Should there be a SSB 4?

[Falconv1.0]

As long as it is more balanced than 3S I can live.

It's hilarious how many things Brawl and 3S have in common.

 

[IYM!]

Do you just ignore everything Sakurai says about his thoughts on competitive games or what.

yep, i know than Sakurai already said than he will never make a game like melee.

but, i can dream after all, dont you thing?, and one of my dreams is have a balanced Smash brothers, a balanced roster, and a balance between competitive game and casual.

When i Say casual game i am refering to pla with items, in crazy stages like big blue or flat zone, sometimes i get boring of play smash on the same way all the time, so, i turn the items on to get some diferent fun, and bring back my old days as a happy n00b. when i was kid (10 years) i played at first time Smash 64, and i did it with items.

But i love play competitive, is so fun and exiting, play agains good opponenst and do the best in a match is something so good. Is something than i dont change it for anything, i love play competitive.

I can tell you, in a year, 80% of the times than i play i do it in the competitive way, and the other 20% i do it with items and other kind of stuff.


PS: what is 3S?

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

It's hilarious how many things Brawl and 3S have in common.

They have some similarities I suppose.

 

[Bassoonist]

Yes, there should be a SSB4.

If only so the series doesn't have to end with Brawl, which was somewhat disappointing.

I'm really hoping we at least get a hint towards it coming at E3 this year (with the announcement of Project Cafe). If we don't, I will be very disappointed, personally. I need another game to waste all of my time speculating which characters will make it in and which won't.

 

[Falconv1.0]

yep, i know than Sakurai already said than he will never make a game like melee.

but, i can dream after all, dont you thing?, and one of my dreams is have a balanced Smash brothers, a balanced roster, and a balance between competitive game and casual.

When i Say casual game i am refering to pla with items, in crazy stages like big blue or flat zone, sometimes i get boring of play smash on the same way all the time, so, i turn the items on to get some diferent fun, and bring back my old days as a happy n00b. when i was kid (10 years) i played at first time Smash 64, and i did it with items.

But i love play competitive, is so fun and exiting, play agains good opponenst and do the best in a match is something so good. Is something than i dont change it for anything, i love play competitive.

I can tell you, in a year, 80% of the times than i play i do it in the competitive way, and the other 20% i do it with items and other kind of stuff.


PS: what is 3S?

Well, first off, please tell me English isn't your first language.

Secondly, 3S stands for Third Strike, one of the dumbest big name fighting games ever. It was poorly balanced, the parry system made it so that everything devolved into a poke match, and you pretty much could see the same routine **** just about every tournament for every friggin' match ever. It's essentially the Brawl of Street Fighter, except, even 3S had some genuinely impressive moments like the Daigo parry. If they made another Smash that's more like, you know, a good competitive game, no one will ever look back at Brawl for some incredible moment, we'll look back at Melee and be like "oh yeah, that was awesome."

 

[Big-Cat]

Hey, at least 3S had combos. Still, while I have barely played 3S, I don't like it for its parry system since zoning is no longer a viable option.

I think SSB4 could be a revamp in the series. I'm not saying that they'll go back to square one, they'll just create a more solid design that'll pretty much be a different game. I know I'm gonna get flack for this, but I wouldn't mind seeing some stronger influences from traditional old school and new school fighters.

If Sakurai wants to create an accessible game, get rid of stuff like perfect shielding if they only have technical value and no strategic value.

 

[BSP]

I still don't get Sakurai's beef with melee.

Competitive depth or not, it was not hard at all to pick it up and play with some friends lol

 

[Big-Cat]

I think Sakurai wants to make a game where skill level is completely irrelevant. The only problem with that is that while it sounds good to a beginner, that beginner will get pissed later on as he gets better.

Say no to competitive communism.

 

[0Room]

I've actually been thinking a lot about that, whether or not it will be, and what impact that would have on the community. I wanted to add an interesting tidbit that I've been thinking about for a while. Personally, I think (as a melee player) SSB4 would be the biggest hurdle to Melee community growth. The ramifications on the Brawl scene would be minimal, and 64 will kind of exist in its own world [as it has for a while now, but is slowly been increasing into the perspective of the community as a whole], but I think Melee will take the biggest hit.

