and simplest tactics. Any knuckleheaded Joe can use a Marth to destroy a Ness/Lucas, regardless of how skilled the Ness/Lucas player is. Such a level of shallowness was unheard of in Melee or 64.

Theory, not fact. There are a host of Ness/Lucas players who, wbile they hate the CG infinite against their character, can still compete. Also, last I checked, there were some **** match ups in Melee/64 too.

The videos, watch the videos.

 

[CervPurp63]

I love Brawl (and play in it competively), but Melee is a GANGSTA game. All the manuverability options you had were amazing, and every character was workable. Brawl is fun, but match ups become more of a factor than everything else. You could have the best Ganondorf in the world and lose to a Falco on FD that just lazers the whole time in Brawl. Just about every character has a broken tactic that can be abused (i.e. DDD's chaingrab). I love Brawl, but I also realize that it is a broken game. There are many flaws and is far from perfection. We still need to give Brawl time (a year at least) before we can truly assess the metagame. Yes, you can camp, be lame, and win. But alot of people aren't gonna keep competing if every tourney is a shoot out. I think there are more "anti-camping" smashers out there that we will soon diffuse camping and make scrubs fight like the game intended. Just my opinion. Any thoughts?

 

[Reaver197]

Wow... nice post Reaver! It is the The Spark Notes version of my post. High five!

Lol, awesome. It was completely unintentional on my part.


By the way AlphaZealot, if you really must bring a video to our attention to prove a point, please choose a specific one, and then explain why you think that video backs up your case.

Because, from how I see it, and also to play a fickle devil's advocate, those videos do nothing to prove your case.

Also, you seem to concede the edgeguarding point.

Sure, Melee and 64 had some bad match-ups, but none to the point where I could literally beat someone by pressing the Z button repeatedly until I feel like hitting the c-stick.

Also, in your original post itself, you say how Brawl essentially suppresses people who are innately faster and more accurate with tech skill. How is that conducive or rewarding at all?

 

[D20]

Brawl videos are a great way to put someone to sleep... not to support arguements.

On a serious note... AZ, are you a hardcore Brawl player now?

 

[BIG C]

Grabs that kill don't kill if DI'd properly until like 120 or so percent so if you ask me that is a pretty ineffective KO I would much rather just kill with a move instead of a grab.

As for sheild camping it is entirely possible depending on how far you stay from your opponent at times basically 1/4 of the stage or more they have to come at you and you sheild waiting for them to get there if they get too close you roll behind or time a spot dodge repeat. I know this works because it's one of the snake strats I use.

 

[AlphaZealot]

Also, you seem to concede the edgeguarding point.

Only edgeguarding in relation to sweet spotting. In terms of intercepting the opponent before they reach that point, Brawl is fine. That said, you can also edge hog sweet spotters, its just significantly harder than Melee.

I don't know if I'd say I'm a hardcore Brawl player now, yea, I suppose so. I don't touch Melee anymore, there is to much **** to keep up with in Brawl.

By the way AlphaZealot, if you really must bring a video to our attention to prove a point, please choose a specific one, and then explain why you think that video backs up your case.

Because, from how I see it, and also to play a fickle devil's advocate, those videos do nothing to prove your case.

That was the beauty, every single video of my Diddy proves my case. Aggression was a point brought up, and my entire game is pretty much aggressive, so any single video would show you the rewards of that aggression.

 

[Daft]

My argument for Brawl as a more competitive game:

I think it is very important to understand the context the game was made under. Brawl was not made to be a game with an extremely competitive hierarchy of players. Like most Nintendo games, it was meant to appeal to a more casual gamer. With this in mind:

1. Brawl is not nearly as chaotic. Unless Melee was being played with no items on a stage like Final Destination, there was simply too much going on at any one moment in time. Stages like Mute City, Peach's Castle, Congo Jungle, Rainbow Ride were almost unplayable do to blurred backgrounds, a flurry of random events, moving parts of the stage that killed the player as often as other characters, and an overdose of items that appeared and disappeared almost too fast to be kept track of. For players who enjoyed to play all of the different stages with items on, there was too much randomness. A player could be killed several times in a match by a series of unfortunate coincidences.

