Should anti-trip be a choice for tourney sets?

[theunabletable]

In short, why shouldn't we do any number of things that would highten the game competitively, remove randomness, make more stages viable, make more characters viable, and generally make brawl a better game? I'm not even saying we would logically have to; I'm saying what's stopping us and why is tripping any different?

There's a couple reasons I can think of off the top of my head

for the most part, the stuff you suggested is just plain impractical. As far as I know, things like removing parts of a stage and such require new .pac files (wait do stages have .pac files, or is that just characters? you still know what I mean), which would mean that you'd need an SD card for every Wii. Standard codes that you can like put into Gecko or w/e just need to be loaded once, and then they're loaded until the Wii is turned off. A character .pac change, and iirc a stage change like that requires that the SD card be in the Wii when that stage or character is loaded.

Anything that requires more than one SD card, or requires SD cards to be in the Wii for longer than the setup is vastly more impractical than no-tripping.

Further it's impractical because it's harder to get people on board with the idea of pure-gameplay changing hacks. You'd get significantly more outlash from the community, and much less acceptance. It's more likely to be dangerous to the community than it is to help, unlike tripping potentially.

Although the largest difference. The stuff you mentioned, those are gameplay-changing things. No-tripping isn't a gameplay changing thing. Walking would still be more effective than dashing most of the time, dash dancing wouldn't be that good because you still can't shield out of it, so someone can just hit you for doing it lol. People would probably dash dance about as much as they do now (visual cue mixups and stuff), but they wouldn't have to worry about getting randomly punished for it, especially when it's normally punishable anyways.

Those things are gameplay changing hacks. This is more of a results changing hack. There's a bit of a difference inherently, I think, and I think that that difference is an important distinction.

TL;DR: A few reasons are that other hacks are impractical to set up at a tournament, they might be damaging to the community, or not accepted by the community very well because of their gameplay-changing nature, as opposed to no-trippings more results-changing nature. Along with other things haha

 

[Tesh]

what?

By that logic, removing GnW 9 isn't gameplay altering either. Just results.

 

[theunabletable]

No, people use his side B with the intention of getting a 9. Removing his 9 would remove the incentive, or the benefits if you prefer that word, of using his side B, and would thus change the metagame of GnW to some extent.

And that's not to say that no-tripping is ENTIRELY non-gameplay effecting. It does effect gameplay to an extent of course, but it effects it in a different way than other changes would, and I'd hoped that coining a different term for that kind of change would make me easier to follow, that way I wouldn't have to keep repointing it out in every paragraph or w/e.

The differences between a change like no-tripping, and a change like the MGFB code (make-ganon's-fair-better) are enough that I thought that a different term might be warranted, to make conversing about them easier.

 

[Life]

[collapse="pet peeve"]"effects"
*twitch*
Hate to be the grammarstapo in the thread, but you're looking for "affects".[/collapse]

This entire argument (the GnW nine) seems to boil down to "random rewards are okay, random penalties aren't" and that makes me go " :/ " IRL.

 

[ElDominio]

With tripping though, it's impossible to mitigate that chance without just not dashing (Hardly a choice for some characters). Sure, Brawl is competitive with the extremely large elements of luck involved. But it'd be much moreso without the inclusion of elements like tripping. Tripping would be fine if it had a defined and known algorithm that we understood beyond "it might happen whenever you dash" (I.e. you trip every 10th dash on the dot). But having it as a completely random element dilutes the competitive

Just because.

You can't code randomness. It doesn't exist in a world of zeroes and ones.

