Smash Bros. Melee was "too difficult" - New Sakurai Interview

[volume]

i remember playing melee with my friends and it was the koolest thing ever. brawl came out it got boring fast lol i play brawl but melee was my fav. if he would bring something even almost identical to melee i would be happy.

 

[Roneblaster]

more proof that brawl isn't supposed to be competitive.

 

[A Pimp Named Slickback]

Technically...he didn't say that it was the most dominant strategy.

Being equally powerful to brawl is not enough to make that conclusion, because it doesn't take into account the power of being offensive in each game (in which case melee clearly outclasses brawl). Ergo, the stronger offense counterbalances the still powerful defense, creating something closer to an equilibrium, where style is more player/matchup dependent, rather than an overall superior tactic.

yeah i was getting ready to put this but thanks anyway

"powerful" is a relative word. whenever you describe something as powerful, you have to have a comparison. this is powerful, as opposed to WHAT?

what you're doing here is saying that so and so are equally powerful compared to ???? you're saying they're equally powerful but comparing to two different standards.

so either Black Mantis' statement is completely worthless (not to say that it isn't already), or you're wrong.

I'll tell you, it's both.

 

[Dark Sonic]

Powerful as opposed to brawl's offense specifically (though that would take some assumption so Black Mantis should elaborate). In this case "equally powerful" is not to mean "equally dominant," but rather something more along the lines of being hard to get through.

The point that I think Mantis was trying to make was that dealing with defensive play styles is just as hard in melee as it is in brawl, though he may have worded it incorrectly.

That's a point that I would very much agree with. My post responding to that was just an explanation for why this can be true while defensive play is not overly prevalent in the melee metagame.

 

[Black Mantis]

The point that I think Mantis was trying to make was that dealing with defensive play styles is just as hard in melee as it is in brawl.

this x1000

 

[A Pimp Named Slickback]

Defense is only powerful if it can successfully counter the offense, because power is relative to it's effectiveness.

If the offense becomes more effective, the defense becomes less powerful. If the offense is weak, then defense is more powerful.

You could argue that defense is also more powerful though, and it would be a valid point.

But if both Melee's offense and defense are "better" than Brawl's, Melee would just be the better game (and it is).

 

[Deleted member]

You're really saying that dealing with defensive play is as hard in Melee as it is in Brawl? A corollary to that is that either 99% of Melee players are really stupid, or 99% of Melee players sandbag all the time. If dealing with defense in melee was just as hard as in brawl, then the current playstyles of 99% of competitive melee players should be changed drastically, because as has been said by tons of people (and I'm sure you agree), in general defensive playstyles yield better results than offensive ones in Brawl. If this is true in Melee too, then we really need to rewrite the Melee metagame.

Some evidence to suggest that Brawl defence >>>>> Melee defence:

Hitstun
Sheild Stun
Reward for actually getting a hit (smaller in Brawl)
Ease of Powersheilding (I could be wrong, but I hear it's easier in Brawl)
Lack of L Canceling

 

[Bones0]

Some evidence to suggest that Brawl defence >>>>> Melee defence:

Hitstun
Sheild Stun
Reward for actually getting a hit (smaller in Brawl)
Ease of Powersheilding (I could be wrong, but I hear it's easier in Brawl)
Lack of L Canceling

^Also the fact that you can grab ledges facing either way from ridiculous distances.

A more concrete form of evidence would simply be counting the number of ledge grabs per minute of Brawl vs. Melee, or keeping track of how many tournament matches are timed out in either game.

 

[Black Mantis]

Wasn't that point already illustrated by tero, pinkshinobi, amsah vs jman, and chibo though?

 

[TheGoat]

I highly doubt it's just Sakurai that's dumbing down nintendo games. It's just nintendo as a whole, it's been a while since they've pretty much devoted themselves to young children and extremely casual gamers. Unfortunately, most of the console industry is dumbing down their games, but microsoft and sony are appealing to older gamers. Melee 2 will never happen.