Because Melee is an aging game, there's already a lot of debate on what we should do to increase community, or if we even should at all. If there is a 4th game, Melee ceases to even be as relevant as it is now, as it's no longer the second of three games, but the second of four. It's fairly easy to go back one game, but two games is a lot harder to make an argument for, especially when that game is hitting it's 10 year mark.
Another major important point is if the 4th game is set more like Brawl. Sakurai himself said that he felt Melee was "too hard", and that he "won't do another game like [melee]." If SSB4 would again, be noncompetitive [unless it includes something absolutely shameful, like Naruto characters as was mentioned above], Melee ceases to be the "prodigy child" from a competitive perspective, and ends up being a fluke. Many people attribute Sakurai with making all of the "good aspects" of the game [read: technical depth] even though I don't necessarily know if he knew exactly what he was doing/if he meant for it to become that way. With the release of a 2nd non-competitive smash entry, a lot of melee player's hopes are crushed, and Melee becomes the kind of "problem child" [even though 64 is competitive in its own right, tournament life never really took off, so I'm not including this for the sake of argument], and I believe that will severely damage, if not completely destroy the Melee scene.

So, think what you will about coming up with an SSB4, I just wanted to share that perspective. I personally love all 3 games, but play competitive Melee, and I would hate to see it die because of the next one that came out. It's a careful balance that we have now, and it only takes a feather to tip it.

 

[Big-Cat]

Super Turbo is still being played today ever since its release in the mid 90s so age or sequels won't have anything on it. However, you do bring a valid point about SSB4 becoming even less competitive. If that happens, Smash will become more of a laughing stock than its become in competitive circles.

 

[Falconv1.0]

If Sakurai wants to create an accessible game, get rid of stuff like perfect shielding if they only have technical value and no strategic value.

.....What the **** are you talking about? Perfect shielding is fine, it's hard enough to where it can't be abused by everyone ever, but the pay off when you land it is great, it's a fine example of a 'good' technical move.

 

[IYM!]

thanks for the expilication, and yes, English isnt my first language. i speak spanish.

Asi que si nesesitas ayuda con tu tarea de español, yo puedo ayudarte XD

 

[Big-Cat]

.....What the **** are you talking about? Perfect shielding is fine, it's hard enough to where it can't be abused by everyone ever, but the pay off when you land it is great, it's a fine example of a 'good' technical move.

*sigh*

Is there a reason for you to NOT do perfect shielding? If not, regardless of whether it's hard to pull off consistently or not, if you have no reason to NOT do it, then you might as well make it automatic. Just because it's hard doesn't mean it's fair or should exist.

 

[Falconv1.0]

*sigh*

Is there a reason for you to NOT do perfect shielding? If not, regardless of whether it's hard to pull off consistently or not, if you have no reason to NOT do it, then you might as well make it automatic. Just because it's hard doesn't mean it's fair or should exist.

Is there a reason for a soldier to not rocket jump at specific points at the beginning of TF2 matches? Nope. So I guess we should just make that automatic too, right?

Sure, let's take away rewards from people for perfect shielding just because not everyone can do it. Sure. If you made it automatic, you have a stupid *** defensive system, if you take it out, you're not improving the game, you're just taking away **** from people because you want people who suck to feel less ****ty.

 

[Big-Cat]

I can't say anything on TF2 since I've never played it.

If you have a stupid *** defensive system because perfect shielding is automatic, then that should be a sign that there is a problem with the mechanics. In theory, if someone were to have perfect shielding down to the point that he/she can perfect shield with godlike reflexes, is there a reason why he/she shouldn't do it?

 

[Falconv1.0]

I can't say anything on TF2 since I've never played it.

If you have a stupid *** defensive system because perfect shielding is automatic, then that should be a sign that there is a problem with the mechanics. In theory, if someone were to have perfect shielding down to the point that he/she can perfect shield with godlike reflexes, is there a reason why he/she shouldn't do it?

