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

[LouisLeGros]

I think it was viel that mentioned micro vs macro earlier and I found it intersting.

Excuse me if I'm wrong, but he said something along the lines of Melee being about micro skill and Brawl being about macro skill.

I think it is fairly obvious that Melee is a much deeper game in the micro department then Brawl. However, Melee also has a very large and very important "macro" aspect to it that I think could arguably be just as important as Brawl's "macro" game.

 

[Veil2222]

I don't believe it was the focus, whatever tactics people came up with, they were usually wrapped around techs, not the other way around, which is how I believe Brawl will pan out. Arrowhead, your comment didn't contrubite a thing other than expressing you think I'm stupid compared to pros and that it's apparently impossible for me to have comparable skill to them.

That, and you completely latches on to the bait I set with my statement "then I'm a top player", I immediately said, "I don't believe that statement".

 

[aho43]

theres no technical skill in brawl.

GaW camps w/ bair pretty easily.

 

[arrowhead]

I don't believe it was the focus, whatever tactics people came up with, they were usually wrapped around techs, not the other way around, which is how I believe Brawl will pan out. Arrowhead, your comment didn't contrubite a thing other than expressing you think I'm stupid compared to pros and that it's apparently impossible for me to have comparable skill to them.

That, and you completely latches on to the bait I set with my statement "then I'm a top player", I immediately said, "I don't believe that statement".

"Eh, my own success makes me believe it can be reproduced on a higher level by someone of higher skill than me"
well first of all, that doesn't make sense. if you're successful against noobs/average players, it doesn't mean your strategy will work vs more experienced players. second, you keep adding in hints that say "i'm a good player":
"I play Ike like Azen does, and I play MK like Forte does "
"I do believe that brawl is a new game and I've played enough to compete"
"I could come up with a great strategy, and it could work really well"

i know you don't believe you're top, but from what you've posted, it seems that you think you're pretty **** good

and no, my other post was not opinion. smash videos are bad at showing actual skill in the game

 

[Endless Nightmares]

lol @ no technical skill in brawl

ehh it depends on the character

Wario has some really technical stuff that's actually useful too

But he's more technical in the Melee Ganon edgehop prefect waveland type way. Like really obscure, **** near impossible without practice type stuff that yields a semi-decent reward when pulled off correctly

But unlike ganon's edgehop waveland you don't die if you miss. lol

 

[Mann]

The threads direction has been changing!

@Arrowhead. How do smash videos not show someone's skill in game? Marjority of the smash videos ARE recordings of what people do in game.

 

[HiIH]

I assume your talking about sort of a "hit and run", bait the other person into something and punish, wait for them to commit style? When most people talk about Brawl's "godly camping" I first think there talking about projectile spamming shield campers. And if what I assumed is true, then were sort of venturing into murky territory, a lot of successful Fox's played like that in Melee, almost every fighting game has that effective style.

You could play like that, but in brawl you pretty much HAVE too to be on top of the meta with alot of characters I believe.

 

[Papapaint]

The threads direction has been changing!

@Arrowhead. How do smash videos not show someone's skill in game? Marjority of the smash videos ARE recordings of what people do in game.

I think what he's saying is that anyone can upload a video of them wavedashing around in melee, or hydroplaning in brawl, but the videos fail to show why the pros win, and that is a simple superiority in a mental game.

Ever played a pro? I played Tope when I was just starting out, and it was the most frustrating and humiliating smash experiences of my life. He was constantly a step ahead of me, without wavedashing or anything else. Just simple smart placement.

 

[Veil2222]

"Eh, my own success makes me believe it can be reproduced on a higher level by someone of higher skill than me"
well first of all, that doesn't make sense. if you're successful against noobs/average players, it doesn't mean your strategy will work vs more experienced players. second, you keep adding in hints that say "i'm a good player":
"I play Ike like Azen does, and I play MK like Forte does "
"I do believe that brawl is a new game and I've played enough to compete"
"I could come up with a great strategy, and it could work really well"

i know you don't believe you're top, but from what you've posted, it seems that you think you're pretty **** good

and no, my other post was not opinion. smash videos are bad at showing actual skill in the game

It's so easy to take peoples words out of context and string them together to make them mean whatever you want, isn't it? Okay, here goes, I'm going to re-contextualize and support everything I said in as clear a format as I can just for you, okay?

