Social Social Thread - Talk About Anything (You Are Allowed to Talk About)!

[bloodpeach]

even if you accept that z-cancelling is the sole source of technical difficulty in this game (it's not) and that without it every single combo would be 100% guarunteed and impossible to drop (they wouldn't), I don't see what could possibly make the situation unfair.

brawl isn't intrinsically unfair because of the removed tech.
64 isn't unfair due to the lack of wave dashing or other melee tech.
chess isn't less fair than chess-boxing.
they're just different games, and you need different tactics to succeed.

come to think of it you also label star king's analogy as unfair, despite it being literally the exact same situation with a different tech barrier.
I wonder if your definition of unfair is just "different than what I'm used to".
I wonder if that's related to being a samus main.

 

[asianaussie]

hey guys, stop bullying the samus main

we have to cherish and protect this dying species

 

[The Star King]

i don't think it's fair to compare four complex movements to one simple tap of a button but i get what you guys mean

but do ya'll at least understand that if you're doing any number of ff aerial combos on platforms, it's not fair to be able to do them perfectly without risking a dropped combo, and thereby eliminating the punish?

how is it not fair?

edit: herp derp didn't notice new page

 

[Cobrevolution]

i'm not saying that every combo would be a 100% guaranteed impossible to drop killdeath monster combo or anything, but that the most basic mistake you can make is missing a z cancel - and if you take away the possibility of that mistake happening, you take away the punish, and as a result, a large part of the punish game.

which, to me, is unfair to both players. the attacking player doesn't have to worry about missing a zcancel and the opponent is unable to punish because there's no chance of his opponent messing up that particular technique.

if i were to equate it to basketball, i would say it's like dribbling - you have to dribble to move up the court and continue the game and get things moving and rolling. there are people who have good handles and bad handles, and players who can react to certain players' dribbles and get steals.

if you remove dribbling and you can just clutch the ball like a football and run up the court, then there's no possibility for the steal off a bad dribble. which is unfair - the guy with the ball can't get it stolen and the guy looking to steal can't capitalize off his opponent's mistake.

i'm just waiting for someone to respond to my idea that if you take away the possibility of a player making mistake and thereby take away the opportunity for the opponent to capitalize on the mistake and punish it, you weaken the game.

i feel like i'm repeating myself

because nobody is addressing this

 

[asianaussie]

assuming equal skill, it's more satisfying to actually win properly, rather than from your opponent not being as fluid/sweaty hand slip/not as used to tournament pressure

i mean sure, the reaction timing and ability to capitalise are skills too, but wouldnt you rather win after a good read instead of watching them flub their twenty-third d-air in the spacing game?

not a true rebuttal, just something i stand by

 

[bloodpeach]

Your idea of fairness makes no sense at all. Is football unfair because there's no dribbling analog? There'd be more fumbles and punishes. Would that make the game more fair? If the Z-cancling window was cut from 20 frames to 6 frames, like in melee, would that make the game more fair?

I really do think this bizzare idea of fairness is linked to the hard life of the samus main. maybe i'll flesh out my ideas later.


your other argument is super subjective so you cant really refute it. Obviously we all like some amount of technical difficulty otherwise we'd all be playing chess. And we don't want too much or we'd all be playing melee. Different people want a different level.

For me at least though, reacting to and punishing a bad decision is a lot more interesting than a missed button press. and Z cancelling really obscures the game from new players; if you don't know about it youre not even playing the game. kinda lame.

I'm gonna go back to posting stupid stuff in unreadable colors now.

 

[Sangoku]

I love z cancel because I can pwn my noob friends harder.

 

[B Link]

I played some matches with LD using the auto z-cancel code. It was similar in terms of enjoyability. I would say I prefer the (slightly) increased skill factor that results from having to press z, for some of the reasons cobr mentioned.