Although Brawl still has some items that can quickly turn a match (Smash Balls and the Dragoon), these items must be fought for and gained, adding a layer to the metagame. I've been able to KO players a number of times when they stop playing against character and start playing for the smash ball. Also the stages on Brawl are mostly (mostly) much more steady. Players are able to swim for a bit before dropping to their deaths or being swept of stage.

2. Brawl puts the emphasis on the abilities of the characters. In Melee, victory was too often determined by a player who knew a hidden technique like wavedashing. This did not necessarily represent skill, but rather greater knowledge and ability for repetition. Brawl requires that a player know the abilities and weaknesses of his or her character, and the the gamer find a way to incorporate these characteristics into their game play. In Brawl a player must truly be skillful with his character.

I play as Ike. I know he's slow. I know his attacks have very apparent shows that makes some of his movement very predictable. I build my playing style around it. I know what moves he has that are quick, I know which moves can keep someone off my back long enough for me to set up, and I know how to build and attach so that even if it shows it's difficult to avoid. I takes skill in those three areas to play Ike. That's what I focus on, and it allows me to beat players who are less skilled consistently.

IN SHORT

-Brawl is less affected by random events that can destroy a good players ability to win.
-Brawl requires skill in operating a character, instead of skill in abusing the games mechanics.

 

[Pink Reaper]

AlphaZealot, I watched the Anther Vs. OS vid and what exactly were you trying to prove? That Pikachu could beat ROB by running away and spamming thunderjolts until he was at high damage and then just QAC in and kill? Sort of like how snake can run away and spam and then just Mortar Slide in for the kill? Anther didn't win with aggression he won by camping harder >_>

As for Diddy and Wario......I don't want to have to switch my mains just so I can beat camping. I don't want to have to pick one of a few characters just so combos will exist.

 

[Smooth Criminal]

IN SHORT

-Brawl is less affected by random events that can destroy a good players ability to win.

-Brawl requires skill in operating a character, instead of skill in abusing the games mechanics.

Halberd (though counterpick by Brawl's meta-game standard), Hanenbow (same with Halberd), Skyworld, Port Town Aero Dive, 75m, Mario Bros., Great Sea (Toon Link stage), Bridge of Eldin, Pokemon Stadium 2, Pictochat, The Summit, New Pork City, and Frigate Orpheon (again, arguably counterpickable) all say "hi," Daft. You want to talk about random events affecting the outcome of the match---you must not have played on those stages at all.

MOST of the stages in Melee were extremely neutral. Very little actually went on in the background. Those stages that were deemed counterpickable had a few certain things going on that could be arguably deemed random but didn't offset the outcome of the match too badly. In Brawl, even those stages that are arguably counterpickable have obstacles that are potentially game turning and tilt the scales a little too far.

Oh, and let's not forget about tripping (random). And the nature of items such as the Dragoon and Smash Balls. Yeah, you know, along with the rest of the items that encourage camping/farming.

As for the latter half of what I quoted, well, did you know that each character in Melee had their own unique physics and techniques that were not a result of exploits? And did you know that knowing advanced techniques in ANY fighting game is only half the battle? Yeah. I'd LOVE to see you pick up a GG game and beat a seasoned tourney-goer without extensive knowledge of the character you're playing. I'm willing to wager you're going to get nothing but chip damage off of him while he dustloops (er, my bad, BADLANDS loops cuz Testament is all the rage) you to death.

When you outline the fact that Nintendo designed this game for the casual player in mind, how in the living hell could you go on a large rant like that vying for its nearly non-existent competitiveness? It's like oil and water, really. Sakurai himself said that the notion of competition is foolish and that everybody should feel like a winner. Brawl epitomizes this to a "t."