 

[Deleted member]

Wasn't that point already illustrated by tero, pinkshinobi, amsah vs jman, and chibo though?

Ugh, do I really have to repeat this?

We've established that yes, certain people are not able to handle defensive/camping strategies, just as some people (somwhere) can't handle an all falcon punch strategy.

Those certain people were not able to handle the defensive/campy style of play, and some of those certain people were not able to handle it when the opponent grabbed the ledge lots of times. As has been established VERY firmly for example, Jman did not know the proper way to play when Amsah ledge stalled, even though many foxes who aren't as good as Jman would have done better in that situation. That has probably changed by now.

But IN GENERAL, playing offensively in Melee > playing defensively in Melee. Also, IN GENERAL, playing defensively in Brawl > playing offensively in Brawl.

 

[Bones0]

Wasn't that point already illustrated by tero, pinkshinobi, amsah vs jman, and chibo though?

Tero's opponent clearly just sucked at dealing with stalling. PinkShinobi can only do it on DK64. Jman wasn't even trying to hit Amsah; I wasn't aware anyone even considered that stalling. Chibo lost. lol

There are more examples of stalling in a single Brawl tournament then there are of stalling in the entirety of Melee's history. Congrats.

 

[Vigilante]

Yeah, I wrote this while being annoyed...:

"I am reacting to a recent Masahiro Sakurai interview on his opinion on the new direction the Super Smash Bros. franchise has taken with the transition from Melee to Brawl. In one passage, he has claimed that Melee was too fast-paced for inexperienced players, but also admitted that Brawl was difficult to play for advanced players competitively. This has in my opinion rendered the Smash Bros. franchise into a party game that appeals only to a casual crowd. It does not possess the synergistic component it was supposed to possess. It isolated advanced gamers who were looking for solid competitive experience.

Of course, not everything has been done wrong, for each game had its memorable elements. The original Nintendo 64 game had a very simple, yet effective level design. Super Smash Bros. Melee had the perfect twitch-reflex gameplay that is still currently played in tournament settings. Brawl has very impressive amounts of content, but the gameplay is plagued with lag, low gravity and random events that cannot even be deactivated. I speak from a core gamer perspective, but I am fully aware that the video game industry is a market, and therefore, casual gamers are valuable consumers. Brawl was an attempt to rally core and casual gamers under the same roof, but it failed. It sold, but many core gamers bitterly regret this acquisition.

But I would not come here without a solution. Critique without thought is meaningless. I believe that this series should take a new path, one that will unite core and casual gamers under the same title: Customization.


Battle-system customization:

Here is how it may go. Once the individual boots up the game, he will be prompted to choose between two options: Simple and Complex. The “Simple” mode would be based off Brawl-like mechanics. It would be easy for beginners to handle. The second, “Complex” mode, would be based on the Melee mechanics. It could be described as a mode for advanced and competitive players. One could even go as far as to add a third component, “Classic” mode, allowing for a system much like Super Smash Bros 64. This prompt upon first booting up the game would make for an easy choice for less experienced gamers who spend little time in menus. Of course, the battle system could be changed by going into the options. One could take this even further and make custom battle systems with a limited amount of options. For example, one could be given five landing lag options:

Lightning: Very quick.
Fast: Complex.
Normal: Simple.
Slow: Classic.
Slow-motion: Very slow.

