Smash4 has not done anything to deserve EVO

[Yodude57]

Did you read the OP? The point of this thread isn't to change EVO's mind, it's to get some perspective on why people support Smash4 getting a chance at EVO.

That question has been answered several times already. It's new and fresh, it's more likely that Nintendo would sponsor Smash4 than Melee, and finally:

My question to OP is how do you propose we do this? Or rather, what is a more direct way to find out how people respond to Smash4 being at a big tournament than putting Smash4 in a big tournament and seeing what happens? Just because other Smash games had to go the grassroots way and build their cases over time doesn't mean every new Smash game should have to do that as well.

The battle is over, we (the Smash community) won! Smash is in big tournaments now! The things you're saying are analogous to saying that every new Street Fighter that comes out shouldn't be allowed on a big stage until it can prove that it's better than the previous iteration. That's not how the world works, and honestly it makes your mindset about this whole thing seem petulant, childish, and butthurt.

Way to tell it like it is with the last part of your quote. And yes you are right melee elitists do get butthurt when a game that can be just as good as melee comes out.

 

[SSS]

Calling the other part of the community names! This thread is ~~~~~awesome~~~~~

 

[Yodude57]

Calling the other part of the community names! This thread is ~~~~~awesome~~~~~

Ikr

 

[MechaWave]

Calling the other part of the community names! This thread is ~~~~~awesome~~~~~

Yes, we all realize this thread will not bode well because it's essentially Melee vs Smash 4 as always. You don't have to keep ****posting, ffs. Just push the conversation even further away, why don't you?

 

[Logsmash]

Yes, we all realize this thread will not bode well because it's essentially Melee vs Smash 4 as always. You don't have to keep ****posting, ffs. Just push the conversation even further away, why don't you?

What baffles me is why it always has to be Melee vs Smash 4 instead of Melee AND Smash 4. I hope we can get there some day, the sooner the better.

 

[SSS]

Yes, we all realize this thread will not bode well because it's essentially Melee vs Smash 4 as always. You don't have to keep ****posting, ffs. Just push the conversation even further away, why don't you?

The people on this forum are so nice. <3

Y'all are my bae

 

[SmashChu]

Over the past few months, the topic of whether Smash4 or Melee should be in EVO has been discussed at length.

Let me say right off the bat that it should be understood that Smash4 will most likely be featured at EVO as the main event, and not Melee. The obvious reasons being that Nintendo was a sponsor of EVO last year, and will probably be a sponsor in 2015. Money is now involved, and Nintendo will be looking to benefit. Getting their new release some big press only makes sense.

With that being said, the point of this thread is not to debate which game is going to be featured as the main event, as it's pretty obvious. The reason I created this thread, is to get some insight into the rationale of people rallying for Smash4s inclusion.

The main argument I see from most advocates for it's inclusion, is that it's new. As far as the Smash community is concerned, this doesn't mean anything. As a primarily grassroots scene, we have gone without the support of the developers. This meant instead of the bulk of players going to where the money is being thrown at, as seen from the FGC, we stayed with the games we enjoyed the most.

Another reason that is used a lot is that Melee already has a thriving community, and that Smash4 needs this for the growth of it's scene. Melee players who disagree are described as selfish, and supporting "Meleetism." These types of statements are completely ironic, because the reason Smash got back into EVO is primarily because of MELEE players. How is it greed to want to keep something you earned, but not greed to want to take something you didn't put any effort into?

Yes, there were players of other Smash games that gave their support, but the bulk of the effort came from the Melee community. Essentially, Smash4 players want to hijack the popularity and efforts of the Melee community to ride their way into a huge event the Melee community put a lot of effort getting into. Melee had to demonstrate itself as a competitive game for years before it got in, why should Smash4 be any different?

People will then say that the different Smash communities are intertwined, and that when one community profits, we all profit. This is not true. Smash may be a franchise, but each one are entirely different from each other. For the previous statement to ring true, that would mean loads of players are cross gaming in tournaments, and this isn't true.Any popularity that Smash4 will gain from EVO 2015 will support the Smash4 community, not the Melee community.

Is there any solid rationale to include Smash4 in EVO 2015 that can be offered?

I'm sure I'm going to get a warning for this, but let me tell you why that's bull****.

So a game has never "deserved" or "had to prove itself" to get into EVO. The norm is the new games always get into EVO. Hell, this year, Injustice was in the tournament. The new games always get added because EVO wants to give the game a chance to shine. For some reason, it's only the Melee fans that don't want that. The other problem Melee fans have to they all this "MINE MINE MINE," mentality. It's never the Smash Brothers community. It's the Melee community. It's always separate. And last I checked, that got people into trouble during Brawl because it was the same mentality. The Smash Community grew and that's what you and other fail to see. Riding off of Melee's new found success is a great thing for the community as a whole. You have an online competitive mode where people can practice easily, and you have new players who are starting on Smash 4 and want to jump in. But no, we have to play the 13 year old game AGAIN. Also, don't give me that "they are totally different." This just shows you're ignorance of other games. In fact, I'd argue Melee and Smash 4 are closer than many sequels. Street Fighter 3 and 4 are totally different. One has a parry and the other has a focus attack. That alone changes most of the game. There is an Ultra bar, and the games have widely different rosters. A game being a different was never an issue.......unless it's the special snow flake Melee.

What annoys me about these topics is that all they are is a new excuse. It was easy when Brawl was around because you had a clear scapegoat. It was slower, it had tripping, ect. But now you have a game that's addressed those issues and added a mode for you. There is no easy scapegoat. So we have to move the goal post to justify the Melee worship and so we don't have to learn a new game. It's far more obvious now than ever.

The reason people call you all Melee elitist because that's exactly what you are. Street Fighter 3 fans never tried to block 4. I know people who like 3 far more and will not go out of there way to spite every other game. Same for any game really. It's just Melee fans. This is a time to make the Smash community big and put it on the main stage, and you all want to throw it away because it wont be Melee there, it will be something different. Stop acting like selfish children and share the damn ball.

 

[MP8]

Geez, all this commotion and Smash U isn't even out yet, with gamecube controller access and everything.

 

[Yodude57]

I'm sure I'm going to get a warning for this, but let me tell you why that's bull****.