Please read the rest of the thread and the rest of our arguments before posting stuff like this. K?

Smooth Criminal

 

[Aesir]

Daft

While you appear to be a smart guy I don't think you played melee at high level or even close to it at all.

Melee may have seen chaotic to the inexperienced eye but it certainly wasn't to the person playing it. I know exactly whats happening during my matches, the game is just face paced and I guess not everyone is cut out for that fast paced movement but hey whatever.

Games came down a variety of different things the the days in which you could pull out a random technique rarely happened after a while.

melee came down to using your options and limiting the other players options, it just so happens most of these options where movement based rather then position based. (brawl is more about position advantage then movement.) but out pacing the other player you could win it is very much a contest of speed and who can out think who in that test of speed.

To put it simply melee wasn't chaotic it was just fast, which can be confused for the former. and furthermore.

-Brawl is less affected by random events that can destroy a good players ability to win.
-Brawl requires skill in operating a character, instead of skill in abusing the games mechanics.

This the most incorrect thing you've written yet.

There were hardly any random events, in melee that decided the out comes of the match, maybe during the beginning of the tourney scene. But as the scene progressed things became more consistant and far less random.

Melee required skill in operating your character maybe more so then in brawl, honestly I have to question if you even played melee and or you just watched a youtube video and formulated an argument based on that.

In brawl you're still abusing game mechanics.

 

[AlphaZealot]

I also like this video of Pikachu stomping on Meta: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pakhMiAStw&NR=1

 

[Smooth Criminal]

In brawl you're still abusing game mechanics.

>.>; I know you are capable of being verbose, Aesir, but ****...you pointed out something that I overlooked in my post.

Aesir...

...I love you.

Smooth Criminal

 

[AlphaZealot]

Oh, and more Samus stuff most people didn't know was possible (well, maybe not possible, but the quickness/effectiveness/creativeness): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmruwRsHBSI

 

[Deft]

Please read the rest of the thread and the rest of our arguments before posting stuff like this. K?

Smooth Criminal

haha read 260 pages of smash brothers debating? no thank you.

personally, all I can ever hope for is someone in the future rebalances melee the way David Sirlin is working on super street fighter 2 turbo hd remix. such a pipe dream.

super smash brothers melee remix!

 

[Aesir]

haha read 260 pages of smash brothers debating? no thank you.

personally, all I can ever hope for is someone in the future rebalances melee the way David Sirlin is working on super street fighter 2 turbo hd remix. such a pipe dream.

super smash brothers melee remix!

Melee is pretty balanced you have about 4-5 characters that can win tourneys and about 10 others who are playable at high level play thats about 15 out of 26 which is pretty good if you ask me..>_>

any character from DK and up is a tourney playable character, the rest have pretty good match ups vs top tiers but just get ***** by some of the higher tiers, or mid tiers.

and there is a more balanced version of the game, it's called Pal lol.

 

[Fatmanonice]

Halberd (though counterpick by Brawl's meta-game standard), Hanenbow (same with Halberd), Skyworld, Port Town Aero Dive, 75m, Mario Bros., Great Sea (Toon Link stage), Bridge of Eldin, Pokemon Stadium 2, Pictochat, The Summit, New Pork City, and Frigate Orpheon (again, arguably counterpickable) all say "hi," Daft. You want to talk about random events affecting the outcome of the match---you must not have played on those stages at all.

Hanenbow, 75m, Great Sea, Pictochat, the Summit, and New Pork City aren't even allowed in most tournaments so why are they even being brought up? Also, you get plenty of warning signs for the hazards in Halberd, Great Sea, Bridge of Eldin, Frigate Orpheon, Pokemon Stadium 2, and 75m and they only kill you if you're not paying attention. For Port Town Aero Dive, the cars always come in the same places and they almost always show up after the same interval of time and for Skyworld, the stage only kills you if spam powerful attacks like Snake's mines and Ike's smash attacks. Also, regarding the Summit and New Pork City, the fish always appears at the bottom of the screen and the Ulimate Chimera is so slow that you really have to be absent minded to get caught by it.