These options could be used to modify the battle system in many creative ways:

- All types of lags.
[Slow-motion] [Classic] [Simple] [Complex] [Lightning]
- Sidestep speed.
[Slow-motion] [Classic] [Simple] [Complex] [Lightning]
- Sidestep.
[Off] [On]
- Rolling Speed.
[Slow-motion] [Classic] [Simple] [Complex] [Lightning]
- Rolling.
[Off] [On]
- Attack speed.
[Slow-motion] [Classic] [Simple] [Complex] [Lightning]
- Walking/running Speed.
[Slow-motion] [Classic] [Simple] [Complex] [Lightning]
- Damage ratio.
[Very low] [Low] [Normal] [High] [Very high]
- Knockback power.
[Very low] [Low] [Normal] [High] [Very high]
- Gravity.
[Light] [Classic] [Simple] [Complex] [Heavy]
- Fast-fall speed. (and ability to toggle it on/off)
[Light] [Classic] [Simple] [Complex] [Heavy]
- Shield strength. (and ability to toggle it on/off)
[None] [Weak] [Normal] [Strong] [Indestructible]
- Shield type.
• Sphere. (Normal shield)
• Wall. (Forward only)
• Damage reduction. (Reduced damage only)
• Knockback reduction. (Makes you fly less far when hit)
• Damage and knockback reduction.
- Power-shielding.
[Off] [Hard] [Normal] [Easy] [Always reflects]
Note: The changes in hard, normal and easy is simply a change in the allowed error margin.
- Wavedash. (ability to toggle it on/off)
[Off] [On]
- Traction.
[Perfect] [Complex] [Simple] [Classic] [Low]
Note: perfect means one never slides.
- Jump start-up speed.
[Slow-motion] [Classic] [Simple] [Complex] [Lightning]
- Short-hop height. (and ability to toggle it on/off)
[None] [Classic] [Simple] [Complex] [Very low]
- Footstool jump. (Toggle on/off)
[Off] [On]
- Teching (Ground recovery) (Ability to toggle it on/off)
[Off] [On]
- Air dodge type.
[Classic] [Simple] [Complex] [Synergistic]
Classic means none, Simple is like Brawl, Complex is like Melee, Synergistic is the dodge that can’t be directed from Brawl, but like Melee, can only be done once while in the air.
- Stumbling.
[Off] [On]

This is but an example. Indeed, this is very much my attempt at a more polished version of Melee and Brawl combat modifiers. Even more can be added.

While already being very inclusive of all types of gamers, many will appreciate the ability to make custom-made battle systems. Some gamers are micro-managers after all and we would be giving some of the creative resources in the hands of the consumers.


Character customization:

Finally, we don’t need to leave customization at that. Adding characters in a fighting game adds new options to a game, but there will eventually be a time where Nintendo will run out of eligible characters. Brawl has already started adding a lot of support characters, and it is only a matter of time until all that is left are generic baddies. Nintendo simply has too many franchises to maintain and cannot possibly hope to create new ones fast enough to catch up with the roster each generation. Thus by adding additional attacks, one can add depth to every character.

Let us begin with an example using only Falco’s special attacks.

The original setting would be as such:

Neutral: Blaster.
Forward: Falco Phantasm.
Upward: Firebird.
Downward: Reflector.

The one could set up alternatives:

Neutral: Charged Stun Blaster.
Forward: Phantasm Blaster
Upward: Barrel Roll.
Downward: Thrown Reflector:

These were made out of the blue merely to exemplify the system. As you can see, there are many advantaged to this. First, it adds depth and variability to the characters. Second, fans of previous games would be pleased to use the moves they used to prefer. Third, characters with no antecedent alternative moves would gain new options. Fourth, there would be a very wide range of possibilities. Default settings would of course exist for each character, but using the name system, one could save his or her character settings. Playing with these would not be mandatory, but available. So every variation of normal attacks and special attacks could have an alternative, literally making a character more to one’s own liking.

Now another for Mario:

Default:

Neutral: Fireball.
Forward: Cape.
Upward: Super Jump Punch.
Downward: Mario Tornado.

Alternatives:

Neutral: Megavitamin.
Forward: Ground Pound.
Upward: Spin Jump (Mario World jump using the A Button).
Downward: FLUUD.