 

[Ghostbone]

Supreme Dirt, you should also re-enable melee dash dancing in that codeset if you haven't already

 

[ElDominio]

Supreme Dirt, you should also re-enable melee dash dancing in that codeset if you haven't already

Isn't the point of the mod fixing Brawl? Or is it going to be another Brawl+/BBrawl

With no tripping, you can do Brawl dash dancing without fear, and it's still mostly brawl

 

[Tesh]

k table, what if we remove the 1 from judgement? or the non misfires? or everything except stich faces from peach? or the waddle dos and dees? I kept the incentive and those character dont have to be screwed over my something random.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

for the most part, the stuff you suggested is just plain impractical. As far as I know, things like removing parts of a stage and such require new .pac files (wait do stages have .pac files, or is that just characters? you still know what I mean), which would mean that you'd need an SD card for every Wii. Standard codes that you can like put into Gecko or w/e just need to be loaded once, and then they're loaded until the Wii is turned off. A character .pac change, and iirc a stage change like that requires that the SD card be in the Wii when that stage or character is loaded.

To an extent, much of these things can be patched with codes, and practicality should hardly be of issue... But let's grant that and reduce it to just codes. There are codes that can do most of what we want to do. It's more awkward and hard to work with, but it's possible. Not all, but a lot of it, anyways. And even just liming it to codes, we can buff ganon, fix RCO lag, etc.

Further it's impractical because it's harder to get people on board with the idea of pure-gameplay changing hacks. You'd get significantly more outlash from the community, and much less acceptance. It's more likely to be dangerous to the community than it is to help, unlike tripping potentially.

Tripping is gameplay-changing. This is the line drawn in the sand: we either change the gameplay or we don't.

Although the largest difference. The stuff you mentioned, those are gameplay-changing things. No-tripping isn't a gameplay changing thing. Walking would still be more effective than dashing most of the time, dash dancing wouldn't be that good because you still can't shield out of it, so someone can just hit you for doing it lol. People would probably dash dance about as much as they do now (visual cue mixups and stuff), but they wouldn't have to worry about getting randomly punished for it, especially when it's normally punishable anyways.

Those things are gameplay changing hacks. This is more of a results changing hack. There's a bit of a difference inherently, I think, and I think that that difference is an important distinction.

Not true. No tripping is gameplay-changing. It doesn't matter if you want to say it's "results-changing"; whether or not walking is still more effective is irrelevant; it makes dash safer either way. Or is removing all the endlag on Warlock Punch not gameplay-changing, simply because it's still never a good option? No, it does change gameplay, often in fairly dramatic ways. It buffs characters like Fox, Olimar, and Sonic, and nerfs (relatively) characters like Peach, Snake, and MK. To claim that no-tripping doesn't change gameplay is quite frankly ridiculous.

 

[theunabletable]

"effects"
*twitch*
Hate to be the grammarstapo in the thread, but you're looking for "affects".

I used to be better with this particular one, but eventually I forgot what the difference is between both. What exactly is the difference lol?

This entire argument (the GnW nine) seems to boil down to "random rewards are okay, random penalties aren't" and that makes me go " :/ " IRL.

actually it's not just that, it's the combination of that and other things.

k table, what if we remove the 1 from judgement?

Impractical, requires a .pac file as far as I know, which means we'd need an SD card for every Wii. Plus there's no community backing for this outside of you making a hypothetical argument that you disagree with anyway. Further it's a different situation.

or the non misfires? or everything except stich faces from peach? or the waddle dos and dees?

These are all useful things, that have an extra random bonus. That is inherently different from the judgment example, but it also has the same problems as the judgment example, plus these effects aren't 100% detrimental.

Although bringing in hypothetical arguments doesn't answer my original question in the slightest.

I asked why removing tripping is a bad thing, I didn't ask you to ask me to argue against removing RCO lag, or any other hackable thing. I'm not versed in the MGFB code arguments, and the MGFB code arguments aren't very related to the no-tripping code arguments.

Explain to me why no-tripping is bad, not asking me why we wouldn't use the MGFB code. Those arguments are flawed because you're looking for universals, and that's a flawed line of thinking.

To an extent, much of these things can be patched with codes, and practicality should hardly be of issue... But let's grant that and reduce it to just codes. There are codes that can do most of what we want to do. It's more awkward and hard to work with, but it's possible. Not all, but a lot of it, anyways. And even just liming it to codes, we can buff ganon, fix RCO lag, etc.