 

[Shaya]

Arbitrary tech skill is really engaging and creates metric chasms of depth.
When you remove arbitrary barriers you are able to see a game's true depth a lot easier. Punishing failed Z cancels may be a big part of the game to most people, but where does the game go without that? More precision of placement and positioning is required to deal with solid strategies/shield pressure; you can't just rely on someone messing up as a means to beat them.

I guess, at the very least, it gives commentators something to talk about in what is usually a too fast a paced game to really be going by the play by play.

 

[KeroKeroppi]

Thinking about studying abroad in Australia sometime next year.

 

[rpotts]

lolstralia

 

[Shaya]

Being Australian is basically a free ticket to being apart of the Smashboards Yakuza.

aa-samaaaaaa forgive me for I hath revealed your pride and joy's existence.

 

[#HBC | ѕoup]

imo i never learned the ~exact~ timing for z-canceling at first so i kinda just have a muscle memory problem where im mashing r at times even when a situation doesn't call for a cancel and it's annoying and causes me to **** up a lot and while i get the whole 'barrier of skill' without having auto z-cancel im pretty sure the true barrier of skill would be utilizing z-cancels instead of just learning it

but im alright if that doesn't change, because it is also is a good initiative to learn the game instead of being given a code compared to the people who have had to learn how to properly z-cancel (myself included).

also nobody cancels perfectly so don't get upset if you're missing them because it happens, even to the top top players (i seen isai screw one up on occasion)

 

[Herbert Von Karajan]

I remember this argument in the skype chat in the days of fireblaster (RIP). I'll share the conculsions to save time:

Any reduction in tech requirements dilutes the game, but any increase is just plain stupid. In fact, Smash 64 is perfect and no changes could possibly improve the game. Unless the changes make Samus better.

AKA play the Japanese version.

 

[ballin4life]

I love z cancel because I can pwn my noob friends harder.

I think a lot of people that are pro z canceling really think this deep down. They enjoy being automatically better than someone else just because they practiced a dumb bit of tech skill. Even though it also leads to all your noob friends quitting the game because they can't even move like you do.

And again, it doesn't add any depth to the game because (barring a few weird edge cases like jiggs dair) you ALWAYS want to z cancel. Tech skill that actually increases depth (like wavedashing in melee, or building units fast in an RTS) might be fine, but Z canceling is just completely pointless because there is no strategic decision. You just ALWAYS do it. It's like having to hit ABAR to do an attack instead of hitting just A - which would increase the technical skill required to do an attack, but is just plain dumb and doesn't add anything to the game itself.

For even more in depth discussion of this here's an article about making the controls easier in Street Fighter 2 (scroll down to the part about "Easier Controls":
http://www.sirlin.net/articles/street-fighter-hd-remix-design-overview.html

 

[Sangoku]

I admire your courage to argue this for the 12th time. My comment was humoristic by the way, I'm not taking part of the argument.

 

[Herbert Von Karajan]

z canceling isnt that important anyways, just use kirby

 

[Cobrevolution]

i mean sure, the reaction timing and ability to capitalise are skills too, but wouldnt you rather win after a good read instead of watching them flub their twenty-third d-air in the spacing game?

if my play affected them in such a way to make them flub their twenty third dair, i think that's just as satisfying. getting someone's nerves worked is an accomplishment for me.

Your idea of fairness makes no sense at all. Is football unfair because there's no dribbling analog? There'd be more fumbles and punishes. Would that make the game more fair? If the Z-cancling window was cut from 20 frames to 6 frames, like in melee, would that make the game more fair?

for football, what if there were no dead ball rule or whatever it's called, wherein if a pass lands on the ground that's the end of the play? the qb could just lob it in the vicinity of a receiver and let him pick it up off the ground as he pleases. but we'd still keep the pass interference rule in that you can't hit the opponent or anything.

fact of the matter is, it does exist and is a necessary mechanic to playing. and i think having the potential for input mistakes is a good thing in a game.