For A attacks, I could even imagine Mario’s Forward Fireball Smash getting interchangeable with The Nintendo 64 Forward Smash Attack. The possibilities are endless. Now here you can see many amusing alternative. All of the Melee moves are available. Furthermore, Dr. Mario’s Megavitamin makes a return. Brawl’s FLUDD can be selected for those who preferred it in Brawl. And there is still room for new attack. This would please the old fans and the new fans. Some of the old fans may even want to experiment. Certainly, that could very well upset the balance a little, for players could find ingenious ways to set up powerful combo-friendly move sets, but the creative benefits would outweigh the gains, and a more competitive system would be enough to quench the thirst of core gamers."

 

[BEES]

I disagree. At least 2d and 3d fighters share the same basic combo and health systems, which is really the staple of the traditional fighting genre.

That's not the definition of a fighter though. There are games that share those combo and health systems, but aren't considered true fighters, like the sidescrolling Beat 'Em Up genre. You can't use that to define a game as a fighter. At best you could say Smash is a non-traditional fighter, which is true.

It has attacks, combos, specials, hitstun, and a rock-paper-scissor system for approaches. Your goal is to beat your opponent to win. You have a much larger variety of offensive and defensive options than a platformer, a party game, or a beat 'em up would have (more than many traditional fighters for that matter). Most of the attacks and movements in the game have the exact same (or very similar) counterparts in other fighting games. KOs rely on ringouts, but that is also present in some fighters.

The general consensus is that if you play 1v1 with items off, it is a fighter. The case against that is utterly hopeless.

I highly doubt it's just Sakurai that's dumbing down nintendo games. It's just nintendo as a whole, it's been a while since they've pretty much devoted themselves to young children and extremely casual gamers. Unfortunately, most of the console industry is dumbing down their games, but microsoft and sony are appealing to older gamers. Melee 2 will never happen.

It's a longshot but with SEGA releasing their own version of Mario Kart, I can't help but wonder if a SEGA version of Smash is on the way. This is purely speculative though.

 

[Melomaniacal]

That's not the definition of a fighter though. There are games that share those combo and health systems, but aren't considered true fighters, like the sidescrolling Beat 'Em Up genre. You can't use that to define a game as a fighter. At best you could say Smash is a non-traditional fighter, which is true.

It has attacks, combos, specials, hitstun, and a rock-paper-scissor system for approaches. Your goal is to beat your opponent to win. You have a much larger variety of offensive and defensive options than a platformer, a party game, or a beat 'em up would have (more than many traditional fighters for that matter). Most of the attacks and movements in the game have the exact same (or very similar) counterparts in other fighting games. KOs rely on ringouts, but that is also present in some fighters.

The general consensus is that if you play 1v1 with items off, it is a fighter. The case against that is utterly hopeless.

I'm not really arguing that Smash isn't a fighter, I'm just saying that 3D and 2D fighters have more similarities than 2D and Smash.

 

[Velox]

Interestingly they made Halo Reach more noob friendly than the other halo titles. It's funny, I see the trend now-n-days towards what a sequel to a great competitive game ends up being.


Must be some great marketing theory of the day.............

Reach is (some) proof that this is a stupid unnecessary idea. After all, if the game can be played without advanced techniques without much difficulty (melee), then what are the noobs complaining about? They'll never run into good players anyway, and if they want to win against good players than they want to play competitively and thus difficulty is the necessity....

 

[Vigilante]

I think Sakurai mentioned that casual players just can't keep up with Melee's speed. If that is the case, then I just think that battle system modfiers can do the trick. I mean Subspace emmissary has faster falling speed for example than the actual others modes in the game. I think they can pull it off. Sure, it would required a little bit more production time, but a team of (benevolent) hackers it able to pull it off with great results.

Here's the thing... Core gamers don't like compromise. They won't settle for "almost goog enough". So the only way to grab both kinds of gamers is just to put modes that are easy to select when you first boot the game. This is just to account for the fact that casual gamers rarely look at menu options.