Quote one:You say it doesn't mean the hypothetical strategy I, or anyone, could come up with, would no neccecarily be effective at pro level. That does *not* mean that it can't be effective, and the only reason I wouldn't say I could try this out myself is because I haven't spent the time to get quite that good yet.

#2: I said I play "like" them, I use the same strategies/attempted combos and such. I did *not* say I was as good as them, they have better spacing than me, and they use a few things that I don't and should.

#3: While I don't think I'm as good as people like azen or forte, I think I'm good enough to put up a challenge to most people, thus, compete. You don't have to be very good to be worthy to at least compete and get out there.

#4: you took this TOTALLY out of context, this was a hypothetical saying that less skilled players can still come up with effective strategies, i.e. ME being the less skilled player compared to the top players.

I do think I'm good, that's not arrogance, I'm not saying "Lawla im awesum nd i can beat n e 1 here", I played melee for a good while in the competitive scene, and I did well, likewise, I'm going to do the same with brawl. I think with enough time and practice, about anyone with a passion can become pro at any game.

There, I spoon fed you the exact reason for everything I said, in context, with extra information, now can you please get off my case and focus on the actual convorsation going on here instead of attacking people personally?

 

[Papapaint]

It's so easy to take peoples words out of context and string them together to make them mean whatever you want, isn't it? Okay, here goes, I'm going to re-contextualize and support everything I said in as clear a format as I can just for you, okay?

Quote one:You say it doesn't mean the hypothetical strategy I, or anyone, could come up with, would no neccecarily be effective at pro level. That does *not* mean that it can't be effective, and the only reason I wouldn't say I could try this out myself is because I haven't spent the time to get quite that good yet.

#2: I said I play "like" them, I use the same strategies/attempted combos and such. I did *not* say I was as good as them, they have better spacing than me, and they use a few things that I don't and should.

#3: While I don't think I'm as good as people like azen or forte, I think I'm good enough to put up a challenge to most people, thus, compete. You don't have to be very good to be worthy to at least compete and get out there.

#4: you took this TOTALLY out of context, this was a hypothetical saying that less skilled players can still come up with effective strategies, i.e. ME being the less skilled player compared to the top players.

I do think I'm good, that's not arrogance, I'm not saying "Lawla im awesum nd i can beat n e 1 here", I played melee for a good while in the competitive scene, and I did well, likewise, I'm going to do the same with brawl. I think with enough time and practice, about anyone with a passion can become pro at any game.

There, I spoon fed you the exact reason for everything I said, in context, with extra information, now can you please get off my case and focus on the actual convorsation going on here instead of attacking people personally?

I see what he's saying though.

So far, your argument against our examples of camping being the dominant, most effective strategy in brawl (backed up with Cactaur's well-worded explanation of risk-reward systems in fighting games) has been "I come up with strategies that pros might be able to use! Plus, campers mess up sometimes, and then you punish them!"

EVEN IF THAT WERE THE CASE, and it's probably not (good players can be campers, and good players rarely mess up, meaning you'd be able to punish them very rarely... and in brawl, one screw-up and one punishment is nothing to fear), a game which degrades into the strategies of "You're either camping or trying to find ways around camping" is not very competitive. It is not deep.

 

[Endless Nightmares]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=vjovwgLSmZ4

Who says videos don't show skill? lol

But I know what people mean when they argue against it.

Videos don't show all the skill involved. True. With this logic does, sitting right behind HugS' shoulder and watching the match in person still not show all the skill? I guess the only way to experience their skill is firsthand, by playing them in person. That's what happened when I played Tink at FBT3 *cough4stockedtwiceinlessthan2minutes*. Unfortunately it happened too late in my Melee career for me to really build on that experience.