It's like having to hit ABAR to do an attack instead of hitting just A - which would increase the technical skill required to do an attack, but is just plain dumb and doesn't add anything to the game itself.

i'd contend that z canceling adds something to the game - canceling all lag on aerials

 

[rjgbadger]

originally as a post for the online rankings v3 thread. I didn't want to derail any potential quality discussion by posting negatively against it.


It isn't just worrying about where you are and being embarrassed or something at low tier placement. There are a variety of reasons one would not want to be included in this list (note: these are some reasons one would not want to be included, and do not represent fully my personal reasoning to be dis included. Some of them may not be the best excuses, but that is beside the point.)

• Its 100% subjective and is based off individuals playing eachother on kaillera in matches, and speculating how well they do/would do versus others, in which neither player can even know how hard the other is playing. Not everyone in server is a 'play to win every single match no matter what' mode. Only a select few are, really.

• There are personal biases, that will still remain prevalent in the list, even with the intent to avoid said biases. Hence why Nova does not want to be included, many people talk poorly of him and will rate him as worse than he is based on this. Character/player styles also comes into play here for other bias. Example: Player A may beat B, C and D, but lose to E, when player E loses to B, C, and D, only able to beat player A. Its difficult to judge who is the better player with results like this.

• There is not a wide enough sample size of recent online tournaments to justify using them to rank players. If we use the online brackets, Killer is the best player in NA online, when we know that is not exactly the case(no shots on him, he's just the best player that happens to enter+win most/all online tourneys).

• Certain players are not fond of the community as a whole, in most cases the online community in particular, and would prefer not to be included in the discussion. For others, they may not even care about their personal skill level and instead care more about getting funny/cool combos or situations and maximizing the level of personal enjoyment.

 

[KoRoBeNiKi]

@ KoRoBeNiKi I don't have the pretension to say I know the openings; I'm just saying it's the only time I know what to do, not what to do right. If you're willing to give me tips, I'll definitely hit you up

Yeah, that is what I guessed

As I said, if you wish to play, challenge me. A few others I know have done the same. I'll give feedback or something.

 

[M!nt]

I love z cancel because I can pwn my noob friends harder.

I have to be honest, this is probably why I like Z-canceling ; __ ;

It sets like a skill barrier that I like games to have and it feels really satisfying to finally get the hang of it and pull off stuff that wasn't nearly possible before. I feel really snobbish to say that tho.

• Its 100% subjective and is based off individuals playing eachother on kaillera in matches, and speculating how well they do/would do versus others, in which neither player can even know how hard the other is playing. Not everyone in server is a 'play to win every single match no matter what' mode. Only a select few are, really.

That's the point though. Even when people are playing around and not trying 100%, you can still kinda see how good they are. Maybe not completely, but you still get a feel for how good they are at the game. Plus even if someone is playing someone that's not trying their best they are still getting an opinion on how they think that player is, so whats wrong with saying it? If anything that should show that person that they should go play them and prove them wrong.

• There are personal biases, that will still remain prevalent in the list, even with the intent to avoid said biases. Hence why Nova does not want to be included, many people talk poorly of him and will rate him as worse than he is based on this. Character/player styles also comes into play here for other bias. Example: Player A may beat B, C and D, but lose to E, when player E loses to B, C, and D, only able to beat player A. Its difficult to judge who is the better player with results like this.

Unless you have it bad with like everyone in the entire community, I think overall if there's enough people participating in the list making, they will get accurately represented. and then if not, so what if someone puts you lower than you think you are. Maybe play someone who put you there and record or go under a alias and do it, but don't just completely hide yourself from being mentioned.

• There is not a wide enough sample size of recent online tournaments to justify using them to rank players. If we use the online brackets, Killer is the best player in NA online, when we know that is not exactly the case(no shots on him, he's just the best player that happens to enter+win most/all online tourneys).

I agree with that though, it sucks noone plays their games

• Certain players are not fond of the community as a whole, in most cases the online community in particular, and would prefer not to be included in the discussion. For others, they may not even care about their personal skill level and instead care more about getting funny/cool combos or situations and maximizing the level of personal enjoyment.