Difficulty is indeed a necessity for enjoyement of a game, but too much difficulty translates into frustration, and I think that was the response of the casual crowd to Melee. Yet, too easy gameplay translates into boredom... the response of the hardcore gamer. A synergistic playstyle can never account for both publics and render them equally happy.

 

[AllyKnight]

lol I was trolling comon, I'm not someone who will talk about melee as if I know the whole game, I don't know Top Melee level very well except getting ***** by Raynex one time in canada back in 09 LOL. I will seriously stop trolling here. Sorry for everything. I'm switching my name anyhow so no more Mad Ally.

I was just trying to see how much Melee people get butthurt or get super defensive. But I did look like an idiot alot of time. and **** off I've made money from Melee, unlike some other scrubs ;D

 

[BEES]

Difficulty is indeed a necessity for enjoyement of a game, but too much difficulty translates into frustration, and I think that was the response of the casual crowd to Melee. Yet, too easy gameplay translates into boredom... the response of the hardcore gamer. A synergistic playstyle can never account for both publics and render them equally happy.

Sure it can. We've covered this before.

Suppose you kept everything in Melee exactly the way it always was, but added 10 extra frames to the L-cancel window and tied wavedashing to a single button? Strategically, the game would be no different at a high level. The technical barrier between casual players and competitive players would be much less noticeable though.

The strategic barrier between casuals and hardcores would still be there though. A tournament veteran would know how to approach, combo, read their opponent, and edgeguard. Casuals would still get thrashed, whether or not they can do their aerials in half the time.

It is for this reason that I think the changes in Brawl were not so much there to accommodate casual players, but to deliberately alienate the competitive crowd, which Nintendo saw as a mold growing on their sacred petri dish of games.

 

[BigD!!!]

bees is right, its pretty obvious they deliberately picked out wding, dding, ledgehopping with invincibility, edgeguarding, and comboing and went after what allowed them to occur

remember that whole tourney*** thing, even if scrubs had never met a competitive melee player and would never play them they were pissed off that somewhere guys were doin **** way above their level. best on the block didnt equate to best in the world anymore once knowledge spread about advanced techniques, and a lot of scrubs were really really mad about competitive play, nintendo wanted to make that gap impossible

 

[Mic_128]

It's a longshot but with SEGA releasing their own version of Mario Kart, I can't help but wonder if a SEGA version of Smash is on the way. This is purely speculative though.

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/JH9sgNS0Ncs?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0&amp;color1=0x234900&amp;color2=0x4e9e00"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/JH9sgNS0Ncs?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0&amp;color1=0x234900&amp;color2=0x4e9e00" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

 

[Fried Ice Cream]

Ahahaha, Mic, I played that game a few times. It was so much fun, wish I could go back and play it again !

 

[Leviathan741]

yeah melee is really good

reading sakurai's thoughts about the insane development cycle probably has something to do with it, they just did a really good job creating each individual aspect of the game, that's probably why we're still playing it 9 years later.

and i don't think it's news to anybody here that there'll never be another game like melee, but i'm pretty much fine with that



and god brawl sucks LOL

You said it brawl is garbage and takes 5% skill and 95% luck

 

[Dark Sonic]

You're really saying that dealing with defensive play is as hard in Melee as it is in Brawl? A corollary to that is that either 99% of Melee players are really stupid, or 99% of Melee players sandbag all the time. If dealing with defense in melee was just as hard as in brawl, then the current playstyles of 99% of competitive melee players should be changed drastically, because as has been said by tons of people (and I'm sure you agree), in general defensive playstyles yield better results than offensive ones in Brawl. If this is true in Melee too, then we really need to rewrite the Melee metagame.

The fact that you get ridiculous combos after you break through someone's defense in melee is what makes offensive play appealing.

Catching a Fox who's intent on running away in melee is just as hard as dealing with most forms of camping in brawl (not planking though. That's in a league of it's own). The difference is that once you catch Fox he's essentially dead, making up for all the damage you took in lasers and stray nairs/bairs.