 

[arrowhead]

@Arrowhead. How do smash videos not show someone's skill in game? Marjority of the smash videos ARE recordings of what people do in game.

you see what the characters do, but you can only guess as to WHY the players did what they did. without narration, you see: SHL, wait half a second, jab, turnaround shine, bair. some players think "that's easy, i can do that". but what they don't realize is that the falco predicted his opponent started getting nervous from the pressure he was putting on him which would result in the spotdodge and once hit, he would DI toward the middle of the stage because he thinks it's more dangerous to be near the edge. there is so much more happening than just what you see in on your computer screen

veil: your post seems to explain most of what was lost over communicating over the internet although i'm still not completely satisfied. but i'll stop since you don't want to continue with this discussion

 

[Veil2222]

Pancake, I also said that I'm one of the people who believes the game is still developing as far as metagame, strategy, and tourney scene are concerned. I'm not saying what I do is gonna change that or that I've found a strategy that's going to shift the metagame, I'm saying I believe someone is going to, and it won't neccesarily come from a top player.

That's the message behind all the specific things I was saying, right now the game could be really campy and defense heavy with bad risk vs reward, but I don't think it's going to stay that way. That is just opinion, but that's what both sides is. I think from my experiences and strategies that the game isn't defense sided, I could be wrong, but that's what I believe.

*edit note, I didn't respond to the videos thing. Arrow, you brought up a good point, it's really hard to see mindgames in a video. If you watch a video enough times, notice pattern setups, and note the players habits through other videos, it's possible to see them. It takes a lot more effort, but I do think you can get most of peoples technical game through videos.

*one more edit >< @ arrowhead, I don't mind the discussion, I just don't like personal attacks rather than staying on subject and talking about brawl strategies, tourney scene, metagame, and other relevant topics. If you've got something new to add, or want to add to an opinion, that's what the forums are for and I welcome it.

 

[Papapaint]

Pancake, I also said that I'm one of the people who believes the game is still developing as far as metagame, strategy, and tourney scene are concerned. I'm not saying what I do is gonna change that or that I've found a strategy that's going to shift the metagame, I'm saying I believe someone is going to, and it won't neccesarily come from a top player.

That's the message behind all the specific things I was saying, right now the game could be really campy and defense heavy with bad risk vs reward, but I don't think it's going to stay that way. That is just opinion, but that's what both sides is. I think from my experiences and strategies that the game isn't defense sided, I could be wrong, but that's what I believe.

*edit note, I didn't respond to the videos thing. Arrow, you brought up a good point, it's really hard to see mindgames in a video. If you watch a video enough times, notice pattern setups, and note the players habits through other videos, it's possible to see them. It takes a lot more effort, but I do think you can get most of peoples technical game through videos.

But your experiences haven't been with the top players.

Yes, the metagame may well change. But as of now, the only way for that to happen would be a significant breaking, glitching, or exploiting of the physics system. Without that, camping will continue to be the most powerful strategy, and you have yet to really provide any evidence to counter that. I mean no offense, it's just that what we're saying is opinion only so far as the word can stretch to include "backed by lots of experience and evidence," while what you're saying is opinion in the sense of "might possibly one day be kind of plausiable."

 

[Endless Nightmares]

Pretty sure two G&Ws took first and second at Huge Johnz, also beating Overswarm's notorious camping ROB

Also pretty sure G&W can't camp

just sayin'

 

[Veil2222]

Yeah, I can't remember if it was even this thread, but I said that both sides is opinion and a concrete answer can't be reached at this point by anyone. It's still worth discussing if new subjects/ideas can come into the conversation, but if it can't go anywhere it just becomes the same opinions back and forth.

 

[Papapaint]

Pretty sure two G&Ws took first and second at Huge Johnz, also beating Overswarm's notorious camping ROB

Also pretty sure G&W can't camp

just sayin'

GW's backair is one of the best camping moves in the game.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=BfR9zIQ6FPE

 

[Papapaint]

Yeah, I can't remember if it was even this thread, but I said that both sides is opinion and a concrete answer can't be reached at this point by anyone. It's still worth discussing if new subjects/ideas can come into the conversation, but if it can't go anywhere it just becomes the same opinions back and forth.

Go read Cactaur's post on the push and pull of fighting games. It explains really really well why you're wrong.

 

[Spellman]

But your experiences haven't been with the top players.