So a game has never "deserved" or "had to prove itself" to get into EVO. The norm is the new games always get into EVO. Hell, this year, Injustice was in the tournament. The new games always get added because EVO wants to give the game a chance to shine. For some reason, it's only the Melee fans that don't want that. The other problem Melee fans have to they all this "MINE MINE MINE," mentality. It's never the Smash Brothers community. It's the Melee community. It's always separate. And last I checked, that got people into trouble during Brawl because it was the same mentality. The Smash Community grew and that's what you and other fail to see. Riding off of Melee's new found success is a great thing for the community as a whole. You have an online competitive mode where people can practice easily, and you have new players who are starting on Smash 4 and want to jump in. But no, we have to play the 13 year old game AGAIN. Also, don't give me that "they are totally different." This just shows you're ignorance of other games. In fact, I'd argue Melee and Smash 4 are closer than many sequels. Street Fighter 3 and 4 are totally different. One has a parry and the other has a focus attack. That alone changes most of the game. There is an Ultra bar, and the games have widely different rosters. A game being a different was never an issue.......unless it's the special snow flake Melee.

What annoys me about these topics is that all they are is a new excuse. It was easy when Brawl was around because you had a clear scapegoat. It was slower, it had tripping, ect. But now you have a game that's addressed those issues and added a mode for you. There is no easy scapegoat. So we have to move the goal post to justify the Melee worship and so we don't have to learn a new game. It's far more obvious now than ever.

The reason people call you all Melee elitist because that's exactly what you are. Street Fighter 3 fans never tried to block 4. I know people who like 3 far more and will no go out of there way to spite every other game. Same for any game really. It's just Melee fans. This is a time to make the Smash community big and put it on the main stage, and you all want to throw it away because it wont be Melee there, it will be something different. Stop acting like selfish children and share the damn ball.

Glad to see more people like you on smashboards who aren't melee elitists and can put reality in perspective for those who are.

 

[The Prince: SDJ]

To clarify, I freaking love both games, melee and smash 4, but if smash 4 were to go to EVO it would need a developed rule set that cannot be made yet for both versions of the game. The 3DS rule-sets seem to be fine but running a 3DS tournament with 1000 entries will be very hard as I am expecting the next smash tournament at EVO to break 1000. If all goes well at Apex for smash 4, it can make a legitimate case for the EVO spot. Until then, melee gets the spot as melee has proven it can be efficiently ran at 900+ entries.

 

[Requiem]

snip
Also, campy, slow, and boring didn't stop Injustice from being featured for the last two years.

Ooooohhhhhhhhhh SNAP!

 

[PandaPanda Senketsu]

What annoys me about these topics is that all they are is a new excuse. It was easy when Brawl was around because you had a clear scapegoat. It was slower, it had tripping, ect. But now you have a game that's addressed those issues and added a mode for you. There is no easy scapegoat. So we have to move the goal post to justify the Melee worship and so we don't have to learn a new game. It's far more obvious now than ever.

Smash 4 is brawl 2.0, it is the exact same speed. Actually you can argue that it is slower because characters survive for much much longer.

 

[Joe73191]

Nintendo would not want Melee and Smash 4 on the same stage at EVO because if Melee got more attendees and viewers it would look bad for their new game. I'm more interested in what the status of Project M will be at Apex 2015.

 

[Gawain]

Smash 4 is brawl 2.0, it is the exact same speed. Actually you can argue that it is slower because characters survive for much much longer.

That's not even remotely true. Just go watch the Game8 tournament or something, no one is going to bother explaining why you are wrong.

 

[PandaPanda Senketsu]

That's not even remotely true. Just go watch the Game8 tournament or something, no one is going to bother explaining why you are wrong.

Um, if you don't think smash 4 is brawl 2.0 then you are probably delusional. They pretty much have the same engine, you can still do stuff like dacus and rar, and it has brawl air dodges. Also the returning brawl Vets have super identical move sets to their brawl counter parts. Why wouldn't this game have identical game play to brawl? Really the only noticeable differences are that air dodges are worse, rolls are better, and the ledge mechanics were changed.

 

[Gawain]

Um, if you don't think smash 4 is brawl 2.0 then you are probably delusional. They pretty much have the same engine, you can still do stuff like dacus and rar, and it has brawl air dodges. Also the returning brawl Vets have super identical move sets to their brawl counter parts. Why wouldn't this game have identical game play to brawl? Really the only noticeable differences are that air dodges are worse, rolls are better, and the ledge mechanics were changed.

It also has higher hitstun, less landing lag across the board, increased ground speed across the board, large differences in shield stun and in throw trajectories, no tripping, and new dash and pivot mechanics. Your focus is entirely on the obvious surface level things. Again, I want you to go watch the recent japanese tournaments and tell me with a straight face that it's anything at all like a Brawl tournament.

 

[Joe73191]

To be fair there are changes from Brawl to make it different from Brawl, but the things that are missing are big enough to affect it in big ways. No real dash-dancing is huge, it removes a lot of aspects of baiting, approaching, retreating, mind games and ground movement that made for very versatile and exciting match play. You do not maintain your momentum from dash to jump. This makes follow-ups and approaches and overall air game slower and less intense. Many moves have way too much landing lag. (Some moves have good landing lag to be fair) There is no reason a move needs to have more than 25 frames of landing lag, more than that is just too much, it makes it slow for the sake of slow. The 60-frame grab-whif mechanic makes grabbing less useful because by grabbing you now have lessened the amount of options you have. You now lose the grab option for the next 60 frames. Vectoring over DI makes matches last longer and removes DI mix-ups and removes that aspect of the game of reading the opponent's DI which removes an interaction between the players. Finally the ledge-stealing mechanic prevents edge-hogging making recoveries safer, easier and more free. Though there are a lot of positive changes that Smash 4 made over Brawl too.

 

[ItsMeBrandon]

Hm... I see an original poster going for Melee, and most of the others to be for Smash 4. I'm going to try to tread carefully here.

I myself don't favor either Smash 4 or Melee being the main event at Evo. I, personally, would probably like to see Smash 4 over Melee, but I won't guess which game will actually make it. I'm pretty bad at predicting things, to be honest.
That said, after reading the posts in this thread, I'd like to give my own opinion on this topic.