Alright now get me a large part of the community's legitimate support to buff Ganon and make that the standard in Brawl (along with 3 years worth of people, not even in this community, complaining about Ganon's fair), and then your analogy is valid.

Until that point, the two situations are largely different enough that they can't be compared in the way you're trying to compare them. Universals don't exist in the way you're trying to force them, we should work on a more case-by-case basis.

Tripping is gameplay-changing. This is the line drawn in the sand: we either change the gameplay or we don't.

Longer replays is gameplay changing, it allows you to press Z at the results screen after 3 minutes have passed. That changes your options within the game. (Oh and since I might as well put this out there, longer replays, a gameplay changing code, didn't lead to us trying to remove tripping, nor did it lead to us trying to buff Ganon's fair)

This analogy I just made, saying that longer replays is gameplay changing, so that either shows that the line in the sand is wrong, or it justifies changing tripping is inherently flawed in a really large way (probably in multiple ways, but it also has one really big flaw, a flaw that's overlooked in most arguments). The issue is that this analogy doesn't apply. The reason the analogy doesn't apply isn't because there's some universal quality that the things you're talking about has, and the longer replay code doesn't exhibit.

The issue is simply that it's different. It doesn't apply because it's a different situation, and it would be foolish of us to act as if it applies even though it doesn't. Longer replays didn't lead to no tripping, it didn't lead to buffing Ganon's fair. It was just making longer replays legal. It doesn't apply to any other argument, it had its own variables that were unique to itself. The qualities it has are VERY reminiscent of the things you have an issue with with the no tripping code (it changes gameplay to some extent, it's different from the developer's intention and the way the game was made, you're basically playing a different game with it on, the original thing, not being able to have replays longer than 3 minutes, was universally disliked, and removing it was better).

The issue is not that they all don't exhibit the exact same traits, and it's not that the traits are varying levels of that trait. The issue is that the situations are simply DIFFERENT, and we gain nothing from comparing them.

We gain a lot, however, by dealing with something on a case-by-case basis.

I don't want an example of something that has similar traits that's arguably bad. I want an explanation of what's wrong with this particular scenario (this scenario being adding the no-tripping code as an option).

Not true. No tripping is gameplay-changing. It doesn't matter if you want to say it's "results-changing"; whether or not walking is still more effective is irrelevant; it makes dash safer either way.

The idea I was trying to communicate by giving a different kind of word to no-tripping clearly was lost on everyone. I apologize for the misunderstandings, I've rephrased my arguments and attempted to be more clear in this post.

 

[Life]

I used to be better with this particular one, but eventually I forgot what the difference is between both. What exactly is the difference lol?

You "affect" something, or you "have an effect" on it. Affect is a verb, effect is a noun. [collapse="Well, usually. It gets complicated..."]

[/collapse]

 

[C.J.]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIvrDsnKuQ8

That is how you remember effect/affect.

 

[theunabletable]

Alright haha. That does sound about right, I remember using it like that, then eventually just giving up lol

 

[Tesh]

Looks like we all learned something from this thread.

 

[B.A.M.]

How could someone not know the difference between effect and affect?


Anyways, im tired of people making the assertion that no-tripping would be a snowball effect. That is such a ridiculous claim. The only issue is the fact that maintaining such a rule throughout tournament to give a choice would be quite difficult imo. If you are a purist, thats perfectly fine. Just stop feeding the notion that no-tripping= making ganons fair OHKO. It doesnt. We are talking about global effects here. An effect that was made to be highly complex in order to replicate randomness. An effect created to add a subjectively arbitrary facet GLOBALLY to the game in order to derail competition. This is NOT the same as super Ganondoken, or Diddy with 5 bananas.

 

[theunabletable]

How could someone not know the difference between effect and affect?

eww I don't like the colon c smily on this site

:C *

Someone could forget what it means

 

[John12346]

eww I don't like the colon c smily on this site

:C *

Spoiler

Too extravagant?

 

[The Ben]

An effect created to add a subjectively arbitrary facet GLOBALLY to the game in order to derail competition.