MOST of the stages in Melee were extremely neutral. Very little actually went on in the background. Those stages that were deemed counterpickable had a few certain things going on that could be arguably deemed random but didn't offset the outcome of the match too badly. In Brawl, even those stages that are arguably counterpickable have obstacles that are potentially game turning and tilt the scales a little too far.

Again, if you don't pay attention and, if you ask me, that only applies for Halberd and Great Sea.

Oh, and let's not forget about tripping (random). And the nature of items such as the Dragoon and Smash Balls. Yeah, you know, along with the rest of the items that encourage camping/farming.

Again, why are items part of this discussion when a vast majority of tournaments don't allow them?

As for the latter half of what I quoted, well, did you know that each character in Melee had their own unique physics and techniques that were not a result of exploits? And did you know that knowing advanced techniques in ANY fighting game is only half the battle? Yeah. I'd LOVE to see you pick up a GG game and beat a seasoned tourney-goer without extensive knowledge of the character you're playing. I'm willing to wager you're going to get nothing but chip damage off of him while he dustloops (er, my bad, BADLANDS loops cuz Testament is all the rage) you to death.

Uh, Brawl isn't like that at. A C-sticking Ike will not fair well in any tournament. A lazer and Fsmash spamming Wolf will not fair well in any tournament. A Kirby who constantly goes to the height of 5 jumps and uses stone, followed by cutter will not fair well in any tournament. "Anyone" matches online have created this illusion but get in a one on one with these kinds of people and they fall to pieces and will usually forfeit the match after they lose 2 stocks and you have only taken 15-30% damage.

When you outline the fact that Nintendo designed this game for the casual player Melee was as well and so was the original. Your point? in mind, how in the living hell could you go on a large rant like that vying for its nearly non-existent competitiveness? It's like oil and water, really. Sakurai himself said that the notion of competition is foolish Source?and that everybody should feel like a winner. Brawl epitomizes this to a "t."

Please read the rest of the thread and the rest of our arguments before posting stuff like this. K?

Smooth Criminal

See above.

 

[Daft]

Daft

While you appear to be a smart guy I don't think you played melee at high level or even close to it at all.

Melee may have seen chaotic to the inexperienced eye but it certainly wasn't to the person playing it. I know exactly whats happening during my matches, the game is just face paced and I guess not everyone is cut out for that fast paced movement but hey whatever.

Games came down a variety of different things the the days in which you could pull out a random technique rarely happened after a while.

melee came down to using your options and limiting the other players options, it just so happens most of these options where movement based rather then position based. (brawl is more about position advantage then movement.) but out pacing the other player you could win it is very much a contest of speed and who can out think who in that test of speed.

To put it simply melee wasn't chaotic it was just fast, which can be confused for the former. and furthermore.



This the most incorrect thing you've written yet.

There were hardly any random events, in melee that decided the out comes of the match, maybe during the beginning of the tourney scene. But as the scene progressed things became more consistant and far less random.

Melee required skill in operating your character maybe more so then in brawl, honestly I have to question if you even played melee and or you just watched a youtube video and formulated an argument based on that.

In brawl you're still abusing game mechanics.

You're 100% correct. I never played Melee at anywhere close to tournament level. I learned wavedashing and called it good. I didn't particularly want to invest the extra time it would take to learn the more advanced techniques.

I'm not claiming that Melee lacked a requirement for skill in operating your character. Quite the opposite. However, because a lot of the metagame techniques were removed in Brawl, the focus is almost completely on that aspect.

I have a few friends who perfected their advanced techniques on Melee, and became almost unbeatable. When, these techniques were removed in Brawl they had to go back to square one. They weren't as good as they used to be. This does not mean Brawl is inherently less competitive. It means it requires a different skill set that will take time to learn.