Yes, the metagame may well change. But as of now, the only way for that to happen would be a significant breaking, glitching, or exploiting of the physics system. Without that, camping will continue to be the most powerful strategy, and you have yet to really provide any evidence to counter that. I mean no offense, it's just that what we're saying is opinion only so far as the word can stretch to include "backed by lots of experience and evidence," while what you're saying is opinion in the sense of "might possibly one day be kind of plausiable."

Half of the people arguing for the other side haven't played against the top players either, and there isn't a lot of evidence supporting that a camper can own someone every time.

 

[hoopspr226]

I'm a little bit confused about the camping complaints.

I understand why people complain about players who simply roll away and projectile spam. It's annoying, its time consuming, and it makes the game a chore. It eliminates the physical, in-your-face fighting that everyone loves about the smash franchise. In addition, it wasn't really present in melee because the fast paced nature of the game (among other things) allowed for easy counters to this type of play style. People don't like how projectile camping is such a prevalent strategy in brawl.

However, I don't understand how people can complain about close quarters camping (G&W bair camping, etc.). Sure, it's still camping in some form, but it was also omnipresent in Melee as well. Captain Falcon's constantly dash dance camped, and Jigglypuffs bair camped with WoP's, etc. If camping is simply the act of constantly putting out hitboxes, I can hardly think of a single example of a high level player who didn't camp. In fact, much of Melee's metagame is about limiting your opponent's options by putting out hitboxes.

I think we can all agree that this fact did not worsen the quality of Melee''s gameplay in the slightest. So why are people using close quarters camping as a reason why Brawl is bad/not competitive/not fun?

Can someone enlighten me?

 

[Papapaint]

I have.

And yes, there is. You clearly did not read the thread?

 

[Papapaint]

Please... everyone talking about camping, go read cactaur's post on fighting game mechanics. If you can't understand the significance of what he says in it, then you haven't played high-level brawl.

 

[Spellman]

I have.

And yes, there is. You clearly did not read the thread?

I said half! And there's only few, with videos where people have won by other means to counter them.

 

[Veil2222]

I read cactars post, and on top of what hoops pointed out before me, there's a few new mechanics I've been using to get around the "impossible camper approach" which are enhanced DI, new air dodge, and b-sticking. The best example of this is when I play Ike, because I have no other options with him, and I have to do all of these things to approach. These things make more options in the approach, I can sh a fair and DI away so that when I land, I'm far enough away to recover before I can be punished, I can try to predict a punishment, feign an areal attack, then air dodge the punish and punish the missed punish, or I can RAR Bair/Nair/Fair through them (depending on what momentum I want), land and spot dodge if I think a Dsmash that can hit me is coming and punish, or try to grab as their dropping their sheild.

I think we have a lot more options on the approach than people are exploring, these all have worked for me with many characters in varying degrees, and this is a big reason why I don't think Brawl rewards camping as much as people think.

* a note responding to more current posts, I watched vids from a lot of the top people on wifi wars, I didn't see a trend of camping superiority. Those are the people that are regarded as high end brawl, if it's not there, it's not anywhere signifigant by people's own definitions.

 

[PhillipthaGoober]

I think brawl is a great game and if you dont like it shut up and just dont play it.

 

[Aesir]

^ these are the exact posts that aren't allowed in here.

Why you might ask? They offer nothing intelligent. Thank you for contributing positively to the discussion

 

[Veil2222]

Phillip, the TC even stated in his rather long painstaking post, that those kinds of comments would get you ignored, flamed, and all around disliked. I'll be doing the first of those from here on in unless you want to say something relevant.

 

[Wekk]

I'm sick of seeing people saying Brawl is a "child's game" compared to the competitive nature of Melee. Bullsh*t it is, or rather, bullsh*t that melee isn't a child's game too. You people think Wavedashing and L-cancelling makes melee a competitive game? Any idiot can f*cking hit L after they do an aerial as they're hitting the ground, and anyone can jump and shortly afterwards air dodge downward. That sh*t is easy, and you guys get all high and mighty about how it makes it such an amazingly competitive game. Try playing Guilty Gear, where you have to memorize character specific combos that are oftentimes needed to be linked in the span of 1 or 2 frames (a frame being 1/60 a second). Try playing GG or ANY other major 2d fighter game and tell me melee is "competitive".