On the contrary, it is purposefully part of the game. By trying to patch it out you're trying to derail competition by insisting that competition in this game isn't good enough for you.

 

[theunabletable]

Too extravagant?

Oh **** yeah. Thanks for that c:

man I am just learning all over the place in this thread

 

[ElDominio]

Longer replays is gameplay changing, it allows you to press Z at the results screen after 3 minutes have passed. That changes your options within the game. (Oh and since I might as well put this out there, longer replays, a gameplay changing code, didn't lead to us trying to remove tripping, nor did it lead to us trying to buff Ganon's fair)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXX5drqRD9s#t=05m09

 

[WindMajor]

How could someone not know the difference between effect and affect?


Anyways, im tired of people making the assertion that no-tripping would be a snowball effect. That is such a ridiculous claim. The only issue is the fact that maintaining such a rule throughout tournament to give a choice would be quite difficult imo. If you are a purist, thats perfectly fine. Just stop feeding the notion that no-tripping= making ganons fair OHKO. It doesnt. We are talking about global effects here. An effect that was made to be highly complex in order to replicate randomness. An effect created to add a subjectively arbitrary facet GLOBALLY to the game in order to derail competition. This is NOT the same as super Ganondoken, or Diddy with 5 bananas.

There's a difference that not a lot of people are picking up on.

The claim isn't that allowing one hack will directly lead into other people wanting to add more hacks in to fix the game. The claim is that allowing one hack will simply peak people's interest, and it'll open the door to allowing another code to be implemented.

In other words, we aren't implying that something will snowball because we allowed no-tripping. What we're implying is that something could snowball because we allowed no-tripping.

People who claim that things WILL happen are wrong. Although there's a high possibility that it probably will happen, none of us can see into the future. There's no ground for anyone to correctly make that assertion.

However, if you're saying that something COULD happen, then that's a legitimate point to bring up, because it's true: allowing one balance-changing hack opens the door for a million double standards.

If we allowed no-tripping, then we're opening the doors for people to ask, "But why can't we make Ganon's Fair OHKO using hacks? We allowed the usage of hacks to remove tripping after all!" They have all the rights in the world to make that claim because it's a legitimate claim. We changed the balance of the game using one hacked alteration, and if we did it once, why shouldn't we be able to do it again? Because we don't want to? We drew a line in the sand and said, "This is enough. This is as far as we'll go."

Gee... that's an awfully unfair arbitrary line drawn in the sand (and here's where the problems will start).

Longer replays is gameplay changing, it allows you to press Z at the results screen after 3 minutes have passed. That changes your options within the game. (Oh and since I might as well put this out there, longer replays, a gameplay changing code, didn't lead to us trying to remove tripping, nor did it lead to us trying to buff Ganon's fair)

Longer replays doesn't effect gameplay or results. It changes the game, yes, but those are only menu and replay mode hacks. The balance of the game remains untouched by replay codes. Your comment indirectly complements my point subtly though, in which people will question why we did this, but not this. Although I haven't seen any arguments for replay codes, I have seen arguments for texture hacks, and if my memory serves me right, those arguments are in this very thread.

 

[The Ben]

They could draw the line at no alteration of characters, just alterations of game mechanics. Still seems pretty dumb though.

 

[theunabletable]

So, just to make sure I have it straight, you're saying we can't make our game and community better, because some ****** in the future might use the things we add as reasoning for bull****?

We're making our game worse, because we want to preemptively combat someone's debate, instead of doing what might be beneficial?

Longer replays doesn't effect gameplay or results.

It does effect gameplay. It is WITHIN the game, and something you control with the controller of your choice. That is very much gameplay. But the entire point of that post was completely missed, as I was showing why that argument is flawed in a much more important way

The balance of the game remains untouched by replay codes. Your comment indirectly complements my point subtly though, in which people will question why we did this, but not this.

Actually I would guess that you only read that quote from the person who posted above you, who only posted that quote. I would recommend that you read the rest of the post, as I explain that that was not my intention, and to make an analogy like the one I did would be foolish, as the argument is flawed.

