Phyvo
Smash Journeyman
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2007
- Messages
- 289
Not so long ago, people dreamed of simply being able to dash dance in Brawl.
Now Bowser is getting 1% damage reduction on every move and specific moves are being buffed and people's brains are exploding with the possibilities of specific character balance.
This... troubles me.
I have seen what it means for hordes of players to cry over nerfs or scream for buffs, whether deserved or not, to the point that it is actually impossible to tell what the blazes is going on and what course of action should really be taken. Even with a PC game getting ongoing patches from the company, it often takes a long time, years even, after the game's release for anything resembling balance to appear.
Thus, the "balance" that people playing Brawl+ will want might be YEARS away (especially considering the number of matchups), and when anyone disagrees with the balance they can simply leave it out of their codeset, hurting the unity of the project. Because of the nature of balance, people will inevitably disagree, and because of the size of the task at hand, people will disagree for more or less forever.
Moreover, tiers and unbalance are normal for fighting games, *especially* those with large rosters. Has this prevented their success in any way? Melee certainly was not balanced. Yet, somehow, it kept the attention of many for almost eight years. This staying power, then, must have come from the depth of its fun mechanics, including the infamous wavedash.
So what does all this add up to? Why do I find it troubling?
Because everyone is focusing on these character specific balance changes, and while so far things don't seem too bad, I think it could possibly impede the adoption of a standard and the expansion of the community as a whole. And while yes, balance is important, we already know from Melee that it's not *that* important compared to solid mechanics leading to a deep metagame. Even in Brawl it took half a year before metaknight started getting *really* controversial, and here we are releasing balance changes every week with relatively little discussion beforehand. And the more balance changes there are, the more arbitrary they become, the more room for disagreement that there is, and the more crying about buffs and nerfs. Remember, people will be putting down cash for Brawl+ tournaments, how do you think they will feel when you nerf the character? Or not buff it?
______________________________
The bottom line: (for the TLDR people)
The line of what balance changes should and shouldn't be in Brawl+ simply doesn't exist right now, but it needs to exist. The longer we go without one the harder it will be to establish one later. Some of the changes that people are talking about right now might be over this line (I personally am not a fan of Bowser's damage reduction, it feels very un-smash-y). Moreover, whatever line you want to establish, some characters are going to suck relative to others.
I dunno. Tell me what you think, I don't know how right I am but I feel that this warrants discussion and no one is discussing it.
Now Bowser is getting 1% damage reduction on every move and specific moves are being buffed and people's brains are exploding with the possibilities of specific character balance.
This... troubles me.
I have seen what it means for hordes of players to cry over nerfs or scream for buffs, whether deserved or not, to the point that it is actually impossible to tell what the blazes is going on and what course of action should really be taken. Even with a PC game getting ongoing patches from the company, it often takes a long time, years even, after the game's release for anything resembling balance to appear.
Thus, the "balance" that people playing Brawl+ will want might be YEARS away (especially considering the number of matchups), and when anyone disagrees with the balance they can simply leave it out of their codeset, hurting the unity of the project. Because of the nature of balance, people will inevitably disagree, and because of the size of the task at hand, people will disagree for more or less forever.
Moreover, tiers and unbalance are normal for fighting games, *especially* those with large rosters. Has this prevented their success in any way? Melee certainly was not balanced. Yet, somehow, it kept the attention of many for almost eight years. This staying power, then, must have come from the depth of its fun mechanics, including the infamous wavedash.
So what does all this add up to? Why do I find it troubling?
Because everyone is focusing on these character specific balance changes, and while so far things don't seem too bad, I think it could possibly impede the adoption of a standard and the expansion of the community as a whole. And while yes, balance is important, we already know from Melee that it's not *that* important compared to solid mechanics leading to a deep metagame. Even in Brawl it took half a year before metaknight started getting *really* controversial, and here we are releasing balance changes every week with relatively little discussion beforehand. And the more balance changes there are, the more arbitrary they become, the more room for disagreement that there is, and the more crying about buffs and nerfs. Remember, people will be putting down cash for Brawl+ tournaments, how do you think they will feel when you nerf the character? Or not buff it?
______________________________
The bottom line: (for the TLDR people)
The line of what balance changes should and shouldn't be in Brawl+ simply doesn't exist right now, but it needs to exist. The longer we go without one the harder it will be to establish one later. Some of the changes that people are talking about right now might be over this line (I personally am not a fan of Bowser's damage reduction, it feels very un-smash-y). Moreover, whatever line you want to establish, some characters are going to suck relative to others.
I dunno. Tell me what you think, I don't know how right I am but I feel that this warrants discussion and no one is discussing it.