I was only introduced to Evo several months ago, and my knowledge of how competitive/tournament stuff goes is pretty limited. So understand that my perspective probably has holes in it.

I can see either game taking the Evo spotlight next year.
Melee because it's still pretty popular competitively. The Big House 4 has shown that Melee can be pretty reliable with getting people interested in it. I imagine it got featured the last few years of Evo because it's become by this point the best competitive Smash game, and 64 and Brawl just can't compete. Melee also has the advantage of already existing for a number of years, so if it got featured at Evo, it can probably be assumed that the event would be very stable in turnout and typical tournament procedures.

Smash 4 because it's new, yes, new. It's gaining in popularity and hype, and it's what a lot of people are keeping their eyes on. If Smash 4 made it, it would undoubtedly be not because of a competitive scene that's thriving better than Melee, but because it's what we all want to see with all the interest we've had directed toward the game. Or, most of us. No one is saying- at least, I'm not saying- that the game that gets featured at Evo must be the one that's dubbed the best (competitive) Smash game of all time. I think the game that gets featured at Evo is one that's simply, well, featured. Shown off. The Smash community has seen Melee be featured, be shown off for about 13 years now, and Melee has gotten a spot at Evo, what was it... 3 times? I think that was the number. Yes, Melee has survived and earned respect as a solid competitive Smash game, but I think having Melee at Evo for a 4th time right in the face of the fact that Smash 4, a newer (and for many a more exciting) Smash iteration, has been out for several months can seem like an odd decision to some people.

Whoa, this post is getting long. I'd better wrap up.

I have no desire to disrespect Melee at all. It's gotten to where it has for a reason.
I also have no desire to disrespect Smash 4. Its competitive scene is natal, but that's just it. I think it ought to grow and be given a chance. Evo doesn't have to be part of the way it does this, but it looks to be an option.

All in all, I'd really like to see both games get into Evo if that is at all possible. I don't want to see either side be disappointed in seeing their game not be featured.

 

[Gawain]

To be fair there are changes from Brawl to make it different from Brawl, but the things that are missing are big enough to affect it in big ways. No real dash-dancing is huge, it removes a lot of aspects of baiting, approaching, retreating, mind games and ground movement that made for very versatile and exciting match play. You do not maintain your momentum from dash to jump. This makes follow-ups and approaches and overall air game slower and less intense. Many moves have way too much landing lag. (Some moves have good landing lag to be fair) There is no reason a move needs to have more than 25 frames of landing lag, more than that is just too much, it makes it slow for the sake of slow. The 60-frame grab-whif mechanic makes grabbing less useful because by grabbing you now have lessened the amount of options you have. You now lose the grab option for the next 60 frames. Vectoring over DI makes matches last longer and removes DI mix-ups and removes that aspect of the game of reading the opponent's DI which removes an interaction between the players. Finally the ledge-stealing mechanic prevents edge-hogging making recoveries safer, easier and more free. Though there are a lot of positive changes that Smash 4 made over Brawl too.

You didn't have dash jump momentum in 64 and that game was fine. Also, there is dash-dancing in Smash 4, it just requires more inputs (-->, --><--, <-- --->, ---><---,.....) and requires more skill and speed. Combined with true pivoting you do literally anything out of dash. Also the new DI mechanics have been proven to be even weaker than the old DI. Which, by the way, is still present, just weakened. And the game is focused more on ledge guarding, not hogging. Every character has been buffed off stage. Off stage play is an important part of the game now for everyone except LIttle Mac. I think you just need to look into the finer details more. Take a look at the Dash Dancing and Perfect Pivot threads.

 

[Dark Lady]

Dear Melee for Evo peeps:

I love Melee! It's a great game! I go to tournaments for it in my home state! I went to Evo last year just so I can play Melee there!

But Smash 4 needs to be our priority for Evo right now with Melee riding the tailcoats. And it's not like you can't make a Melee side tournament at Evo if the worst-case-scenario-in-your-eyes happen and Melee is not on the main stage. I mean, it's so disorganized, and no one gives two cares if you make a side tournament outside of the main hall. Hell, I helped organize and run a Divekick side tourney with a full pot! At the last minute!

Anyways why Smash 4 HAS done something to deserve EVO:

Remember, Nintendo's watchdogs are now keeping track of our community. They've openly admitted to having accounts on Smashboards. They've been observing us, and even invited several of our number to an invitational tournament. And every commentator they've picked were spot. Freaking. On.

And they've also branched out to the pro community by listening to all of out complaints about Brawl, bothering to fix them, and were actually RUNNING TOURNAMENTS. For SMASH. NINTENDO DID THAT. They've also been sponsoring a few of ours if I recall correctly.

WE NEED TO SUPPORT THEM SUPPORTING US. WE ARE OFFICIALLY OBLIGATED. And the way to kick that off? Getting out collective heads out of our collective backsides and rolling with Smash 4 as our main EVO game. That way, they get PR, they get happy. Then they sponsor all of our tourneys more, so we're happy. And i'm sure good ol' Nintendo won't forget about Melee when sweetening the pot for national tournament. Heck, if we shoot for the stars enough.... Melee HD re-release???

So yeah, don't be afraid of Melee not being on the Main Stage. It WILL BE at EVO regardless. And we have so many excellent people that stream so no one will miss out on the action. Ever. I'm sure if we ask nice, VGBootcamp will gladly take up the mantle. Or Clash Tournaments. Or the myriad of other streamers we've had over the years.

 

[Zork]

It also has higher hitstun, less landing lag across the board, increased ground speed across the board, large differences in shield stun and in throw trajectories, no tripping, and new dash and pivot mechanics. Your focus is entirely on the obvious surface level things. Again, I want you to go watch the recent japanese tournaments and tell me with a straight face that it's anything at all like a Brawl tournament.

As an avid Brawl player, it's just like a Brawl tournament. I've seen those matches. Clearly you never paid attention to competitive brawl.

What proof do you have that there's less landing lag across the board? If anything there is more considering moves that could be auto-cancelled in Brawl can't be here.

The neutral game is very similar to Brawl except with less short hop aerials on shield (again due to more landing lag) and much MUCH more rolling.