If they don't like the community, then why would they care about what we think? Shouldn't they just ignore it and just keep doing their own thing? Also they wouldn't be here in the first place most likely. If someone only cares about cool/funny combos then why would they care AT ALL about where they place on an online COMPETITIVE tier list?

 

[asianaussie]

very rarely will your opponent actually be the reason you miss a z-cancel

 

[clubbadubba]

cobr its very interesting that i've never heard you complain about the auto-air canceling in 64.

What's air cancelling you say? Its that mechanic where if you press Z 20 frames or less before the end of the aerial you avoid the pesky air lag. You know, how after every midair aerial completes you then have an additional 15 frames where you can't control your character? Luckily they made air cancelling automatic so none of us have ever experienced this air lag. Though damn if that existed my noob friends would be even slower, so I would look much faster in comparison!

This hypothetical air cancelling mechanic above is the EXACT SAME as z-cancelling, with the only difference being z-cancelling is before you land, whereas air cancelling is before the end of a move in midair. You must think that either the hypothetical air cancelling above is a good mechanic and its a tragedy it isn't in the game, or z-cancelling is a bad mechanic and its a tragedy its in the game. I'm curious which one you think.


To reply to some previous points:

"Why not make teching automatic?"- There are 3 different directions to tech, and at the time you must make a choice as to which one you do. With z-cancelling there is no such choice (with the one exception of puff, which would be better if only puff had to zcancel and it had the opposite effect). However, I do think it would be better if no input resulted in standing tech, right resulted in roll right, left resulted in roll left (no z needed for these 2), and z resulted in no tech (which is sometimes good).

"If you add rules that change the game the game is no longer fair"- Every game that does not explicitly give an advantage to one team over another is fair. Your football rule changes are fair, provided both teams can take advantage of the rule. Auto-z cancelling is fair, provided both players get auto z-cancelling. I think maybe there is a different word you're looking for.

 

[Sedda]

sigh cobr the samus main

 

[Cobrevolution]

if you can find another word for it instead of fair, i'd like to hear it. it's sorta like the foul rule in basketball wherein if you hit a shooter's arm after the shot (ie, the ball is in the air, out of your hands, and there is literally nothing you can do to alter its trajectory), it's a foul. the shot was not changed in any way, and yet both teams can be called for it and you can receive free throws. there's a difference between hitting them and not letting them land and going up for a block and clipping their wrist after the followthrough, and yet both are punished the same by both parties. that's not fair, in my mind, to be called for something like that, even if it doesn't give an advantage to anyone in particular.

You must think that either the hypothetical air cancelling above is a good mechanic and its a tragedy it isn't in the game,

a tragedy? no. but if it were to function the same as z canceling, i'd have no problem with it being in the game. it would certainly add another level of input and increase the possibility of error in exactly the same way as z canceling already does, so whatever. but this is not analogous to having to press L and R and c up to achieve the same result.

but that doesn't exist. and z canceling does. and how many people actually john about it in the sense of "if there were no z canceling, i wouldn't miss z cancels, and i would have won that game?"

nobody. why? cuz it's easy and you made a mistake and lost for it. you probably shielded instead of grabbing earlier in the match and lost a stock for that, too.

neither of us are going to change the other's opinion, so i'll just stop talking about it.

 

[M!nt]

how many people actually john about it in the sense of "if there were no z canceling, i wouldn't miss z cancels, and i would have won that game?"

I'm definitely going to start using that now.

 

[Herbert Von Karajan]

fair? i'd rather bair. bair is better than fair for like every non-ness character

 

[asianaussie]

how many people actually john about it in the sense of "if there were no z canceling, i wouldn't miss z cancels, and i would have won that game?"

fyi guys this is not to be confused for an actual argument for z-cancelling

 

[Battlecow]

I like how we all agreed that having this argument again was a bad idea, and then we went ahead and had it anyways

z canceling is dum

 

[mixa]

I like how we all agreed that having this argument again was a bad idea, and then we went ahead and had it anyways

HAHAH

 

[NovaSmash]

Why are people arguing about something in the game that you can't change?