 

[ElDominio]

So, just to make sure I have it straight, you're saying we can't make our game and community better, because some ****** in the future might use the things we add as reasoning for bull****?

We're making our game worse, because we want to preemptively combat someone's debate, instead of doing what might be beneficial?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXX5drqRD9s#t=05m09

 

[theunabletable]

I can't tell what part from that video is supposed to be the response to what I said.

is it where he says "what?"? I'm not really sure what has you so confused in that case

 

[WindMajor]

So, just to make sure I have it straight, you're saying we can't make our game and community better, because some ****** in the future might use the things we add as reasoning for bull****?

We're making our game worse, because we want to preemptively combat someone's debate, instead of doing what might be beneficial?

Basically, although I don't think we see eye to eye on what we think is beneficial for the community/game when including small hacks to replace vBrawl in tournaments (even if it's by choice). What you think is beneficial is not what I think is beneficial, and my reasons for it fall within and beyond the scope of what this thread has discussed.

This isn't the only argument I'm pinning against anti-tripping. If you didn't already see, it's only one of many.

I'll chime in if someone else figures it out, but for now, I'm back to lurking.

 

[MonkUnit]

Technically the code only removes tripping from a Dash, but not from attacks, bananas, etc. So you still retain some tripping. Although doing this removes things like dashing to start a combo but you getting ****ed up because of the Trip.


IMO its up to the TO to decide what they want to use. But players should still be able to ask whether it's ni tripping or not and be able to say no to a particular setup.

Also, what the heck do you mean needing one sd card for all wiis? If it's all codes and no files - .PAC, .rel,etc. Then you only need a minimum of one sd card. Put the sd card in one wii, stacksmash it, move to the next wii, stacksmash it, etc.

If you do decide to put tripping back in, you have to restart brawl iirc, you can't just stacksmash it again after doing the stacksmash.

 

[Ghostbone]

Isn't the point of the mod fixing Brawl? Or is it going to be another Brawl+/BBrawl

With no tripping, you can do Brawl dash dancing without fear, and it's still mostly brawl

Disabling melee dash dancing was as silly as enabling you to act out of hitstun (which he took out as well). It gives you more options, plus it was in the Brawl demo.
It's just limiting the game not to allow it.
It's also something else that only requires a code, which is the point of the mod.

 

[John12346]

Btw, I tried out Brawl without the ability to cancel hitstun

Combos are possible now, but they're still pretty hard to perform, mainly due to the slow paced, floaty nature of the game and how most characters' attacks send the opponent too far to begin with. What it DOES do, however, is protect you from being punished on moves that were previously unsafe on HIT, and that seems like something important, imo...

/offtopic again

 

[Shockna]

Not understanding the algorithm doesn't make it not exist. Not knowing why something works or how often its triggered isn't a reason to remove it. Is competition diluted by random events in a game that is inherently random? I don't think so, I think that's just the way the game was designed.

If a game is inherently random, then it's not a competitive game. Brawl is hardly a "random" game. It's a game with a few random elements.

I'm not saying there is no algorithm to determine tripping. I'm familiar enough with programming to know that no computer operation can be truly "random". The scope of the typical algorithms used to show the appearance of randomness, however, is typically far beyond the capacity of the human brain to keep track. Once the human brain is capable of performing the same number of operations per second as most modern computers are, then tripping could be claimed as a legitimate factor.

If something is intended to have random elements, and does, that thing succeeds at what it sets out to do. Using a non-video game example, is poker not competitive because the game is designed with a lot of random factors or do competitive poker players learn how to capitalize on the misfortune of others? It may be to the detriment of some characters, but balance in any game where you choose characters (or anything really) is relative to the options your selections have within the rules of said game and to expect the game to not favor some characters sometimes is unrealistic.

Poker is inherently random and has luck as it's primary means of operation. The "competition" comes only in the form of mindgames (Which often border on faux-psychic level), and pretty much anyone who actually watches competitive poker should know that.