Anyway here's the match I'm guessing you are referring to:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlZNaU9fxDM

Let's see.

1. Tons of camping from both sides hoping the other player will over-commit first.
2. Hardly any combos beyond low percents.
3. Match takes 4 minutes roughly to complete on 2 stocks. Converted to 3 stocks this would be 6 mins. Which would be the same as a slower than average Brawl match.

You can watch other videos on that channel if you think I'm cherry-picking a campier than normal matchup. They were almost all like that.

I love how people that probably just followed the herd before this and bashed Brawl while understanding nothing about it are now suddenly praising Smash 4 because it's new and shiny which is essentially Brawl 1.5. In reality, if you love Smash 4, you probably would have liked Brawl as well if you gave it a chance.

Edit:

Keep in mind I'm not saying Smash 4 hasn't improved on some aspects. No tripping, potentially better balance etc. So it's fine to say you think it's better in some ways. But anyone that says it's a completely different game is delusional. It's more similar to its predecessor than any Smash game before it by far.

 

[Illuvial]

It would be healthy for the community as a whole to see a game at EVO when the meta is fresher, the character variety is greater, and when its newer and more exciting. It would draw in more Smash players to the competitive scene and I feel would just get people more hyped in general as there's more chance for new faces to pop up out of nowhere and turn brackets on their head

Personally so long as Smash is at EVO I couldn't care less, but I'd rather Smash 4 be there, personally

 

[D-idara]

The Brawl players banded together to get Melee back when that whole Nintendo-Lawyer fiasco happened, I really doubt Melee players would've done the same for Brawl for one reason, they're part of the Melee community, not the Smash community, Smash4 has already proven itself, it has a balance between offensive and defensive playstyles, the ledgegame's interesting, gimping's stronger than ever...

Smash4 should be at EVO, and no, your precious Melee's not going to die, you won't let it, but some people will move on to Smash4, accept that as a fact and keep playing the game you like if you don't like Smash4, it looks better, it plays better, it has a better, more balanced roster (As lackluster as it is), it sounds better...

 

[Thor]

Um, if you don't think smash 4 is brawl 2.0 then you are probably delusional. They pretty much have the same engine, you can still do stuff like dacus and rar, and it has brawl air dodges. Also the returning brawl Vets have super identical move sets to their brawl counter parts. Why wouldn't this game have identical game play to brawl? Really the only noticeable differences are that air dodges are worse, rolls are better, and the ledge mechanics were changed.

No no no no no.

You can't auto-cancel b-moves or chaingrab. Falco is COMPLETELY different for these reasons alone. Like, 100% different (and his Phantasm also feels very different on-stage). Try camping with him and come back to me, because it factually does not work in this game unless your opponent is also trying to camp you (and if they are, they're probably winning) or are simply completely and utter garbage at Smash in general. His dthrow can set up for usmash or dash attack at low percents but you can't just dthrow CG. Some of these changes matter for others as well (notably Samus can't auto-cancel missiles).

Fastfall speeds are almost meteoric on most chara0cters (from what I can tell, Jigglypuff's isn't, but that would just be wrong anyway).

Airdodges aren't worse (exactly), but different - they appear to have less endlag (buffer into each other faster), but don't do them falling into the ground. This makes juggling more interesting, because you can try it high up, and have to work for it, or stay lower to the ground and really bait out the airdodges, or have the guts to try to make them airdodge into the ground to set up for a smash attack.

Rolls LOOK better because people aren't as good at fighting on Smash 3DS yet - I saw one guy who modded his 3DS to have a Gamecube Controller attached and he was punishing rolls like they were worse than Melee. Time will tell if this holds for the Wii U. And even if rolls are better, that just means people will have to get better at punishing them (even Brawl Falco's spotdodge was punishable). Or is learning to punish dodges too hard for people to get better at?

Link me to a video of someone doing a DACUS - I have not seen one (even from the guy who had the Gamecube Controller attached). And last I checked, don't you like mobility ATs? RARing is awesome and DACUS is helpful for a variety of things. Or would you prefer we can't do fancy things to slide along the ground?

Rage KB modifier.

Tethers you can't SHAD tether because the tether retains the landing lag of the airdodge - you can SH tether but you can't airdodge someone's projectile then poke them without landing lag. However you can still use them as attacks.

Shields are less durable. One is at significantly more risk for a shield break from Marth's neutral B than ever before, and some other moves do very respectable (dangerous) shield damage.

Pivot Ftilt out of dashes is real (and it makes MK's ftilt great), and also vastly increases mobility options for many characters (tourist -> pivot ftilt anyone?).

As an avid Brawl player, it's just like a Brawl tournament. I've seen those matches. Clearly you never paid attention to competitive brawl.

What proof do you have that there's less landing lag across the board? If anything there is more considering moves that could be auto-cancelled in Brawl can't be here.

The neutral game is very similar to Brawl except with less short hop aerials on shield (again due to more landing lag) and much MUCH more rolling.

Anyway here's the match I'm guessing you are referring to:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlZNaU9fxDM

Let's see.

1. Tons of camping from both sides hoping the other player will over-commit first.
2. Hardly any combos beyond low percents.
3. Match takes 4 minutes roughly to complete on 2 stocks. Converted to 3 stocks this would be 6 mins. Which would be the same as a slower than average Brawl match.

You can watch other videos on that channel if you think I'm cherry-picking a campier than normal matchup. They were almost all like that.

I love how people that probably just followed the herd before this and bashed Brawl while understanding nothing about it are now suddenly praising Smash 4 because it's new and shiny which is essentially Brawl 1.5. In reality, if you love Smash 4, you probably would have liked Brawl as well if you gave it a chance.

Edit:

Keep in mind I'm not saying Smash 4 hasn't improved on some aspects. No tripping, potentially better balance etc. So it's fine to say you think it's better in some ways. But anyone that says it's a completely different game is delusional. It's more similar to its predecessor than any Smash game before it by far.

First I don't believe for a second you are "an avid Brawl player."

Most people gave getting bopped by MK a chance, decided they hated it, and moved on. I'm different, but that's neither here nor there.