But here's the thing, no one can perfect shield with godlike reflexes, and no one will, bro.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

I guess perfect shielding could apply to why I dislike L canceling.

I think it's fine when you have to predict a move, PSing a frame 5 move on reaction is impossible, but it rewards people PS things that are reactable and it is kinda of a why not do it situation, so I can see where Kus is coming.

 

[Falconv1.0]

I guess perfect shielding could apply to why I dislike L canceling.

I think it's fine when you have to predict a move, PSing a frame 5 move on reaction is impossible, but it rewards people PS things that are reactable and it is kinda of a why not do it situation, so I can see where Kus is coming.

It's one thing if there's no reason at all for it to be there, like l canceling, it's completely pointless, and it could easily be designed in. PS'ing everything is impossible, and perfect shielding **** that is easy to react to is simply rewarding a player for being good, you shouldn't take away rewards for not being terrible, that's just dumb. So what, should we get rid of headshots in shooters when there's no reason to not go for a head shot other than it's harder? That's terrible ****ing logic. There's a pretty big difference between having no reason to be there and a reward for being dedicated.

 

[Big-Cat]

Risk vs. Reward

That is all.

 

[Falconv1.0]

Way to address nothing I said. I have yet to see a pro claim perfect shielding makes the game too defensive, but maybe I'm just stupid and miss out on that ****. Apparently powershielding isn't 'risky' enough, no wonder everyone's complaining about it, because there are so many moves that are so easy to powershield, right? I love the terrible argument claiming that if someone gets it down to 'godlike' reflexes, it would be broken, so I guess you're saying pros who have been playing for 7 years just suck at it, sure.

 

[¯\_S.(ツ).L.I.D._/¯]

Perfect shielding...removed? What? Make it automatic? Yeah, there's no reason for a Marth to not up b OoS when they can punish something so we should make that automatic. There's no reason for an MK to not gimp Ganon when he's far offstage, so we should make that automatic. (sorry if I'm behind in the metagame and stuff haven't played smash in a year)

Just because it's the correct move in a situation and people should be using it doesn't mean it should be automatic.

 

[tera twin]

As far as which console it will debut on, I highly doubt it will on the 3DS with Project Cafe coming out. Remember that Nintendo vs Capcom deal? I think that MAYBE and just MAYBE, there will be such a game for the 3DS. However, the main SSB title will be released for Project Cafe.

 

[Big-Cat]

Perfect shielding...removed? What? Make it automatic? Yeah, there's no reason for a Marth to not up b OoS when they can punish something so we should make that automatic. There's no reason for an MK to not gimp Ganon when he's far offstage, so we should make that automatic. (sorry if I'm behind in the metagame and stuff haven't played smash in a year)

Just because it's the correct move in a situation and people should be using it doesn't mean it should be automatic.

Depth is about having viable options. There's no true depth if there's only one good option at a given situation. If the other options available pale in comparison to the best option, then there's no real depth.

And with Brawl, the balance is messed up anyway. It's almost irrelvant, but I'm years behind Brawl's metagame.

 

[Falconv1.0]

Depth is about having viable options. There's no true depth if there's only one good option at a given situation. If the other options available pale in comparison to the best option, then there's no real depth.

And with Brawl, the balance is messed up anyway. It's almost irrelvant, but I'm years behind Brawl's metagame.

Skill and depth are two different things. He never argued that it gives the game depth, stop straw manning.

There's no extra depth in almost any skill related **** ever, that doesn't mean it should be there, being good at a game is hugely dependent ON YOUR ABILITY TO EXECUTE ****. So what, would you prefer fighting games turn into chess? All you're proposing to do is take as many rewards as possible from players that play more than others, just so they're forced to play on the same level as much less dedicated people because there needs to be multiple options in every situation ever. Ok, sure, man, you'd do well talking to competitive shooter players. Wait, no you wouldn't'. Don't take rewards from skilled players unless it makes the game legitimately worse, like parrying in third strike.