The difference between a fan releasing a patch and a company releasing a patch is that the company is the officiator of the game's design. The fan is not, and depending on the ToS agreed to upon purchase may actually be breaking the law. With that said, I don't care if someone has some kind of homebrew Smash haxx tournament as long as they're upfront about it and don't try to pass it off as Smash proper.

Why, precisely, does it matter who the officiator of the game design is? This returns to the very same argumentum ad verecundiam that was previously dismissed.

To be honest though, I know the Smash community won't be smart enough to really get behind a more balanced game, because they're too busy thinking nonsense. Good thing Project M exists to fix most of these issues. >_>

 

[The Ben]

So, just to make sure I have it straight, you're saying we can't make our game and community better, because some ****** in the future might use the things we add as reasoning for bull****?

We're making our game worse, because we want to preemptively combat someone's debate, instead of doing what might be beneficial?

Nope, the argument is once you modify the balance of the game you're no longer playing Brawl (or "vBrawl") and are thus not even discussing the same game. You're essentially trying to make the community "better" (which is subjective) by suggesting they stop playing brawl and play some homebrew haxx instead. The end result is actually dividing the community between players and TOs interested in Brawl and players and TOs interested in something that isn't Brawl yet parades itself as such because it came about as a mod for Brawl. For comparison DOTA isn't Warcraft 3 and makes no claims as such other than for legal reasons.

You're not making the game worse by keeping it in its current state, you're keeping the game exactly how it is. The only thing making the community worse is how the community thinks it understands how to develop a game better than Nintendo.

 

[Spelt]

The only thing making the community worse is how the community thinks it understands how to develop a game better than Nintendo.

Did you really just say this?

I think you just said this.


...

 

[Browny]

Firstly, haters gonna hate.

Secondly, Nintendo developed this game to make money. Don't be so quick to suggest that 'developing' a game means catering to a very small minority.

 

[The Ben]

All game developers develop games to make money. My point is that no other fighting game community is so dissatisfied with the product that they have to mod it to make it viable. Either admit that you don't think Brawl is tournament quality and pick up another game, or play Brawl at tournaments because it is tournament viable. Don't modify it and rebalance it and then claim its still Brawl while advertising it as Brawl at tournaments. I think that's really what I'm trying to get at. Play whatever game it is you like, even make tournaments with it, but don't be a bunch of frauds about it.

 

[theunabletable]

Either admit that you don't think Brawl is tournament quality and pick up another game, or play Brawl at tournaments because it is tournament viable.

oh right, I forgot the world is so black and white that we can have only two legitimate choices to choose from in this situation.

 

[The Ben]

Well, yeah, it really is either play or don't play. There isn't exactly some in between where you half play and half don't play.

Fan hacks are not Brawl and should never be advertised as such for legal reasons.

 

[KuroganeHammer]

Interesting question. I've been thinking about the same thing recently.
I think that tripping is a part of the game, and if you turn it off, then you are not playing anymore "Super Smash Brothers. Brawl" since the game suddenly changes to "SSBB Without random tripping". Having the code on for all the consoles at a tournament would also be too much trouble and would probably never happen.


I was recently, a week ago at a tournament where 1 of the Wiis had the No Random Tripping code on. I played about half of my sets on that TV. I barely noticed any change and I completely forgot that I was playing a game without tripping. Everyone else also seemed to be cool with this and nobody really cared much if it was on or not since it VERY raraly affects the outcome of matches.

Couldn't have worded the top half better myself.

The second bit pretty much elaborates on why they don't want it. It very rarely affects matches, so why bother. lol

 

[SFA Smiley]

Diddy main trippin' about tripping

 

[Ghostbone]

Well, yeah, it really is either play or don't play. There isn't exactly some in between where you half play and half don't play.

Fan hacks are not Brawl and should never be advertised as such for legal reasons.

Cause you can't advertise it as a BBrawl/Brawl-/P:M/whatever other mod tourney at all.

I don't see anybody saying that we should host modified Brawl tourneys without telling people it's a modified version.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Explain to me why no-tripping is bad, not asking me why we wouldn't use the MGFB code. Those arguments are flawed because you're looking for universals, and that's a flawed line of thinking.