Have you ever watched Zero or M2K laser camp someone? Because camping and looking for people to overcommit never happens in Melee.

Also see above about changes that are just off the top of my head that I can think of (ignoring things that are different but functionally the same, like the new version of directional influence I prefer to call distance influence, or DI for short).

Awesome game, awesome roster, I don't care much on the issue but the phrasing of the OP is just silly and implies that Melee always deserved it and the Melee community did it on its own, when that claim is very false. After all, how many fighting game people "knew" that Melee would "never" deserve a spot on the EVO stage because, c'mon people, it's not a "REAL" fighting game, right?

The Brawl players banded together to get Melee back when that whole Nintendo-Lawyer fiasco happened, I really doubt Melee players would've done the same for Brawl for one reason, they're part of the Melee community, not the Smash community, Smash4 has already proven itself, it has a balance between offensive and defensive playstyles, the ledgegame's interesting, gimping's stronger than ever...

Smash4 should be at EVO, and no, your precious Melee's not going to die, you won't let it, but some people will move on to Smash4, accept that as a fact and keep playing the game you like if you don't like Smash4, it looks better, it plays better, it has a better, more balanced roster (As lackluster as it is), it sounds better...

Why would you want a 3/10 (AT BEST) game at EVO?

 

[PandaPanda Senketsu]

It also has higher hitstun, less landing lag across the board, increased ground speed across the board, large differences in shield stun and in throw trajectories, no tripping, and new dash and pivot mechanics. Your focus is entirely on the obvious surface level things. Again, I want you to go watch the recent japanese tournaments and tell me with a straight face that it's anything at all like a Brawl tournament.

No no no no no.

You can't auto-cancel b-moves or chaingrab. Falco is COMPLETELY different for these reasons alone. Like, 100% different (and his Phantasm also feels very different on-stage). Try camping with him and come back to me, because it factually does not work in this game unless your opponent is also trying to camp you (and if they are, they're probably winning) or are simply completely and utter garbage at Smash in general. His dthrow can set up for usmash or dash attack at low percents but you can't just dthrow CG. Some of these changes matter for others as well (notably Samus can't auto-cancel missiles).

Fastfall speeds are almost meteoric on most chara0cters (from what I can tell, Jigglypuff's isn't, but that would just be wrong anyway).

Airdodges aren't worse (exactly), but different - they appear to have less endlag (buffer into each other faster), but don't do them falling into the ground. This makes juggling more interesting, because you can try it high up, and have to work for it, or stay lower to the ground and really bait out the airdodges, or have the guts to try to make them airdodge into the ground to set up for a smash attack.

Rolls LOOK better because people aren't as good at fighting on Smash 3DS yet - I saw one guy who modded his 3DS to have a Gamecube Controller attached and he was punishing rolls like they were worse than Melee. Time will tell if this holds for the Wii U. And even if rolls are better, that just means people will have to get better at punishing them (even Brawl Falco's spotdodge was punishable). Or is learning to punish dodges too hard for people to get better at?

Link me to a video of someone doing a DACUS - I have not seen one (even from the guy who had the Gamecube Controller attached). And last I checked, don't you like mobility ATs? RARing is awesome and DACUS is helpful for a variety of things. Or would you prefer we can't do fancy things to slide along the ground?

Rage KB modifier.

Tethers you can't SHAD tether because the tether retains the landing lag of the airdodge - you can SH tether but you can't airdodge someone's projectile then poke them without landing lag. However you can still use them as attacks.

Shields are less durable. One is at significantly more risk for a shield break from Marth's neutral B than ever before, and some other moves do very respectable (dangerous) shield damage.

Pivot Ftilt out of dashes is real (and it makes MK's ftilt great), and also vastly increases mobility options for many characters (tourist -> pivot ftilt anyone?).

The big reason why I like smash 4 so much is because it is a lot like brawl, because I liked brawl lol. But when I first played sm4sh I noticed right off the bat that it was brawl 2.0, out of all the smash games it feels the most like brawl. I go into every match with the same mentality that I did in brawl, and frankly it works for me.

 

[victra♥]

Nintendo is going to push for Smash 4 to be at Evo. Sadly I think the only two options that are possible is both Melee and Smash 4 or Smash 4 over Melee.

Which is a shame because they're both widely different games. I love them both but I think Melee is much more exciting to watch and would rather watch Melee over Smash 4.

 

[many37]

Most of the points that I thought in replying to you have been taken already but I will state this.

Money talks.

Its not about which games deserve to be in what event but about the profitability of said game that was included in the event. It is true that the fans play an important role on a game's profitability, which is why Smash 4 will most likely be included in next year's EVO (apart from the fact that Nintendo hosted EVO 2014 for Smash players).

Because of Smash 4's popularity and consumer base, the odds are that Smash 4 will be included at EVO 2015. Period.

Then again, why not have both??

 

[Zork]

First I don't believe for a second you are "an avid Brawl player."

Most people gave getting bopped by MK a chance, decided they hated it, and moved on. I'm different, but that's neither here nor there.

Have you ever watched Zero or M2K laser camp someone? Because camping and looking for people to overcommit never happens in Melee.

Also see above about changes that are just off the top of my head that I can think of (ignoring things that are different but functionally the same, like the new version of directional influence I prefer to call distance influence, or DI for short).

Awesome game, awesome roster, I don't care much on the issue but the phrasing of the OP is just silly and implies that Melee always deserved it and the Melee community did it on its own, when that claim is very false. After all, how many fighting game people "knew" that Melee would "never" deserve a spot on the EVO stage because, c'mon people, it's not a "REAL" fighting game, right?

What? What makes you think I didn't play Brawl competitively?

Nearly everything you said I already stated long before you did. I was the one that brought up less moves being able to be autocancelled and lack of SHDL for Fox/Falco in the first place. Also you probably can't IAP anymore with Falco which means side Bs can't be done in a way with very little endlag either which further hurts his camping and run away game. A common tactic by all Brawl Falco's including myself when I play him.

I'm well aware of how good MK is in Brawl. No that did not deter me from the game. I use most of the cast in the game and 2 of my best characters in singles (Diddy/Snake) do okay vs him relatively speaking. Or I'd just mirror match. Either way, I always found MK fun to face.

