ETWIST51294
Smash Hero
Marvel and GG are hard as **** on pad.
Thank god Noobs unplayable on UMK3.
Thank god Noobs unplayable on UMK3.
-
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!
Smash vs Traditional Fighters
- Thread starter CloneHat
- Start date
Phantom hits aren't a bad thing at all. You almost missed your attack, but you get half the damage anyway since it was a pixel away from missing. Like having your skin grazed irl by the tip of a sword that barely touched you. Phantom hits are no more inconsistent than perfect shields, and they make sense in the realm of the game.
Redact
Professional Nice Guy
I have no idea what you're on about with impossible on pad, we have players here who can do full extended ino combos on pad, play eddie flawlessly on pad, not to mention a good 80% of our scene plays pad here for GG
Walt
Smash Ace
I've never heard of anyone playing eddie flawlessly on pad. Like, actually doing the 3 1 frame negative edge high/low mixups?
I play on pad but I play potemkin so the hardest thing I have to input is half circle back forward, everything else is timing (I actually have terrible execution and have execution johns like 100% of the time when I play but I can't use sticks)
I play on pad but I play potemkin so the hardest thing I have to input is half circle back forward, everything else is timing (I actually have terrible execution and have execution johns like 100% of the time when I play but I can't use sticks)
Renth
Smash Hero
only because he has 30% more health. Also I will MM you in that game Ricky. I'm also Decent at MK9 but after I got LOL ***** a few times I quit trying.
ETWIST51294
Smash Hero
Because I totally said impossible in that sentence, right? I said HARD, not impossible.
Niko45
Smash Master
Melee is really ****ing hard, that's all I know.
Mr.Jackpot
Smash Lord
This is pretty much the mindset SRK people have when they bash Smash <_<
Niko45
Smash Master
Nah I think it's more cause they think it's kiddie or a party game or they don't like ring outs (at least that's what they'll see, even if deep down they know it's because it's too ****ing hard lol).
Honestly, idgaf, I'm fully confident I'm playing the game that is harder and has more depth. Someone already said they are not the same game therefore they cannot be equal, so **** it, I'll pick a side. We're at war. If they want to hate on Smash then right back at them. My understanding of 2D is basic but it just looks much more limited in terms of what goes on in the game. Smash has a lot more going on with recovery + edgeguarding, as well as the general "push-pull" of neutral position and muscle-memory based punishes that the 2D fighters have. You can't SD in a 2D fighter, every input in smash has more pressure on it, not to mention that it takes like 10x more actual inputs to win a 4 stock match of smash.
Not to mention Smash is more reaction-based. Our punishes aren't pure muscle memory because of DI. Spacing is and control of your character in melee gets to an incredibly detailed level that is definitely not matched in 2D fighters as far as I can tell.
They have a Rock Paper Scissor style blocking system which is built into the game where as Melee also has plenty of RPS scenarios that aren't "man-made" and just happen naturally. All this on top of being way more demanding technically.
Plus I'm pretty sure more smashers have achieved respectable results in their games than vice versa (correct me if I'm wrong). I know Forward has had some success in MvC3 and Alukard at SSF4.
Their games are cool and have plenty of depth I'm sure but it ain't Melee. Sorry. Don't give a **** if it sounds ignorant.
Honestly, idgaf, I'm fully confident I'm playing the game that is harder and has more depth. Someone already said they are not the same game therefore they cannot be equal, so **** it, I'll pick a side. We're at war. If they want to hate on Smash then right back at them. My understanding of 2D is basic but it just looks much more limited in terms of what goes on in the game. Smash has a lot more going on with recovery + edgeguarding, as well as the general "push-pull" of neutral position and muscle-memory based punishes that the 2D fighters have. You can't SD in a 2D fighter, every input in smash has more pressure on it, not to mention that it takes like 10x more actual inputs to win a 4 stock match of smash.
Not to mention Smash is more reaction-based. Our punishes aren't pure muscle memory because of DI. Spacing is and control of your character in melee gets to an incredibly detailed level that is definitely not matched in 2D fighters as far as I can tell.
They have a Rock Paper Scissor style blocking system which is built into the game where as Melee also has plenty of RPS scenarios that aren't "man-made" and just happen naturally. All this on top of being way more demanding technically.
Plus I'm pretty sure more smashers have achieved respectable results in their games than vice versa (correct me if I'm wrong). I know Forward has had some success in MvC3 and Alukard at SSF4.
Their games are cool and have plenty of depth I'm sure but it ain't Melee. Sorry. Don't give a **** if it sounds ignorant.