Oh, and let's not forget about tripping (random). And the nature of items such as the Dragoon and Smash Balls. Yeah, you know, along with the rest of the items that encourage camping/farming.

I did forget about tripping, which I do think is a horrible addition to the game. As for Dragoons and Smash Balls, I mentioned them, I think they add a different level to the gameplay, because they have to be fought for. There is a metagame that needs to be developed around how to play for these items. Although if all we're concerned about is tournament play, it's irrelevant anyway.


My final point goes a little something like this (and I fully expect to be lambasted for this): I don't think it is possible for one game to be more competitive than another. In every game there is going to be someone who is best, but it may not always be for same the same reasons. The best Guitar Hero and Halo players will have completely different skill sets. Tell me which of those two games is more competitive. The New England patriots were the best team in football with a record of 16-0-0, but the Detroit Red Wings only had to go 54-21-7 to be the best team in hockey. Is football more competitive then hockey? It's ludicrous to think that just because someone was the best in Melee they're going to be the best in Brawl. Yes, the two games are similar, but they are also different. They were intentionally made by the developer to be different. I encourage people to wait. Let people adjust to the differences in Brawl. Just like in Melee the best players will float to the top. It may not be for the same reasons, but it will happen.

Also, I'm not saying Brawl is a better game. That's for each person to decide for themselves. I'm just saying it is equally competitive.
.
.
.
Please be gentle. I'm just trying to stir the pot a bit.

 

[Corigames]

Rebute

IN SHORT

-Brawl is less affected by random events that can destroy a good players ability to win.
-Brawl requires skill in operating a character, instead of skill in abusing the games mechanics.

I have to honestly disagree in everyway. The only way I could perfectly counter this post is to replace the word Brawl with melee.... which I will. In my opinion:

IN SHORT

-Melee is less affected by random events that can destroy a good players ability to win.
-Melee requires skill in operating a character, instead of skill in abusing the games

 

[Zankoku]

The best Guitar Hero and Halo players will have completely different skill sets. Tell me which of those two games is more competitive.

Halo is clearly more competitive, and I don't even play that game. Guitar Hero relies on rote memorization and technical skill in pressing the chords/strumming. There is a very clear ceiling of skill - hitting every single note and using Star Power on the parts with dense chords. Halo actually allows players to interact against each other to add a dynamic measure of skill to the mix - strategy, prediction of the other player, and reaction are now tested which will not happen in Guitar Hero. There is no true ceiling of skill because a player's success is limited by other players also trying to win/improve.

 

[AlphaZealot]

There is no true ceiling of skill because a player's success is limited by other players also trying to win/improve.

And so we hit on why Brawl is competitive. Just as Halo 1, 2, and 3 are all competitive, they simply have variant levels of technical skill, just as 64, Melee, and Brawl are all competitive, they just have variant levels of technical skill.

 

[Reaver197]

Constantly attacking does not mean that you're being aggressive. An aggressive playstyle, while usually involving being unrelenting in your offense, is more marked by the fact that the underlying idea behind it is that you take a greater risk to reap a greater reward.

In Melee, for the most part, trying to be offensive was a tricky proposition against a skilled opponent. If you messed up your tech, or the opponent properly read you or anticipated your move, your aggressive stance could easily be turned against you. You will be punished, possibly to death depending on the situation and skill of the opponent.

In Brawl, from the examples shown, there is very little risk involved. Spamming projectiles and safe moves does not equate to aggressive play. It would be the equivalent of a Falco SH lasering you in Melee. Sure, technically he's always trying to attack you, but he's putting himself at very little risk. Then, on top of that, the technical ease of playing Brawl, and the fact that punishment is much less severe, also contribute to keeping the risk factor very low.

In any competitive game, you must risk something to gain something; you must put something on the line. With Brawl, what are you risking? What's on the line? In all the times I've played it, it feels like child's play, where at the worst you get a kiddish slap on the wrist.