Also DI and vectoring are not the same thing. One influences your trajectory, the other influences the amount of pushback you take.

When people say the game is Brawl 2.0 they aren't saying NONE of the characters have any changes. just that the overall system and neutral game is very similar. Heck the example you gave of Falco was horrible because you didn't mention any new options he got, just old ones he lost. So he's basically a gimped version of Brawl Falco. And I already stated Smash 4 seems similar to Brawl but with less options at times.

That's like saying "Smash 5 Wario doesn't have his bike or waft? But otherwise the game has copypasted smash 4? Nah it's still a completely different game because a few characters lost key options".

Next time don't make so many assumptions. Or you can simply play me on Brawl's mediocre wifi (which I'm probably going to get back into soon) and decide for yourself if I'm an avid Brawl player or not.

 

[Arash]

Since the other thread is closed for replies I decided to post in this thread...

Firstly, "Smash 4 hasn't done anything to deserve EVO" is a horrible title. The game has been out for a month in Japan and a week elsewhere; if I recall Melee had a far worse tournament scene in January 2002 a month after its release, with practically no high level strategy or advanced technique discovered yet.

Secondly, the fact that all this tech and strategy has been discovered so far may indicate that Smash 4 has deep gameplay and is worthy of a tournament scene. (NOTE TO ALL MELEE SUPPORTERS, I DID NOT SAY SMASH 4 IS DEEPER THAN MELEE)

The fact that Melee "rebuilt its scene" is also irrelevant; EVO cares about the number of entrants only, and Melee only got to stay when EVO saw that there were 200+ entrants for its event. Brawl was only a laughingstock in 2008 EVO because the TO made a thread in the back room asking whether or not items should be on, and despite our arguments to the contrary they included items. CPU (the ROB who got 1st place) admitted publicly right after the event that had it not been for the Final Smash being enabled, Ken would have probably destroyed him.

By the time EVO rolls around, Smash 4 will have been out for 8 months on Wii U (the definitive version) and with all the current activity it is reasonable to expect high-level players making the finals.

 

[Zork]

It is definitely true that Evo gives new games a chance to shine regardless of if they've proved themselves or not. In fact a lot of the selection depends on sponsorship more than anything. Someone mentioned earlier how that's basically why Injustice gets in (Neathrealm is a sponsor).

So because Nintendo presumably will sponsor Evo like they did last year, Smash 4 is probably a shoe in regardless of what the community wants. Nintendo is a business, they exist to make money. They don't stand to gain anything if Melee is featured over Smash 4, they can't make money off that anymore.

Not to mention it would make their new game look horrible if their 14 year old game was chosen over it. A lot of casual viewers would automatically assume it meant Smash 4 was trash. Put yourself in Nintendo's shoes, you'd do the same no matter how much you loved Melee.

 

[Thor]

What? What makes you think I didn't play Brawl competitively?

Nearly everything you said I already stated long before you did. I was the one that brought up less moves being able to be autocancelled and lack of SHDL for Fox/Falco in the first place. Also you probably can't IAP anymore with Falco which means side Bs can't be done in a way with very little endlag either which further hurts his camping and run away game. A common tactic by all Brawl Falco's including myself when I play him.

I'm well aware of how good MK is in Brawl. No that did not deter me from the game. I use most of the cast in the game and 2 of my best characters in singles (Diddy/Snake) do okay vs him relatively speaking. Or I'd just mirror match. Either way, I always found MK fun to face.

Also DI and vectoring are not the same thing. One influences your trajectory, the other influences the amount of pushback you take.

When people say the game is Brawl 2.0 they aren't saying NONE of the characters have any changes. just that the overall system and neutral game is very similar. Heck the example you gave of Falco was horrible because you didn't mention any new options he got, just old ones he lost. So he's basically a gimped version of Brawl Falco. And I already stated Smash 4 seems similar to Brawl but with less options at times.

That's like saying "Smash 5 Wario doesn't have his bike or waft? But otherwise the game has copypasted smash 4? Nah it's still a completely different game because a few characters lost key options".

Next time don't make so many assumptions. Or you can simply play me on Brawl's mediocre wifi (which I'm probably going to get back into soon) and decide for yourself if I'm an avid Brawl player or not.

If I had a Wii right now, I'd play on Wi-Fi anyway just because I don't have many people to play with in the first place. But my Wii is not with me

I didn't think I'd have to mention options Falco gained, but his bair feels even better than before, his pivot ftilt is none too shabby, his jab finisher is usable, his recovery is significantly improved, his reflector's #3 strikes me as more useful than his standard (irrelevant if custom moves are banned), his usmash does more damage, hits, and (As I mentioned above), true combos out of dthrow (and it does more damage), his fair feels better and has less endlag, and his nair feels more useful as well. His fsmash seems stronger (and may be possible to use if you can set up airdodge traps). His dtilt also seems stronger, from what I've seen (it didn't KO below 150% in Brawl, but I've seen it KO at like 135% in the new one). Fire Bird is also much harder to gimp thanks to new ledge mechanics (you can use its maximum range much more easily).

You seem to be a lot more of a Brawl player than you first came across, since your post read vaguely like you were trying to make Smash 4 look bad by comparing it to Brawl. Frankly, I think the game is somewhat similar to Brawl as well, but I think it's different enough (pivot ftilt, different survival/combo defensive mechanics, though they DO have similar end results - you live a little longer and aren't combo fodder like in Smash 64, some movesets and global changes making most camping less effective and gimping safer but trickier for those who rely on ledge rolls, but still ledge sweetspots smaller, faster fastfalls, airdodges seeming to have less lag, making them better higher up, but landing low worse, no tripping/RCO lag/gliding) that it shouldn't just be called Brawl 2.0.

Perhaps more simply, [and why I posted at all] I try to problematize the label "Brawl 2.0" [despite liking Brawl, and I would be very satisfied with Brawl 2.0, which would be just the ledge i-frame changes, no tripping or RCO lag and a rebalanced cast] because I think it makes many people turn away from a game that is very good, simply because of the [unjustified] stigmas associated with Brawl. If Brawl were well-loved on SWF by the vast majority of people [and in general], I would simply let people call it "Brawl 2.0" all day long [though I feel the label is not completely accurate, as I've described above]. Or if people called it "Melee 2.0", I would zip my lips even if that was blatantly false, because people would actively support the game even fi they knew next to nothing about it [which is far preferable to people hating on a game they know nothing about]. But too many people hate on anything labeled "Brawl", and I feel that Brawl and Smash 4 are different enough that Smash 4 deserves to be known as "Smash 4", not "Brawl 2.0", if that makes sense.

