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!
The reason it was a "fluke" is because of Suckurai's twisted concept of "hardcore" and "casual" gamers. Depth and ease of access need not be mutually exclusive. Melee is a deep fighter *and* a party game, but Sakurai only sees it as the latter.
I'm not saying that lesser execution requirement is why people bought to game, more so the game was just a bit easier and more refined in some areas like AA's post said.
This isn't going to necessarily make people quit, but it can make the game more likable.
If you're trying to imply that's what I did to keep it that clean, then that is false. I haven't left Melee in my gamecube over that span, in fact, I constantly swap it out to run other games and have used it on both the Gamecube and the Wii . . . . . .
Melee isn't inaccessible but Brawl is more accessible.
The accessibility is not what drove the game to popularity, however.
I've always thought that Melee looked better than Brawl xD
All of these factor were pretty much known before the game came out via hype. Accessibility wasn't known, however once it is known people have known that Brawl is easier to pick up and play than Melee, which is Sakurai's point.
Yes but Melee by far it is harder even on a casual level.
Doesn't exist?
There are reasons why they pick it over the other, I can say for some difficult was an issue. Some of which were even told to me that is was an issue.
I am a brawl player and that was a very good read along with that article from that website you posted Lord HDL. If I ever meet you in person, we need to nerd at some arcade games, I miss arcades so much.How many people here are old enough to have experienced the wonders of arcades in their heyday? If so, you might remember furiously entering quarters for this game: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEY1pTqEz7g
Why do I bring this up, it has nothing to do with Smash. But it has plenty to do with accessibility VS depth. This game only uses a stick and two buttons, simple right? You'd think a game that simple would be easy.
NO
In the 6 different parts of my run, I explain various things about the game in annotations and why it's so unreasonably hard. Even then, I don't explain everything about the game's depth because there would be annotations up the wazoo. I have a second run uploaded as well, which you can see here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBR-4gRIqUQ
This one is an actual serious attempt to 1C the game. Those of you who understand the sheer amount of knowledge and skill it takes to 1C an arcade game can understand what it means to beat a game like Ghosts 'n Goblins, for which you can find videos.
Notice that games like these all have something in common: they are dirt easy to pick up and start playing! Tell me that you fools did not have fun playing Ninja Turtles, The Simpsons, Gradius, Strider, R-Type, Rygar, GNG, Metal Slug, Pac-Man, and other such arcade games with simple controls. Hell, everyone loses at Pac-Man and all you use is a single stick! You don't even push buttons! Only 1 or 2 people in the world have ever "beaten" it.
Anyway, why do I bring all this up? It's because accessibility and depth are not enemies. Every game I mentioned is easy to get into, everyone played them as kids and loved them. But deep down, they're so hard to get good at and actually beat legitimately. Melee is like this. Brawl is not like this.
Brawl uses more buttons than the games I mentioned and yet has less depth than they do and is so much easier. Eliminating all traces of difficulty does not make a well-designed game that people enjoy more. Good decisions make a well-designed game that people enjoy more. Accessibility is just an added layer on top of that.
Another reason why many people dislike Brawl is because it's not challenging. I've seen the words "slow, bland, boring" tossed around a lot. It's because these people are not having their minds stimulated. What induces stimulation? Difficulty, challenge, hardship. Having to put the effort to overcome a difficult task using skill and knowledge is where the enjoyment comes from.
Think back to when you played your favorite retro game, and you were almost down for the count. You had 1 life, nearly 0 health, and the enemy was coming fast and furious. All of a sudden you transform and go super saiyan, you start dodging ALL their attacks. You strike at all the right moments, and in the end you blast them to smithereens and feel that rush in your hands, that thrill of having succeeded in the face of overwhelming odds.
For those of you who weren't fully aware of why you think Melee is more hype than Brawl, you now have your answer.
The arcade games mentioned are so old and yet they got the formula of accessibility + depth right from the get-go. Why, then, do we still have certain developers floundering around trying to impose their own faulty philosophies as "the right way to design games"? The first known electronic "video game" to be made came out in 1947. Atari and arcade games followed in the 70s. Count the years, and then come back to the current generation. You'd think by now they'd get it.
Maybe I sound like a disgruntled old man, but I grew up in an era where challenging, skill-based hobbies were fostered. Nowadays you have these companies spoon feeding their user base. This is evident in dumb things like Xbox achievements in which no consistency is needed, just complete something once and feel like you did something special. Pretty soon we're going to have games where you watch stuff on the screen but don't need to control anything that happens! Talk about convenient!
To sum this up, Sakurai's design philosophy is terrible and it's the main reason why Kirby games are never even close to considered for titles like "best game of the year" and such.
Lastly, allow me to give you all this parting gift: http://insomnia.ac/commentary/arcade_culture/
tl;dr: If you thought this was too long, you probably play Brawl.
Games sell because they are good, not because of what system they are on.
Your right in depth and accessibility, but you applied it wrong.How many people here are old enough to have experienced the wonders of arcades in their heyday? If so, you might remember furiously entering quarters for this game: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEY1pTqEz7g
Why do I bring this up, it has nothing to do with Smash. But it has plenty to do with accessibility VS depth. This game only uses a stick and two buttons, simple right? You'd think a game that simple would be easy.