ETWIST51294
Smash Hero
Yeah, you're completely wrong but whatever. If you're not gonna play any fighters to learn why you're wrong then why argue.
Wow, this thread.
So much ignorance going 'round.
So much ignorance going 'round.
Pengie
Smash Lord
Niko: statements like those (from both communities) are what cause them to hate us and vice versa. If all you know is Melee that's fine, but don't go around talking out of your ***; that's the reason why they think we're ignorant children; because for the most part the community acts the part.
We're "at war" because of people with ignorant views talking out of their ***.
Jonas
Smash Champion
I guess the people who say that "we're at war" are the ones who really want to be at war with the other community.
Walt
Smash Ace
Smash is a deep game, but it isn't INFINITELY HARDER AND MORE COMPLICATED THAN EVERY OTHER GAME. It's a fighting game, but it looks like we're playing mouse trap to other communities and they're playing chess. We are both playing chess, just our chess has some goofy looking colorful chuck e. cheese **** and you need to be able to admit that. If you think smash has all these deep nuances, that you don't see that unless you play the game seriously, but you don't play other FGs, AND you think their game doesn't have equally intricate nuances, then you are a ******** ignorant hypocrite.
i'm a couple pages late, but i'd like to talk about that pretty cool video that guy posted about the akuma spacing on his sweep
that video was great at explaining the subtleties and everything, i really understood the implications of the situation and the different moves, and i can see why you dont think that melee has an equivalent of situations like that
however, i can definitively tell you that melee does have situations like that, and they are every bit as complex. the difference, however, is that the situations in melee cant be memorized. there arent 3 common spacings you end up at after certain moves in melee, there are near infinite. if you have to choose between a cross up and not cross up in another game, thats basically equivalent to mixing up between hitting their shield or wavelanding/emptyjumping into a punish, not to mention you actually can cross up but i'll admit that doesnt have the same going for it as crossing up in traditional games does. but really, every situation in melee outside of guaranteed combos basically includes this kind of spacing, from avoiding shield grabs to avoiding cc punishes and plenty of other situations
footsies and zoning in melee do exist and are complex; while you cant kill a person by batting them away, when you camp by the ledge you are in position to convert a punish into a gimp. not to mention when, for example, a fox or sheik is trying to camp the ledge with projectiles, they have to be careful about the fact that in smash, several characters can cross the screen in the time it takes to launch that projectile, given a prediction by the non camping player.
and lastly, the criticism on smash's blocking system being shallow, i would again disagree and say it is simply different. smash is based more on a wider range of movement, that much is accepted by everyone here it seems, and what blocking in smash does is limit your range of movement. smash is more about recognizing when someone can block at all and adjusting your behavior to pressure their now limited options, while in traditional fighters its about trying to make them consistently block in the right way instead of messing up.
the principle difference here is that blocking in traditional fighters, at least in my experience (steet figher), does not do anything to inhibit the options that immediately follow
i dont know much about other fighters, i thought that akuma video was an excellent insight into the kind of things players of other games consider while playing, but i can explain mechanics of smash and how they relate to the depth and options within the game
that video was great at explaining the subtleties and everything, i really understood the implications of the situation and the different moves, and i can see why you dont think that melee has an equivalent of situations like that
however, i can definitively tell you that melee does have situations like that, and they are every bit as complex. the difference, however, is that the situations in melee cant be memorized. there arent 3 common spacings you end up at after certain moves in melee, there are near infinite. if you have to choose between a cross up and not cross up in another game, thats basically equivalent to mixing up between hitting their shield or wavelanding/emptyjumping into a punish, not to mention you actually can cross up but i'll admit that doesnt have the same going for it as crossing up in traditional games does. but really, every situation in melee outside of guaranteed combos basically includes this kind of spacing, from avoiding shield grabs to avoiding cc punishes and plenty of other situations
footsies and zoning in melee do exist and are complex; while you cant kill a person by batting them away, when you camp by the ledge you are in position to convert a punish into a gimp. not to mention when, for example, a fox or sheik is trying to camp the ledge with projectiles, they have to be careful about the fact that in smash, several characters can cross the screen in the time it takes to launch that projectile, given a prediction by the non camping player.
and lastly, the criticism on smash's blocking system being shallow, i would again disagree and say it is simply different. smash is based more on a wider range of movement, that much is accepted by everyone here it seems, and what blocking in smash does is limit your range of movement. smash is more about recognizing when someone can block at all and adjusting your behavior to pressure their now limited options, while in traditional fighters its about trying to make them consistently block in the right way instead of messing up.
the principle difference here is that blocking in traditional fighters, at least in my experience (steet figher), does not do anything to inhibit the options that immediately follow
i dont know much about other fighters, i thought that akuma video was an excellent insight into the kind of things players of other games consider while playing, but i can explain mechanics of smash and how they relate to the depth and options within the game
ETWIST51294
Smash Hero
The two posts above me are gdlk
Falcon mains are the smartest smashers obv.