On an unrelated note, I want to test phantasm some, because I think it MAY function like Mach Tornado - if so, IAP would of course still be lame, but phantasm reasonably high up might still result in almost no endlag - though I do not know this for sure of course.

The big reason why I like smash 4 so much is because it is a lot like brawl, because I liked brawl lol. But when I first played sm4sh I noticed right off the bat that it was brawl 2.0, out of all the smash games it feels the most like brawl. I go into every match with the same mentality that I did in brawl, and frankly it works for me.

See my second and third paragraphs above. As far as mindset... I go into every smash game with the same mindset - don't get hit. And remove their stocks before mine are all gone. Less facetiously, I think Melee and Smash 64 have different mindsets required from Brawl and Smash 4 primarily because recoveries are less terrible. Not being one bad hit away from death (in the first two playing Fox at 0%! though Little Mac is a notable exception) and being unable to efficiently abuse and wear down an opponent's shield in one go (as of now from what we know) probably most fundamentally affect your mindset, because they are (in my opinion) crucial factors in understanding how to approach, pressure, and kill someone that differ noticeably from game to game. Brawl and Smash 4 are similar in those facets, which is why I think a Brawl player mentality will still function well in Smash 4 [as you've stated yours does]. I'm not sure if I'm expressing this very well, but I think you will probably grasp what I'm trying to say.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

As an avid Brawl player, it's just like a Brawl tournament. I've seen those matches. Clearly you never paid attention to competitive brawl.

What proof do you have that there's less landing lag across the board? If anything there is more considering moves that could be auto-cancelled in Brawl can't be here.

The neutral game is very similar to Brawl except with less short hop aerials on shield (again due to more landing lag) and much MUCH more rolling.

Anyway here's the match I'm guessing you are referring to:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlZNaU9fxDM

Let's see.

1. Tons of camping from both sides hoping the other player will over-commit first.
2. Hardly any combos beyond low percents.
3. Match takes 4 minutes roughly to complete on 2 stocks. Converted to 3 stocks this would be 6 mins. Which would be the same as a slower than average Brawl match.

You can watch other videos on that channel if you think I'm cherry-picking a campier than normal matchup. They were almost all like that.

I love how people that probably just followed the herd before this and bashed Brawl while understanding nothing about it are now suddenly praising Smash 4 because it's new and shiny which is essentially Brawl 1.5. In reality, if you love Smash 4, you probably would have liked Brawl as well if you gave it a chance.

Edit:

Keep in mind I'm not saying Smash 4 hasn't improved on some aspects. No tripping, potentially better balance etc. So it's fine to say you think it's better in some ways. But anyone that says it's a completely different game is delusional. It's more similar to its predecessor than any Smash game before it by far.

You're referencing Duck Hunt Dog vs Rosalina and Luma. One characters who most of his kit is ranged projectiles and the other is a puppet character who can send her puppet to long distances. This is the definition of a cherry pick vs referring any match with Lil'Mac or Sheik.

The average smash 4 match for 2 stocks is 3 minutes and the average for 3 stock is around 4 minutes. This is taken straight from tournament data that has been recorded.

 

[Zork]

If I had a Wii right now, I'd play on Wi-Fi anyway just because I don't have many people to play with in the first place. But my Wii is not with me

I didn't think I'd have to mention options Falco gained, but his bair feels even better than before, his pivot ftilt is none too shabby, his jab finisher is usable, his recovery is significantly improved, his reflector's #3 strikes me as more useful than his standard (irrelevant if custom moves are banned), his usmash does more damage, hits, and (As I mentioned above), true combos out of dthrow (and it does more damage), his fair feels better and has less endlag, and his nair feels more useful as well. His fsmash seems stronger (and may be possible to use if you can set up airdodge traps). His dtilt also seems stronger, from what I've seen (it didn't KO below 150% in Brawl, but I've seen it KO at like 135% in the new one). Fire Bird is also much harder to gimp thanks to new ledge mechanics (you can use its maximum range much more easily).

You seem to be a lot more of a Brawl player than you first came across, since your post read vaguely like you were trying to make Smash 4 look bad by comparing it to Brawl. Frankly, I think the game is somewhat similar to Brawl as well, but I think it's different enough (pivot ftilt, different survival/combo defensive mechanics, though they DO have similar end results - you live a little longer and aren't combo fodder like in Smash 64, some movesets and global changes making most camping less effective and gimping safer but trickier for those who rely on ledge rolls, but still ledge sweetspots smaller, faster fastfalls, airdodges seeming to have less lag, making them better higher up, but landing low worse, no tripping/RCO lag/gliding) that it shouldn't just be called Brawl 2.0.

Perhaps more simply, [and why I posted at all] I try to problematize the label "Brawl 2.0" [despite liking Brawl, and I would be very satisfied with Brawl 2.0, which would be just the ledge i-frame changes, no tripping or RCO lag and a rebalanced cast] because I think it makes many people turn away from a game that is very good, simply because of the [unjustified] stigmas associated with Brawl. If Brawl were well-loved on SWF by the vast majority of people [and in general], I would simply let people call it "Brawl 2.0" all day long [though I feel the label is not completely accurate, as I've described above]. Or if people called it "Melee 2.0", I would zip my lips even if that was blatantly false, because people would actively support the game even fi they knew next to nothing about it [which is far preferable to people hating on a game they know nothing about]. But too many people hate on anything labeled "Brawl", and I feel that Brawl and Smash 4 are different enough that Smash 4 deserves to be known as "Smash 4", not "Brawl 2.0", if that makes sense.

On an unrelated note, I want to test phantasm some, because I think it MAY function like Mach Tornado - if so, IAP would of course still be lame, but phantasm reasonably high up might still result in almost no endlag - though I do not know this for sure of course.