It's not that melee's defensive options are weaker than brawl's (I daresay they're stronger. Faster jumps and fall speeds facilitate platform camping and dash dancing and crouch canceling can be very useful for punishing certain approaches). What makes offensive play viable is the reward you get for being successful (most of the time surpassing the damage you'd build with a defensive playstyle instead). It's a situation of moderate risk: high reward vs low risk: moderate reward.

That's my take on it.

 

[BEES]

I agree, Melee has better defensive options than Brawl.

-Airdodge recovery onto the stage
-Crouch Canceling
-WD out of shield
-WD onto the stage from the ledge
-Powershielding

There's an entire metagame based around crouch canceling alone as it pertains to defending on approach. It's a whole avenue of depth they just took out. The difference is that these defensive options are all preventative. You can use them to prevent getting hit. In Brawl, defense is there to punish whoever tried to hit you.

 

[Darkshooter]

I can't even talk with Melee players, too ******** to understand the meaning of my explaination. I play melee, even if Kage is sandbagging or not, I took games off him and combo'ing with Falco takes no brain. Don't start with the Brawl player capability I played this game for 7 years casual with my friends and watched all of MLGs/Nationals tourneys videos. Brawl takes more patient and you have to play smarter. If you don't agreed, then you just got some Melee pride going in and out your ***. I'm done.

-Very Mad Ally.

Theres always Stamina Mega Flower Curry Heavy Slow ANGLED Brawl, Ally.

 

[Vigilante]

Not really sure that can truly be done. I mean, you technically just have a lag reduction and an easy wavedash. Problem being what kind of button configuration could be imployed to wavedash. Diagonal-down and jump?

Besides, the point being is that Sakurai said the game was too "Fast" for the average person. In other words, the problem had nothing to do with L-Cancel and wavedashing, or crouch cancel, or whatever according to him, but speed itself.

And in my experience, defense punishes the defender in Brawl at times. Youc an't do much after a roll and the sidestep frames are off, making dodging bothersome. I don,t think just adding auto-L-cancel and easy wavedash can make the game competitive. L-Cancels erves little purpose if you can't short-hop for lots of characters for instances.

I'm just saying that you'd also need to modofy speed, lag and a lot of things to please the casual gamers. I honestly would like a game aimed only at the core, but with Nintendo's new philosophy and the market as it is, I'm not expecting it.

 

[BEES]

Not really sure that can truly be done. I mean, you technically just have a lag reduction and an easy wavedash. Problem being what kind of button configuration could be imployed to wavedash. Diagonal-down and jump?

I would think diagonal down shield would be a good place to put it. Halfway between a spotdodge and a roll. And I'm not a fan of auto-l-canceling. I feel like something should be there, but I'm a bit clueless as to how to make it strategic, so I'll settle for just making the button press easier.

The rest of the issues you bring up are not really issues. You could progress your skill in the game steadily over time, adding one small thing every time you come back to it. At no point would casual players ever run into a wall where they have to learn something that's an order of magnitude harder than anything they've learned before that point in order to progress.

The beginning and end points of the learning curve are in the same place. You would eventually have to learn difficult technical things like JC shines, SHFFLing and so on, but now it would gradually build up to that instead of hitting you in the face. This just smooths out the cliffs on the way to it.

 

[Black Mantis]

The fact that you get ridiculous combos after you break through someone's defense in melee is what makes offensive play appealing.

Catching a Fox who's intent on running away in melee is just as hard as dealing with most forms of camping in brawl (not planking though. That's in a league of it's own). The difference is that once you catch Fox he's essentially dead, making up for all the damage you took in lasers and stray nairs/bairs.

It's not that melee's defensive options are weaker than brawl's (I daresay they're stronger. Faster jumps and fall speeds facilitate platform camping and dash dancing and crouch canceling can be very useful for punishing certain approaches). What makes offensive play viable is the reward you get for being successful (most of the time surpassing the damage you'd build with a defensive playstyle instead). It's a situation of moderate risk: high reward vs low risk: moderate reward.