Falcon mains are the smartest smashers obv.
Smooth Criminal
Da Cheef
>_>
Never mind.
Still, this thread is stupid.
Smooth Criminal
Never mind.
Still, this thread is stupid.
Smooth Criminal
Druggedfox
Smash Champion
I'd like to know the ratio of the number of people that attacked niko for his statement and its "incorrectness" to the number of people that actually made an attempt to prove their point against his. I've been told you can't divide by zero though, so I guess I'll never know >__>
Smooth Criminal
Da Cheef
I'm not attacking him per se. The man likes Smash, and he doesn't give a **** about other fighting games. Great. Good for him.
I just think this thread is kinda dumb. I think even you can kinda see it, Drugged.
Smooth Criminal
KirbyKaze
Smash Legend
Smash's combo system in most matchups with most characters* can be broken down into flowcharts. The options and what you do change a little bit based on percent and whatever but it's not really hard to combo effectively in this game.
*Ice Climbers are somewhat exempt from this. Especially if wobbling is on.
edit: We're going to be at war either way. Issue is too old. They're not going to change their views unless something radical happens and a good chunk of our community is going to resent that. This issue is never going to go anywhere productive; just let it fester. Maybe it'll die with (lots of) time. But dredging it up and making these threads really doesn't help. We know why our game is deep. Rather than make (what may seem like) hostile statements about their game, why don't we just let them play the game they like while we enjoy ours?
*Ice Climbers are somewhat exempt from this. Especially if wobbling is on.
edit: We're going to be at war either way. Issue is too old. They're not going to change their views unless something radical happens and a good chunk of our community is going to resent that. This issue is never going to go anywhere productive; just let it fester. Maybe it'll die with (lots of) time. But dredging it up and making these threads really doesn't help. We know why our game is deep. Rather than make (what may seem like) hostile statements about their game, why don't we just let them play the game they like while we enjoy ours?
Druggedfox
Smash Champion
I definitely do think the thread is pretty dumb/pointless, but if people want to discuss it... at least have it be some sort of productive discussion. Oh well, pointless debate for the most part; each community will continue holding their own opinions regardless of any valid arguments, and everything else KK said
KirbyKaze
Smash Legend
I'd actually like more people to elaborate on why Smash's combo system is so good. I don't think the game's combo system is really all that demanding or cool; most of it can be broken down pretty easily. At this point I'm not sure how much of it is creative, on-the-spot thinking vs. recycling generic combos we've already done before and are fairly tried and true.
Minato
穏やかじゃない
To be clear, there's no "war". It's just something that Smashers use to retaliate by saying their game has more depth.
The majority of communities hate how immature Smashers can be. They never really said Smash lacks depth.
The majority of communities hate how immature Smashers can be. They never really said Smash lacks depth.
KirbyKaze
Smash Legend
Melee is incredibly homosexual. You're all lucky I suck so I can't show you this.
Druggedfox
Smash Champion
@KK, I think it's less that the combo system is amazing, necessarily, and more that the combo system still offers some sort of input from the player being combo'd which makes them feel less useless.
Being a bit more serious, I think that adds an interesting depth to smash in terms of risk/reward assessment etc for combo choice. In most traditional fighting games, because combos are guaranteed (minus breakers/barrier bursts/whatever specific mechanic to break out of combos said fighting game may have) once you land a hit, if you're consistent enough at a combo you can just go for the most damaging thing every time. The only thing that changes that is positioning (are you midscreen or corner... oh no, so hard to figure out >_>) or if you go for some sort of reset, which is a legitimate consideration. Resets are the closest thing analog from traditional fighters to the risk/reward assessment on combos that you have to think about in smash, but its far more evident on average in smash than in traditional fighters. Do you keep going for a tech chase, or do you go for the prediction and upsmash with sheik during a tech chase? Do you go for the extended falco combo that could potentially lead to death, or do you end it safely with a quick shine bair and reset yourself with advantageous positioning rather than get the damage? Do you combo for damage, or for position? Those sorts of things are comparable to combo resets in fighters, but are far more involved in smash simply because of how the existence of DI affects everything.