Yes it's true Brawl was designed to be "less competitive", in that you can grab ledges from behind, rolling is less punishable, etc. That does NOT mean that Brawl cannot be played competitive, or even that Melee is the end all be all of competitive games. Brawl is different, and you just need to adjust or GTFO. Whining about rolling being harder to punish? Learn the tighter timing to punish it the. Whining about easy recovery in this game? Well, I'm sorry you're not playing Melee Marth where you knock the opponent off the stage once and they might as well be dead at that point. Honestly, the new way you play the game seems to be MORE competitive to me. Tighter roll timings, no more mindless easy as sh*t edgeguarding.

Honestly if you guys want a really competitive game, play a different game. But Brawl can be competitive, I guarantee that top players in Brawl will be CONSISTENTLY winning tournaments, while you're stilling whining about how the game sucks. Smash Brothers has always been about Mindgames and knowledge of spacing and timing basics. If you think being able to L cancel or Wavedash makes you a good player, then you are sorely mistaken.

 

[Papapaint]

I'm sick of seeing people saying Brawl is a "child's game" compared to the competitive nature of Melee. Bullsh*t it is, or rather, bullsh*t that melee isn't a child's game too. You people think Wavedashing and L-cancelling makes melee a competitive game? Any idiot can f*cking hit L after they do an aerial as they're hitting the ground, and anyone can jump and shortly afterwards air dodge downward. That sh*t is easy, and you guys get all high and mighty about how it makes it such an amazingly competitive game. Try playing Guilty Gear, where you have to memorize character specific combos that are oftentimes needed to be linked in the span of 1 or 2 frames (a frame being 1/60 a second). Try playing GG or ANY other major 2d fighter game and tell me melee is "competitive".

Yes it's true Brawl was designed to be "less competitive", in that you can grab ledges from behind, rolling is less punishable, etc. That does NOT mean that Brawl cannot be played competitive, or even that Melee is the end all be all of competitive games. Brawl is different, and you just need to adjust or GTFO. Whining about rolling being harder to punish? Learn the tighter timing to punish it the. Whining about easy recovery in this game? Well, I'm sorry you're not playing Melee Marth where you knock the opponent off the stage once and they might as well be dead at that point. Honestly, the new way you play the game seems to be MORE competitive to me. Tighter roll timings, no more mindless easy as sh*t edgeguarding.

Honestly if you guys want a really competitive game, play a different game. But Brawl can be competitive, I guarantee that top players in Brawl will be CONSISTENTLY winning tournaments, while you're stilling whining about how the game sucks. Smash Brothers has always been about Mindgames and knowledge of spacing and timing basics. If you think being able to L cancel or Wavedash makes you a good player, then you are sorely mistaken.

Good post.

Wait, sorry, I meant that word that means the opposite of "good."

How about ****TY ****ING CONTRIBUTION.

I have never flamed someone for being a n00b before, but you, sir... you **** well deserve it. Get the hell out of this thread you n00b *** piece of **** god ****ed ****ing moron.

 

[Smooth Criminal]

~snip.~

I happen to disagree with the notion that Brawl isn't going anywhere, metagame-wise. I think Brawl is an excellent game in its own right and will eventually have just enough depth for it to hold water in the competitive community.

However, you cannot possibly detract from Melee's depth. As far as that goes, Brawl falls short by a long shot.

So, take a long hard look at your post and think about everything you just listed. You pretty much summed up the reason why Melee is deeper than Brawl and therefore defeated your own argument.

Go ***** somewhere else. Or better yet, SHUT UP and play Brawl like the rest of us.


Smooth Criminal

 

[Papapaint]

I happen to disagree with the notion that Brawl isn't going anywhere, metagame-wise. I think Brawl is an excellent game in its own right and will eventually have just enough depth for it to hold water in the competitive community.

However, you cannot possibly detract from Melee's depth. As far as that goes, Brawl falls short by a long shot.

So, take a long hard look at your post and think about everything you just listed. You pretty much summed up the reason why Melee is deeper than Brawl and therefore defeated your own argument.

Go ***** somewhere else. Or better yet, SHUT UP and play Brawl like the rest of us.