See my second and third paragraphs above. As far as mindset... I go into every smash game with the same mindset - don't get hit. And remove their stocks before mine are all gone. Less facetiously, I think Melee and Smash 64 have different mindsets required from Brawl and Smash 4 primarily because recoveries are less terrible. Not being one bad hit away from death (in the first two playing Fox at 0%! though Little Mac is a notable exception) and being unable to efficiently abuse and wear down an opponent's shield in one go (as of now from what we know) probably most fundamentally affect your mindset, because they are (in my opinion) crucial factors in understanding how to approach, pressure, and kill someone that differ noticeably from game to game. Brawl and Smash 4 are similar in those facets, which is why I think a Brawl player mentality will still function well in Smash 4 [as you've stated yours does]. I'm not sure if I'm expressing this very well, but I think you will probably grasp what I'm trying to say.

Fair enough. I get saying it's Brawl 2.0 has a negative connotation but I've never intended this in a negative way considering how much I like Brawl. Let me know if you get access to your Wii, I'm always looking for new players to play.

Also, admittedly the actual game speed does seem potentially slightly faster than Brawl but larger boundaries, better recoveries and vectoring counteract this.

You're referencing Duck Hunt Dog vs Rosalina and Luma. One characters who most of his kit is ranged projectiles and the other is a puppet character who can send her puppet to long distances. This is the definition of a cherry pick vs referring any match with Lil'Mac or Sheik.

The average smash 4 match for 2 stocks is 3 minutes and the average for 3 stock is around 4 minutes. This is taken straight from tournament data that has been recorded.

I was basing it off other matches on that channel, not only that one. And another series of matches I've seen from another Japanese tournament.

Keep in mind Little Mac is quite unique in Smash 4. He can not only kill very early but also be killed very early himself. He's the textbook definition of a glass cannon. So yes, naturally matches involving him go faster than normal. This doesn't accurately represent how the game is played in general. And right now Little Mac seems one of the most popular characters in tournament style play so I do think he's skewing the data.

Take this as you will but earlier today on stream Zero said all the best Smash 4 characters play "lame". Lame in this case of course meaning defensive not bad.

 

[SmashBro99]

Melee at evo again? It's so fun to watch! I can't wait!

jk it's boring af.

I love how one reason people are against Smash 4 is "the games are too long, takes too long to kill" etc. Imo that makes it more fun to watch, people knocking off their enemy at 30% and edgeguarding isn't fun to watch, it's crap. It's not even a fight. nty.

Smash4 is campy? That's funny I've been bodying people with Mario and DK, rofl.

Watching Melee:

Melee is "deserving"? It's just a broken game, lol.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

I was basing it off other matches on that channel, not only that one.

Keep in mind Little Mac is quite unique in Smash 4. He can not only kill very early but also be killed very early himself. He's the textbook definition of a glass cannon. So yes, naturally matches involving him go faster than normal. This doesn't accurately represent how the game is played in general.

Take this as you will but earlier today on stream Zero said all the best Smash 4 characters play "lame". Lame in this case of course meaning defensive not bad.

What I am saying is that you referenced two characters whose playstyle is about that and tried to point it out to the whole game is like that when it really isn't.

 

[Zork]

Whether or not the whole game will be about that I guess depends on tiers. If the top 5 or so characters in the game do end up heavily favouring defensive play and these characters are much better than everyone else then it might be.

All I'm saying is right now based off various footage I've seen, defensive play is favoured. The only really fast matches I've seen so far (that were also competitive with a sense of back and forth, not just blowouts) involved Little Mac. That's 1 character out of 51.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Whether or not the whole game will be about that I guess depends on tiers. If the top 5 or so characters in the game do end up heavily favouring defensive play and these characters are much better than everyone else then it might be.

All I'm saying is right now based off various footage I've seen, defensive play is favoured. The only really fast matches I've seen so far (that were also competitive with a sense of back and forth, not just blowouts) involved Little Mac. That's 1 character out of 51.

Tiers won't define in stone how the game is played out, the overall game will.

I only take issue with you on this front because you are cherry pick situations and characters to meet your conclusion rather than overall evidence which points to it being far more character specific than any of the other smash games.

 

[Zork]

Tiers won't define in stone how the game is played out, the overall game will.

I only take issue with you on this front because you are cherry pick situations and characters to meet your conclusion rather than overall evidence which points to it being far more character specific than any of the other smash games.

Here's the channel where I got that match from:

http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCirM-BzC-yB9LOWcU_ohVhg

This channel has 5 minute matches. On two stocks. If I was just cherrypicking don't you think I would have picked those instead? I picked that match because it was Grand Finals, no other reason.

If you look at that channel overall, the average time does seem to be 4 mins on two stocks for this particular tournament.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Here's the channel where I got that match from:

http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCirM-BzC-yB9LOWcU_ohVhg

This channel has 5 minute matches. On two stocks. If I was just cherrypicking don't you think I would have picked those instead? I picked that match because it was Grand Finals, no other reason.

If you look at that channel overall, the average time does seem to be 4 mins on two stocks for this particular tournament.

Data being gathered in the US is averaged to be around 3 minutes for two stocks, I cannot speak for Japan or other areas.

What I would like is an overall general view rather than just one match with two characters whose playstyles just happened to fit the definination.

 

[Zork]

Data being gathered in the US is averaged to be around 3 minutes for two stocks, I cannot speak for Japan or other areas.

What I would like is an overall general view rather than just one match with two characters whose playstyles just happened to fit the definination.

Yes I do think Japan is leaning towards a more defensive meta than NA. But again I feel this has a lot to do with every other NA player having Little Mac as a main or secondary.

Anyway right now even from US tournies this is the vibe I'm getting when Little Mac is excluded on 3 stocks:

Competitive match but with a decisive winner (last stock each but one at kill percent other at low percents). Average 4-4:30 mins.
Competitive match that goes to last hit. Average 5-6:30 mins.

This is inline with Brawl average times. Again do I personally think this is a bad thing? Not at all, I love Brawl and actually think there is some merit in longer sets. But will TOs share the same opinion? Probably not. Brawl was notorious for getting TOs to complain about it taking to long to finish and delaying tournaments. Of course to be fair this is a problem with Smash in general.