I also think that, while about 99% of it is just generic recycled stuff, there are still times that every now and then smash requires you to be really innovative on the spot while taking into account your opponent's DI/trajectory etc. After a certain point in the development of traditional fighters, that's almost entirely gone; even aside from that, the vast majority of the ingenuity comes from the invention of the combos, which everybody eventually copies and standardizes... its not nearly the same. Even if that isn't the case, the way slight variations in DI can change the optimal way to cover options (either in strict combos or tech chasing) adds an interesting depth to the game that most *smashers* don't even consider; if the majority of people who play the game don't even look at such things, we can't really expect people who don't play the game to appreciate/understand them.
@Minato... Idk about that, there are quite a few fighting game players who don't just think smashers are immature, but that smash in and of itself is a kids game in either its simplicity or in that it requires mindless mashing. I'm not saying the majority of FG players think this, but to say fighting game players *don't* think smash lacks depth is simply inaccurate, from my experience.
@Ministry...Good execution is important... the best execution wins? Not even sure if that's worth responding to... >_> That's true between two evenly matched players, but to say, as a generalized statement, that a player with worse execution will lose to a player with better execution is flat out silly.
Being a bit more serious, I think that adds an interesting depth to smash in terms of risk/reward assessment etc for combo choice. In most traditional fighting games, because combos are guaranteed (minus breakers/barrier bursts/whatever specific mechanic to break out of combos said fighting game may have) once you land a hit, if you're consistent enough at a combo you can just go for the most damaging thing every time. The only thing that changes that is positioning (are you midscreen or corner... oh no, so hard to figure out >_>) or if you go for some sort of reset, which is a legitimate consideration. Resets are the closest thing analog from traditional fighters to the risk/reward assessment on combos that you have to think about in smash, but its far more evident on average in smash than in traditional fighters. Do you keep going for a tech chase, or do you go for the prediction and upsmash with sheik during a tech chase? Do you go for the extended falco combo that could potentially lead to death, or do you end it safely with a quick shine bair and reset yourself with advantageous positioning rather than get the damage? Do you combo for damage, or for position? Those sorts of things are comparable to combo resets in fighters, but are far more involved in smash simply because of how the existence of DI affects everything.
I also think that, while about 99% of it is just generic recycled stuff, there are still times that every now and then smash requires you to be really innovative on the spot while taking into account your opponent's DI/trajectory etc. After a certain point in the development of traditional fighters, that's almost entirely gone; even aside from that, the vast majority of the ingenuity comes from the invention of the combos, which everybody eventually copies and standardizes... its not nearly the same. Even if that isn't the case, the way slight variations in DI can change the optimal way to cover options (either in strict combos or tech chasing) adds an interesting depth to the game that most *smashers* don't even consider; if the majority of people who play the game don't even look at such things, we can't really expect people who don't play the game to appreciate/understand them.
@Minato... Idk about that, there are quite a few fighting game players who don't just think smashers are immature, but that smash in and of itself is a kids game in either its simplicity or in that it requires mindless mashing. I'm not saying the majority of FG players think this, but to say fighting game players *don't* think smash lacks depth is simply inaccurate, from my experience.
@Ministry...Good execution is important... the best execution wins? Not even sure if that's worth responding to... >_> That's true between two evenly matched players, but to say, as a generalized statement, that a player with worse execution will lose to a player with better execution is flat out silly.
VGmasta
Smash Lord
Yeah right, I'm not lettin' you get free money off of doing those Reptile gimmicks on me, lol.
Jonas
Smash Champion
Yeah Dark is the best player in the world.
No.
Tech skill certainly is very important, but I'd say the smartest player usually wins.
VGmasta
Smash Lord
You have to be smart and technical enough to prevail.
I'm more than smart enough to win a ton of matches that I actually end up losing because of technical errors.
I'm not knocking against the traditional fighters at all. Like I said, I used to play Tekken and Soul Calibur. But ever since ps3,wii, and xbox360 took over, SSBM has been all I could afford to keep up with in terms of time and money. And SSBM deserves more credit than many of the outsiders (and some insiders/smashers) are giving.
I'm more than smart enough to win a ton of matches that I actually end up losing because of technical errors.
I'm not knocking against the traditional fighters at all. Like I said, I used to play Tekken and Soul Calibur. But ever since ps3,wii, and xbox360 took over, SSBM has been all I could afford to keep up with in terms of time and money. And SSBM deserves more credit than many of the outsiders (and some insiders/smashers) are giving.