NO
In the 6 different parts of my run, I explain various things about the game in annotations and why it's so unreasonably hard. Even then, I don't explain everything about the game's depth because there would be annotations up the wazoo. I have a second run uploaded as well, which you can see here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBR-4gRIqUQ
This one is an actual serious attempt to 1C the game. Those of you who understand the sheer amount of knowledge and skill it takes to 1C an arcade game can understand what it means to beat a game like Ghosts 'n Goblins, for which you can find videos.
Notice that games like these all have something in common: they are dirt easy to pick up and start playing! Tell me that you fools did not have fun playing Ninja Turtles, The Simpsons, Gradius, Strider, R-Type, Rygar, GNG, Metal Slug, Pac-Man, and other such arcade games with simple controls. Hell, everyone loses at Pac-Man and all you use is a single stick! You don't even push buttons! Only 1 or 2 people in the world have ever "beaten" it.
Anyway, why do I bring all this up? It's because accessibility and depth are not enemies. Every game I mentioned is easy to get into, everyone played them as kids and loved them. But deep down, they're so hard to get good at and actually beat legitimately. Melee is like this. Brawl is not like this.
Brawl uses more buttons than the games I mentioned and yet has less depth than they do and is so much easier. Eliminating all traces of difficulty does not make a well-designed game that people enjoy more. Good decisions make a well-designed game that people enjoy more. Accessibility is just an added layer on top of that.
Another reason why many people dislike Brawl is because it's not challenging. I've seen the words "slow, bland, boring" tossed around a lot. It's because these people are not having their minds stimulated. What induces stimulation? Difficulty, challenge, hardship. Having to put the effort to overcome a difficult task using skill and knowledge is where the enjoyment comes from.
Think back to when you played your favorite retro game, and you were almost down for the count. You had 1 life, nearly 0 health, and the enemy was coming fast and furious. All of a sudden you transform and go super saiyan, you start dodging ALL their attacks. You strike at all the right moments, and in the end you blast them to smithereens and feel that rush in your hands, that thrill of having succeeded in the face of overwhelming odds.
For those of you who weren't fully aware of why you think Melee is more hype than Brawl, you now have your answer.
The arcade games mentioned are so old and yet they got the formula of accessibility + depth right from the get-go. Why, then, do we still have certain developers floundering around trying to impose their own faulty philosophies as "the right way to design games"? The first known electronic "video game" to be made came out in 1947. Atari and arcade games followed in the 70s. Count the years, and then come back to the current generation. You'd think by now they'd get it.
Maybe I sound like a disgruntled old man, but I grew up in an era where challenging, skill-based hobbies were fostered. Nowadays you have these companies spoon feeding their user base. This is evident in dumb things like Xbox achievements in which no consistency is needed, just complete something once and feel like you did something special. Pretty soon we're going to have games where you watch stuff on the screen but don't need to control anything that happens! Talk about convenient!
To sum this up, Sakurai's design philosophy is terrible and it's the main reason why Kirby games are never even close to considered for titles like "best game of the year" and such.
Lastly, allow me to give you all this parting gift: http://insomnia.ac/commentary/arcade_culture/
tl;dr: If you thought this was too long, you probably play Brawl.
No, it really is sooo easy. 90% of people who've played Melee and Brawl can barely tell the difference between the two, gameplay wise. The controls are the same for christ sake.
In this episode of Assumptions Gone Wild.
This is the most annoying of all arguments. "Melee is actually too difficult, but you wouldn't understand why because you play it a lot" (pararphrasing). It's the best way to avoid having to actually give arguments.
"Games sell because they are good." For the most part that is true, but you're saying that it goes the other way around too, "good games sell." That is not always the case. If a game doesn't sell well, you can't take that to mean that the game is bad. By the way, Melee sold extremely well, and as someone pointed out in an earlier post (maybe in the other thread), Melee took a bigger market share (which is a more accurate measurement) than Brawl. Again though, selling more DOES NOT EQUAL better game.
I'm just going to go ahead and agree with that 90% figure. 90% of casual players, anyway.
No, I attend tournaments and I've put in the hours to learn all the technical stuff in Melee, and I don't think the game is beyond criticism in some areas. The learning curve is too steep. Nobody should have to practice for weeks wavedashing up and down final destination until they can do it. SHFFLing until the l-cancel works, and then applying it to different characters in different situations.
1 - The Japanese have a weird definition of fun.
Made it up. I should have said "the overwhelming majority of people who bought the game" I suppose.
I want to believe this, but there are way to many amazing games that barely sell... meanwhile Wii Fit, Wii Play and casual game x are selling like hot cakes because of stupid peripherals.
Note it was Sakurai who said it, and it is generally true. Look at all the competitive Smash players who say it's easy.
Good games always sell. Period. The reason they didn't sell was because something was holding them back.
This is a misconception because Melee did worse than 64 in Japan. It makes no sense that it road Melee's success when Melee was a down turn for the series.
False.
Who claims that Melee is easy to play? Go ask competitive players and they will tell you otherwise. Competitive Melee is difficult to play and learn, but in return it is extremely rewarding and allows for a fulfilling competitive experience, as demonstrated by large tournament outcomes 9 years after the game has been released.
Wow, terrible, terrible.
This is where I stop responding, because I know that arguing with you is meaningless. I will leave with this though.
is a horrible one.