 

[Big-Cat]

I don't think you understand what I'm getting at, and I'm not trying to straw man anything.

Skill involves your execution abilities, but it's more than that. It also includes your ability to apply the mental aspect of the game as well. That mental aspect is then divided into different areas depending on the game. For fighting games, this includes spacing, prediction, okizeme, abare, and other assorted Japanese words. In short, execution and strategy go hand in hand. Execution allows you to explore your options while strategy allows you to pull off your most dangerous techniques in a smart manner. Fighting games have always been strategic like chess.

For example, C. Viper is a very technical character, but you have to be strategic to consistently land blows. Sure, she has damaging, hard to do combos, but you have to set the opponent up for them to be pulled off safely.

 

[Falconv1.0]

You straw manned by answering Solid's argument about not making things automatic or removing them by saying what depth is, Solid didn't say the word 'depth' ONCE.

 

[A2ZOMG]

If Sakurai wants to create an accessible game, get rid of stuff like perfect shielding if they only have technical value and no strategic value.

Whoa whoa whoa wait a sec, are you trying to imply that perfect shielding is not strategic? Did people just magically forget that failing to perfect shield is a commitment? If you don't roll, spotdodge, grab, or jump out of shield, you're stuck doing nothing for at minimum 14 frames if you fail to perfect shield a move. Are you trying to tell me that this can't be baited? You must not know what empty jumps are.

*sigh*

Is there a reason for you to NOT do perfect shielding? If not, regardless of whether it's hard to pull off consistently or not, if you have no reason to NOT do it, then you might as well make it automatic. Just because it's hard doesn't mean it's fair or should exist.

Someone is theorycrafting MAD hard. Seriously. I don't understand where you get this idea that players are just magically capable of perfect shielding every 6 frame B-air or F-tilt in existence on reaction. In a perfect world where competitive play is based on Tool Assisted Speedruns, maybe you would have a vaild point. But seriously. What. The. Hell.

There's also the fact that perfect shielding doesn't really stop you from getting shield poked either. Are you trying to imply that this is an overpowered and unbalanced technique?

I can't say anything on TF2 since I've never played it.

If you have a stupid *** defensive system because perfect shielding is automatic, then that should be a sign that there is a problem with the mechanics. In theory, if someone were to have perfect shielding down to the point that he/she can perfect shield with godlike reflexes, is there a reason why he/she shouldn't do it?

You lost me. What is the problem with perfect shielding again? It's not automatic. And it's not free unless you're spamming slow moves all day. Furthermore it is NOT the reason why Brawl is considered defensive. If anything the strong shielding mechanics of Brawl make the game MORE offensive if anything since it makes it fundamentally easier for characters to approach. The fact that spacing and resets are emphasized in the Brawl engine are the real reason why the game is defensive.

Depth is about having viable options. There's no true depth if there's only one good option at a given situation. If the other options available pale in comparison to the best option, then there's no real depth.

And with Brawl, the balance is messed up anyway. It's almost irrelvant, but I'm years behind Brawl's metagame.

This has to do with what? You're just saying that there is no true depth if there is only one good option at a given situation. What does that mean? Seriously. I don't get how this proves that Brawl is unbalanced. Last time I checked, the real source of unbalance wasn't a lack of options. It's really ****ing stupid matchups.

 

[Falconv1.0]

Yeah but hurrrr if you can always land it, it's always the best option!

>__________________>

 

[M@v]

Btw, I can't believe I forgot this one, but Geno plz.

 

[Big-Cat]

Let's just drop the conversation. It's getting WAY WAY off topic. If it'll make you two sleep tonight, I'll say you two win this argument.

 

[Falconv1.0]

I lost.

Yes, yes you did. Remember when you were like "there's no reason to not powershield" and then we gave the most ****ing obvious reasons why there are reasons not to after I explained not everything needs risk/reward?

Good tiiiiimes.

 

[Big-Cat]

@Falcon
Cool the attitude.

@A2Z
After sleeping on it, your explanation makes sense. I'm convinced there is strategic value in perfect shielding and not doing it at the same time. Thank you. That being said, I'm still not fond of the mechanic, but that's strictly my opinion.