Smooth Criminal

You've never made a post I didn't like. <3

 

[Icege]

I apologize if this has already been addressed, but what's stopping the Smash community from shrugging their shoulders and moving on?

Don't get ahead of me now, I'm not saying Brawl wins the battle. What I'm merely saying is do what the rest of the fighting game community has done: Keep both games ars tournament games.

In situations where there has been a blatant divide over a game (Tekken 4 and Tekken Tag Tournament for example), tournaments were held for both games. On a similar note, classics are always welcome. I do believe that Melee was the game in the Smash series that really broke Smash out on to the scene. As far as I'm concerned, it should be a main stay. The Super Street Fighter II Turbo of Smash if you will.

I'm very, very new to Smash. However, I am not new to the fighting game scene. From my very limited exposure to both games, I find Melee to be the much "deeper" of the games while Brawl is much more user friendly. If I had to make a comparison, I would say Melee is Virtua Fighter to Brawl's Tekken. Both have their pros and cons. I personally would love to see both games in tournaments since the more I learn about Brawl, the more I appreciate Melee.

In fact, Brawl to me feels like training wheels for Melee . I like Brawl more though, simply because I can play it for more than three matches without my eyes bleeding, but that's a personal problem.

I digress.

I do believe I'm more than likely taking this thread out of context, but I'm constantly seeing Melee players saying they don't like Brawl at all. They use it as a reason to quit playing Smash, which to me is just silly. If you don't like the game, don't play it. If somebody doesn't like the game, that's fine. Let them play the game they like. From a competitive stand point though, I do think that running both is a no brainer. Unfortunately, the money is going to be in Brawl, that much is certain. New game smell I suppose.

 

[Papapaint]

Most of us are moving on to brawl, but trying to figure out what makes melee the superior competitive game. In doing so, we hope to discover new things about brawl.

 

[Pink Reaper]

Good post.

Wait, sorry, I meant that word that means the opposite of "good."

How about ****TY ****ING CONTRIBUTION.

I have never flamed someone for being a n00b before, but you, sir... you **** well deserve it. Get the hell out of this thread you n00b *** piece of **** god ****ed ****ing moron.

lol, don't even bother dude, this guy just reeks of the same n00b smell that Jafar had, just do what I did, and add another to your ignore list

 

[Plairnkk]

I don't think i've ever made a post that didn't just emit awesome everywhere.

 

[Wekk]

I am trying to stay on topic at least, you flaming me more or less is completely irrelevant to the thread.

 

[Wekk]

I happen to disagree with the notion that Brawl isn't going anywhere, metagame-wise. I think Brawl is an excellent game in its own right and will eventually have just enough depth for it to hold water in the competitive community.

However, you cannot possibly detract from Melee's depth. As far as that goes, Brawl falls short by a long shot.

So, take a long hard look at your post and think about everything you just listed. You pretty much summed up the reason why Melee is deeper than Brawl and therefore defeated your own argument.

Go ***** somewhere else. Or better yet, SHUT UP and play Brawl like the rest of us.


Smooth Criminal

Ok, what the H*ll? I DEFENDED Brawl through and through in my post. I AM playing Brawl, Idiot.

Also, what in my post makes you think Melee was more in depth? You clearly didn't read it very well, because I was saying the OPPOSITE. Being able to ledsgeguard easily in Melee may give you a big d*ck, but it certainly doesn't make you a better or more competitive player. You think Wavedashing is "high level"? Wavedashing is unpunishable by all means, it doesn't get any noobier than that. Try playing where you can choose between rolling, running, fox trotting, walking, short hopping as all legitimate options versus only wavedashing and TELL me again that Melee is more in depth.

 

[Spellman]

Wekk has a sharp tongue, but he makes solid points. If people are allowed to take shots at Brawl in this thread, then taking shots at Melee is fair game, too.

 

[Jack Kieser]

@Spellman,

Blasphemy! Techs make competitiveness! Melee has techs! Brawl doesn't! Melee will always be better!

[/sarcasm]

 

[Wekk]

Thank you Spellman. I apologize if I was brash, but some of the arguments seem kinda lobsided. In my mind, the only real edge Melee has over Brawl in being competitive is that it is faster paced. Other than that, it's simply a different game with a new way to play it successfully.