A lot of people go on the SRK forums and think that the fact that the majority of people there think Smash isn't a fighting game, because all the respondents say as much. But it's not like most SRKers are actually competent in the games they play. They are moreso than we are, sure, but the overwhelming majority of those people don't win any tournaments ever, and most of them probably don't think about their game a whole lot outside of playing it.
On the other hand, I was watching a stream of some MvC3 tournament (I don't remember which), and Noel Brown, and a few other high level players were sitting there openly saying that Smash is a fighting game, it's just really weird. And well, Smash is definitely weird.
So just keep in mind next time you try to convince SRK that Smash is a fighting game: it's not a unified front. It also doesn't really matter that much if the Smash community ever gains acceptance outside of SWF. Our community has survived ten years, and is among the most active fg communities--without any help from SRK. We don't need them to like us, as we've already shown.
I would suggest however, that more people take time out to learn and play some other fighting games. There's a lot there to learn. Not only does it give you a better perspective on those games, but I think it also helps your perspective in Smash.
On the other hand, I was watching a stream of some MvC3 tournament (I don't remember which), and Noel Brown, and a few other high level players were sitting there openly saying that Smash is a fighting game, it's just really weird. And well, Smash is definitely weird.
So just keep in mind next time you try to convince SRK that Smash is a fighting game: it's not a unified front. It also doesn't really matter that much if the Smash community ever gains acceptance outside of SWF. Our community has survived ten years, and is among the most active fg communities--without any help from SRK. We don't need them to like us, as we've already shown.
I would suggest however, that more people take time out to learn and play some other fighting games. There's a lot there to learn. Not only does it give you a better perspective on those games, but I think it also helps your perspective in Smash.
ETWIST51294
Smash Hero
SRK randoms are ********. I would have never learned how good MK was if I listened to them.
They ride capcoms nuts.
Anything other than that gets bashed for the most part.
They ride capcoms nuts.
Anything other than that gets bashed for the most part.
Jonas
Smash Champion
Johns.
=D
Ah well I see what you mean, but look at who are actually the best players, such as Mango, Dr PP or Armada. Sure they're technical beasts, but above all else they stand out because they make such smart decisions all the time.
1048576
Smash Master
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2006
- Messages
- 3,417
HBox is not technical. He suicides with Puff sometimes. He's still like 5th in the world.
There's a lot of ridiculously fast spacies that don't place well. Silent Wolf, Lucien, Lovage, Dark, etc... Heck, anyone remember this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opiolAzMClI No? That's because prosmashertim didn't have the fastest mind to go with those fastest fingers. Ken vs. Bombsoldier is another classic example of smart play besting near-flawless "execution."
Now, when I read that I was thinking by "execution" you didn't just mean tech-skill. You meant timing, prediction, reflexes, spacing, game knowledge, and tech skill. In that case, yeah. You're basically just saying the best player wins. And even then you're still wrong because of character matchups and stage matchups. Stage selection matters in this game more than any other fighter. That's why it's such a hotly contested topic.
There's a lot of ridiculously fast spacies that don't place well. Silent Wolf, Lucien, Lovage, Dark, etc... Heck, anyone remember this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opiolAzMClI No? That's because prosmashertim didn't have the fastest mind to go with those fastest fingers. Ken vs. Bombsoldier is another classic example of smart play besting near-flawless "execution."
Now, when I read that I was thinking by "execution" you didn't just mean tech-skill. You meant timing, prediction, reflexes, spacing, game knowledge, and tech skill. In that case, yeah. You're basically just saying the best player wins. And even then you're still wrong because of character matchups and stage matchups. Stage selection matters in this game more than any other fighter. That's why it's such a hotly contested topic.
KirbyKaze
Smash Legend
Smash is homosexual. There's a lot of ways to cover too many options and we have gigantic reaction windows for a crapload of our tournament staple characters.
I think at this point most of smash is recycled garbage that we know works. While they're not set in stone, the flow chart never lies!
Execution is incredibly important. At this point, it's very likely to die from a technical error or similar misstep. Now, that said, you can still be legitimately stupid and do everything you want and lose just because what you "want" to do isn't what you "need" to do. But this is where terms and personal definitions make everything mucky and difficult to discuss.
I think at this point most of smash is recycled garbage that we know works. While they're not set in stone, the flow chart never lies!
Execution is incredibly important. At this point, it's very likely to die from a technical error or similar misstep. Now, that said, you can still be legitimately stupid and do everything you want and lose just because what you "want" to do isn't what you "need" to do. But this is where terms and personal definitions make everything mucky and difficult to discuss.
KirbyKaze
Smash Legend
I have one for Sheik. I don't really feel like posting it, though.