As I said though, I'm years behind the metagame, and I haven't played the game remotely seriously in over a year.

 

[IYM!]

another interesting thing here would be a balanced Final smahses

 

[Falconv1.0]

another interesting thing here would be a balanced Final smahses

I don't think you can have something be both single and plural, bro.

Also, final smashes are items, no one actually gives a **** about 'balancing' items. Items are for casual play, I'd refuse to play the game if they made their way into competitive.

 

[Mr.Jackpot]

It'd be cool if we had a Final Smash bar or something that you could turn on and off, kind of like SSBC if any of you have played that.

 

[PurDi]

That's kinda ridiculous Falcon... Final Smashes could actually be a nice touch if they were balanced better. The fact that its an instant lure for the opponent is pretty cool. It's kinda like a stage hazard, like say... WarioWare. You can screw the other person up or try to accomplish the task given.

 

[Flutter NiTE]

It'd be cool if we had a Final Smash bar or something that you could turn on and off, kind of like SSBC if any of you have played that.

Ohh yeah... im one of the original beta testers / BRoomers.

 

[IYM!]

I don't think you can have something be both single and plural, bro.

Also, final smashes are items, no one actually gives a **** about 'balancing' items. Items are for casual play, I'd refuse to play the game if they made their way into competitive.

yes i know that, but maybe, they can do another sistem, something like Marvel vs Capcom 3 sistem. something than you can turn on or off in the rules srceen and have a balance between one an another.

for example, is ovbious than the landmaster is better than Mario final, so will be great if this new sistem be like this:

1) You need full your "Smash final bar" first it can be fulled by 3 ways:
a) Do good combos to your opponent b) Killing 2 or 3 opponent with one hit c) Kiling your opponent and he is with a percentage superior than 170%.

2)You have your Final Smash

3)Press B for activate your "Final Smash mode"

4)You can use your character like always, but if you pres B again you will activate your attack, your character will do a fast move (like Ike first hit of his FS) and if it hit your opponent your attack will start

5)this attack is a combo, is posible dodge it at the start, but not in easy way,but if youconect the hit... the only thing than you have to do is enjoy. You have 2 chances to conected it, if you miss thge 2 times, you will lose your "Final Smash mode"

6)All the atacks do 100% and can kill your oponent at 30%, all the attacks have the same knockback, only change the way than how them do it.

for example

CFalcon start with a combo, low kick> punch>punch >etc>strong hit than send your oponent a little far> Falcon get out of the screen>BlueFalcon appear and hit your opponent

Link start with swings, some bombs and finish with a Combo with the triforce Slash.

Fox do a Combo and finish with a huge Laser of his Tank



This way the Final Smashes will be balanced.

 

[Falconv1.0]

Your idea of balanced is incredibly naive, and who taught you how to spell, they should be shot. So it kills at a ****tardedly early percent and it's just a scripted move that ****s them up, great it'll be like Third Strike but ****tier. I am so excited.

 

[IYM!]

Your idea of balanced is incredibly naive, and who taught you how to spell, they should be shot. So it kills at a ****tardedly early percent and it's just a scripted move that ****s them up, great it'll be like Third Strike but ****tier. I am so excited.

Do you have a better idea sir?


If you read well my previous post, initially I said that these movements were avoidable


To obtain so called " Final Smash mode " is difficult

When you do good combos, your bar does not fill completely, is like ... you need 5 combos, each one of 5 hits to fill the bar.


Also the bar fills when you kill more than one opponent with one only blow. It does not fill completely, but it increases the quantity. But this is applied for the Free For all or the Team battles

And finally, if you kill your enemy, and he is over 170% of hurt, your bar also increases.


And if you say that the execive strenght is a problem, well, only add more lives and time to the rules and the problem will be fixed



PS: i know... my English isnt perfect, but, please stop to criticize it, we are discusing the SSB4 posivilities, no my skills on English. and for respond your question... anybody, i am learning by myself, and using this forum to practice