That's my take on it.

This and what BEES stated x10000

Also, A pimp named slickback did you really say ganon sucks?

Inb4KageandRockcrock

 

[Vigilante]

Could be possible. I also think there should be a sort of mastery mode, that teaches players how to use some advanced techniques. They would be rewarded with unlockables (Like trophies) if they manage to pull it off. A demo shows the move in slow motion, then is normal motion, showing when to press the buttons, and they can learn some advanced comboes. It would be good for the player who wants to improve but doesn,t go to places like Smashboards.

 

[Deleted member]

@ Dark Sonic and Black Mantis Ugh, again, somebody talked about it earlier, but when we talk about a certain games defense being better than another, or a certain game's offense being better, it's all in relative terms.

If we were to assign numbers to it out of 10, it would be something like this.

Melee defense: 7
Melee offense: 9

Brawl defense: 5
Brawl offense: 3

This is what the scale would be like if you combine the 2 games. Since obviously you have more defensive options in Melee (and offensive options), offense and defense are better in Melee than in Brawl. Note: please don't argue about the specifics of those numbers, that isn't the point, unless you think the actual order of the numbers should be different.

The point is that in both of the games, one number is higher than the other in the individual game. Even though Melee defense > Brawl defense, a Melee defensive style will still generally (I underline it because I don't want to have to go through the same thing as before again) lose to an offensive style.

Even though Melee defense > Brawl defense, in Brawl one would still rather be defensive while in Melee one would still rather be offensive.

 

[Vigilante]

Personally, I see Brawl as a party game, along the same lines as Mario Party. Melee, i see it more and a mixture between a party game and a figting game, but a bit more towards a fighting game.

But I kind of wonder if Melee really is that much more offense than defense. I found very aggressive players to do good at first, but poorly at higher levels. One could consider stuff like the Falco short-hop blaster a defensive/offensive manoeuvre, since it stuns attacks and movements, for instances. I found it fairly even.

I guess it depends on the playstyle, but I've seen some pretty good defensive players like Chu for Project M.

 

[Dark Sonic]

^^Actually Puu....that's pretty much what I was trying to say. I wasn't trying to say that melee is a more defensive orientated game than brawl, but rather that melee defense is scarier than brawl defense <_<.

 

[Deleted member]

Personally, I see Brawl as a party game, along the same lines as Mario Party. Melee, i see it more and a mixture between a party game and a figting game, but a bit more towards a fighting game.

But I kind of wonder if Melee really is that much more offense than defense. I found very aggressive players to do good at first, but poorly at higher levels. One could consider stuff like the Falco short-hop blaster a defensive/offensive manoeuvre, since it stuns attacks and movements, for instances. I found it fairly even.

I guess it depends on the playstyle, but I've seen some pretty good defensive players like Chu for Project M.

Yeah it's hard to say what's offensive and defensive, but for the most part people do better when they approach rather than if they don't approach.

^^Actually Puu....that's pretty much what I was trying to say. I wasn't trying to say that melee is a more defensive orientated game than brawl, but rather that melee defense is scarier than brawl defense <_<.

=) <3

 

[Vigilante]

My biggest fun in Melee is to dodge my friends to toy around with them . Then count to three and kill them, XD.

 

[ProSuperSmash1]

Happeh with the way it is. This will prove that the later SSB games will be more like brawl.

I never got to play Melee in a competitive way because back then, I didn't know there were those techniques such as wavedashing, L-canceling etc. Now I don't have it anymore...

 

[BEES]

People comparing Brawl to Mario Party are doing it a huge disservice. It's more like a less-fun version of PowerStone.

 

[ETWIST51294]

It is a less fun version of powerstone. No bull****.

 

[Black Mantis]

Mario party>>>>>>>>power stone

 

[Mike G]

^

.........