I assume that gameplay-altering hacks are bad in the context of a brawl tournament (things like Brawl+/Brawl- assume that you are already playing a completely different game). This is why I don't support little fixes like removing tripping or fixing ganon's fair or removing IDC or fixing planking (now there's a hack that I bet we could all get on board for!). So if we do not assume that gameplay-altering hacks are bad, then I ask: why not do that?

Alright now get me a large part of the community's legitimate support to buff Ganon and make that the standard in Brawl (along with 3 years worth of people, not even in this community, complaining about Ganon's fair), and then your analogy is valid.

Popularity shouldn't matter one bit. What popular rarely runs parallel with what is good. We need a clear line. Just like we don't ban things because people don't like them, but rather because they are broken (case in point: your main). And people have been complaining about poor balance in Brawl for quite a long time, especially MK and Ganondorf. Hell, I bet we could easily get more than half the community to, in theory, support nerfing MK.

Longer replays is gameplay changing, it allows you to press Z at the results screen after 3 minutes have passed. That changes your options within the game. (Oh and since I might as well put this out there, longer replays, a gameplay changing code, didn't lead to us trying to remove tripping, nor did it lead to us trying to buff Ganon's fair)

This analogy I just made, saying that longer replays is gameplay changing, so that either shows that the line in the sand is wrong, or it justifies changing tripping is inherently flawed in a really large way (probably in multiple ways, but it also has one really big flaw, a flaw that's overlooked in most arguments). The issue is that this analogy doesn't apply. The reason the analogy doesn't apply isn't because there's some universal quality that the things you're talking about has, and the longer replay code doesn't exhibit.

Yes. Now let me make it very clear where the line is: longer replays, like texture and music hacks, does not ****ing affect gameplay. Let me clarify: it changes the game, yes, but it does not change how the match runs. We can **** with the menus and such as much as we want, because, surprise surprise, the contents of the menus has very little effect on the skills we want to test. Tripping, on the other hand, has a major impact on it. So what I'm hoping is that you intentionally misrepresented where the line in the sand was drawn, because if you're that stupid you're not worth talking to.

The issue is simply that it's different. It doesn't apply because it's a different situation, and it would be foolish of us to act as if it applies even though it doesn't. Longer replays didn't lead to no tripping, it didn't lead to buffing Ganon's fair. It was just making longer replays legal. It doesn't apply to any other argument, it had its own variables that were unique to itself. The qualities it has are VERY reminiscent of the things you have an issue with with the no tripping code (it changes gameplay to some extent, it's different from the developer's intention and the way the game was made, you're basically playing a different game with it on, the original thing, not being able to have replays longer than 3 minutes, was universally disliked, and removing it was better).

Again: tell me how the changes in the replay code affect the element of the game we are trying to test for. You're completely missing what "gameplay-altering" means in this context.

Anyways, im tired of people making the assertion that no-tripping would be a snowball effect. That is such a ridiculous claim. The only issue is the fact that maintaining such a rule throughout tournament to give a choice would be quite difficult imo. If you are a purist, thats perfectly fine. Just stop feeding the notion that no-tripping= making ganons fair OHKO. It doesnt. We are talking about global effects here. An effect that was made to be highly complex in order to replicate randomness. An effect created to add a subjectively arbitrary facet GLOBALLY to the game in order to derail competition. This is NOT the same as super Ganondoken, or Diddy with 5 bananas.

I'm not claiming it will. I'm not claiming it could. I'm claiming it should. There's so much wrong with Brawl. If we start with tripping, why should we stop there? Think of all the crap we could fix! RCO lag is stupid, let's ditch it. Ganon's fair could autocancel, making the worst character in the game at least somewhat less than unviable. We could make it so that DDD can't infinite DK! The possibilities for improving the game are endless, and yet we're ignoring them. Why? I ignore them because I think gameplay-altering hacks are not a viable option and not a good thing for competition. What's your excuse?