 

[M!nt]

You can change it with a gameshark code though

 

[KeroKeroppi]

lol i use the auto z cancel cheat when i play on emulator

 

[Cobrevolution]

fyi guys this is not to be confused for an actual argument for z-cancelling

fact: people lose games and stocks because of missed z cancels all the time, which can be blamed on bad timing, a slow reflex, hitlag throwing off muscle memory, unexpectedly hitting the opponent to induce the opportunity for z canceling, shaky hands from nerves from being up/down/vs a good player/at a certain spot in bracket/on stage/etcetc

fact: removing z canceling from 64 would change the percent of combos dropped because of a missed z cancel to 0, but keep all of the other chances the same.

fact: z canceling is not hard to learn, but may deter newer players from picking up the game, because it's an additional technical barrier that they have to overcome before competing.

opinion: pressing a button to remove lag is an arbitrary tech skill requirement that adds no depth to the game.

opinion: pressing a button to remove lag exists and adds potential punishment due to human error.

random facts about other games that have simple one button mechanics:
1. in crash team racing, you must press L2 or R2 to continue power boosting around the track; without this, you will never be a fast racer. its exclusion would lead to consistent boosts upon reaching redline; therefore, no player would be punished for missing a boost, and there would be no position changes as a result of it.
2. in gears, you must press RB in a certain shaded area to reload and get the active, which increases power and accuracy. a normal reload (slower reflex, mistiming) leads to regular reload. a jammed reload (being outside of the shaded/marked area) leads to your character struggling to fix it for a few seconds, leaving you vulnerable to enemy fire and unable to shoot until it is rectified. without this button press, the enemy would have constant active reloads or normal reloads and never be vulnerable.
3. in tenchu 3, when falling off roofs or descending to the ground, you had to hit circle to make your character land on his toes and be quiet. if you didn't do this, the enemy would hear you and turn around, set off an alert, and you'd be engaged in a fight. without this simple button press, the enemy would never hear you as you land, and you would be able to run around as you wish without risking an alert (outside of being seen).

last post defending my stance. ya'll can call me a stubborn samus main all you want now

 

[Sedda]

I think nobody johns about it because you can't take it out of the game (unless you're cheating).

z cancelling doesn't add any real (read bellow) depth to the game. It's just artificial difficulty, and it's part of what keeps new players from learning what 64 is all about: Falcon up airs

jk, but it's just one step you have to take before getting into the mindgames and spacing part of competitive smash, so it'ss pretty lame.

To respond to @ Cobrevolution directly: It is a FACT that Z cancelling DOES add SOME kind of depth to the game. It's also a FACT that it does it just for the sake of the technique itself. Z cancelling doesn't mess with your spacing, or your baiting abilities, or your DI. It just opens up two possibilities, both of which exist under the umbrella of Z cancelling alone: you time it well, or you don't. Punishing a missed Z cancel is a legit strategy obviously, but you can't "bait" your opponent to miss a Z cancel. You just kinda miss it and get punished for it. There's no decision making that goes into Z cancelling. You know if it's a good idea to full jump or short hop. You can decide on whether you should tech left or right. If teching left was always a better option because of lame invincibility frames or something, then teching would be a terrible mechanic too.

 

[Herbert Von Karajan]

opinion: pressing a button to remove lag is an arbitrary tech skill requirement that adds no depth to the game.

It actually does add depth: A person can to a edge cancel without doing a Z-Cancel.

(1) Probably means the non-z cancel hitboxes for stuff like kirby air attacks still come out
(2) Shiny green stuff comes out for things like link's dair

(1) alone adds depth.

