Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
Are you attempting to suggest that all matches are 100% fair on FD?
Not 100% obviously, but the metagame seems to be intentionally being carved for FD balance, with the general nerfing of projectiles and the introduction of super armor.
We'll see how that goes. I made an entire thread about FD Only and it has it's advantages and disadvantages, but fighting on only one stage is something I doubt we'll see just due to our community in general. I don't think FD is going to balance out the cast.
Well, I'm FD-biased anyway due to being a Street Fighter player, so take me with a grain of salt.
The smash community likes platforms so I don't see FD only ever happening at least outside of Japan.
Yeah, I agree with this. They may have the same roster, but their metagames would be different. That's why both will be competitive. Another reason why is the different stages and possible rulesets, but I don't know about that.
Sadly, these kinds of things are inevitable.
Yeah, I hear yeah.
I agree.
I'd like for what you described to be a separate mode from For Glory, with FG being more a 'hop on and play a quick few legit games' deal. Having online modes for both tournament type matches and friendlies makes sense, no?
That does sound like a good idea. Having a mode for you to practice to new techniques and one to apply them would make a lot of sense. What would you call it, though?
I think it will only affect a few characters. One character might be A tier in the Wii U version but B tier in the 3DS version. Not a lot but enough to warrant seperate tier lists.
I'm not really worried about For Glory. I don't think it's going to affect the competetive community at all.
That's the problem though. I would like For Glory mode to affect the competitive community because it's supposed to be for the competitive community, but For Glory in it's current state does not reflect how competitive is played at all. Instead it reflects the stereotype of competitive play (ALL FOX, NO ITEMS, FINAL DESTINATION!).
"Sparring". Alternatively, "For Practice".
This really depends on how you define a 'competitive player.' However, what I do think most competitive players want, no matter how you define them, would be the most fair and legitimate system to duke it out that they can. I really have to disagree with the last sentence in this quote because, well, it's "For Glory!" Isn't demonstrating your skills, and showing where you stand in regards to that one of the primary points of competition?
That's the exact point I made in my earlier post. As it stands, there aren't really any fighting games with well constructed online competitive play that are taken seriously. If For Glory represented a tournament set, it would be huge not just for smash, but the entire genre.
As I've said before, this wouldn't be terribly hard to implement. You're not adding any actual content to the game, it's changing the way the For Glory system works in regards to stage and character picks. This is not really any kind of ridiculous request, and I find it hard to believe that For Glory isn't meant to be any kind of competitive system. They've implemented rankings at the very least.
You do realize that Final Destination is one of the least played stages in tournaments, because some characters have clear advantages over others in many matchups, right? Most tournament players agree that battlefield is probably by far the most neutral stage.
The part I bolded, why not? Of course an online system could never reach the legitimacy of an actual tournament, but shouldn't it try to cut it close? Think about it, one of the biggest walls of entering the tournament scene is that people are afraid to go out to their first tournament just to be boned out in their first match, even though that's exactly what's needed to become good and really start participating. This has the ability to cut down that wall, and give people the chance to become better in the comfort of their own homes.
You are really, really over-exaggerating the complexity of a tournament set. Also, I never asked for a bracket system, that would be irrelevant. This quick rush of competitive play would serve much better if done on more stages, and it would be most fair to select those through a stage-strike and counterpick system. A system that, again, would be fairly simple to implement.
That will do more harm than good. Nintendo simply won't keep up with what the neutral stages are. If we banned one, they'll just go on their hi diddly way and keep it selectable, because we ain't Sakurai and they really don't see anything to gain by listening to us.
So keeping up with neutral stages are hard to keep up with, therefore only one stage should be allowed? I don't really find this to be a very fair compromise. The stages considered neutral haven't really changed for any version of the game in the last couple of years, and I think it's fairly clear what makes a stage neutral at this point. All the neutral stages are just symmetrical, fairly small stages with possibly a couple of platforms.
You probably use your mouse on the left side too... It's lefties like you that give us lefties a bad name.
I disagree that it was meant for the competitive community. The competitive community in the long run isn't going to care about For Glory mode even if it had other stages because it still pits you against randoms and limits you on stuff. The competitive community is going to do it's online through Friend lists and the like instead. For Glory isn't for us, it's for the casual-competitive player.
Actually I don't, but using a stylus with my right hand is still really awkward. Moving with the face buttons is kind of clunky too, considering the movement is made to be full analog. It's like trying to play smash with the wiimote. :/
Even if that's true, wouldn't the "casual-competitive" player prefer more neutral stages as well? Is there really that big of an audience who want to play on Final Destination and nothing else? I haven't seen anyone around who prefers that.
How much post release support do you actually expect to get in this game? I'll consider us all lucky if we even get decent balance patches for more than a year. I don't think that this is Blizzard we're dealing with, here.
If we're at the very least getting enough post release support for the servers that we're playing on to stay up, running, and stable, I don't think this would be much more. It's not very often that a stage gets banned anymore. Balance patches would be far more difficult to implement than just turning a stage off.
Oh, on that I agree. It really is.
That's a good example for the point I was making about different stages.
That remains to be seen. It could go either way. I personally think the 3DS version will have a following for at least the first two years.