Just the fact that some moves have less hitboxes when they are z canceled adds depth.

So your opinion is wrong.

 

[mixa]

but you can't "bait" your opponent to miss a Z cancel.

I've been thinking that if you hax DI right at the end of Fox's drill, they'll most likely miss the Z-cancel (for non top players, I guess)

 

[Mr Bushido]

Great now I'll only get z-cancel results when I search my name

 

[The Star King]

I've been thinking that if you hax DI right at the end of Fox's drill, they'll most likely miss the Z-cancel (for non top players, I guess)

It's a 20 frame window. So losing that few frames of hitlag would only apply if they normally press Z very early in that window. And, in my opinion, the trial and error nature of the development of automatic, thoughtless habit (such as z-canceling) will lead to most experienced players pressing it later into the window (that is, they will subconsciously tend to this timing because it will lead to a successful z-cancel more consistently, accounting for all situations). It might work vs less skilled players though, especially if they play a lot vs other less skilled players who don't really DI.

 

[clubbadubba]

Why are people arguing about something in the game that you can't change?

you must be new here lol

on the real there are like 3 things to discuss on here: anime, mods, and zcancelling. I'll take door #3. And I guess I'm the only one here who loves z-cancelling discussions lol. Well I was sleeping/at work for it so I'm not ****ing done yet!

if you can find another word for it instead of fair, i'd like to hear it. it's sorta like the foul rule in basketball wherein if you hit a shooter's arm after the shot (ie, the ball is in the air, out of your hands, and there is literally nothing you can do to alter its trajectory), it's a foul. the shot was not changed in any way, and yet both teams can be called for it and you can receive free throws. there's a difference between hitting them and not letting them land and going up for a block and clipping their wrist after the followthrough, and yet both are punished the same by both parties. that's not fair, in my mind, to be called for something like that, even if it doesn't give an advantage to anyone in particular.


a tragedy? no. but if it were to function the same as z canceling, i'd have no problem with it being in the game. it would certainly add another level of input and increase the possibility of error in exactly the same way as z canceling already does, so whatever. but this is not analogous to having to press L and R and c up to achieve the same result.

but that doesn't exist. and z canceling does. and how many people actually john about it in the sense of "if there were no z canceling, i wouldn't miss z cancels, and i would have won that game?"

nobody. why? cuz it's easy and you made a mistake and lost for it. you probably shielded instead of grabbing earlier in the match and lost a stock for that, too.

neither of us are going to change the other's opinion, so i'll just stop talking about it.

If there is an ounce of logic in your bones I will change your opinion!

The word you're looking for is "cobr-doesn't-like-the-game-this-way". Fair implies one opponent has a greater than 50% chance to win against an evenly matched foe. Home court advantage is an example of unfairness. Foul rules are not.

BASKETBALL RELATED SIDENOTE: There is great reason that is a foul. It does affect the shot if a shooter thinks he is about to get hit. If it were legal, defenders would definitely do it all the time. Which seems to imply that defenders gain some advantage from it... and initiating contact that creates an advantage is the definition of a foul in basketball.

Now don't try to out sports metaphor the sports metaphor master! Here we go:

An analogy of z-cancelling in basketball would be if whenever you caught the ball in midair and landed you had to scream "REBOUND!" before you were allowed to move or pass the ball. A superfluous action that must be taken. Maybe people even forget to do it if they catch a rebound in heavy traffic and it causes turnovers like z-cancelling can be flubbed under pressure. Hilarious? Yes. Good game mechanic? Don't think so. Can you imagine the NBA ever putting this rule into place? Not in this lifetime.

And one more hypothetical:

You are consistent in saying more situations like z-cancelling are good. Props for consistency. But is there no limit? If I added another such situation would that be good too? And so on and so forth until finally you would say enough is enough (or not, in which case... props for consistency). And then it would be clear that it is not this sense of "fairness" as you put it that makes you like the mechanic, but really it is just "cobr-likes-it-this-way".