SynikaL's Brawl Impressions: "When Hearts Cry" Edition

[SynikaL]

No, it doesn't and don't read the final sentence meant to stand as thought provocation material as an implication of such. Read carefully please.

Maybe that's my own fault for attempting to be abstract in such a volatile discussion.


-Syn

 

[TZarek]

The problem isn't that a Pro might, in some obscure and really unlucky game, be beaten by a Non-Pro (possibly even a N00b). The problem is when two Pros face off.

In the finals... with a lot of money on the line. 1st place is worth more than twice as much money than 2nd. It's the crucial last match. What happens? One single lucky item turned the entire game around. It's not even player skill, it's not something the losing player could help or overcome on pure skill. That single lucky item just popped up and a close game was tipped severely in favour of one player.

Because of an entire randomly and luck-based occurence.

It's the equivalent to, in Chess, having a random occurence sometime happen when a Nuke drops onto a random board space and anything on it is killed.

And what I'm saying is, there are many many people who aren't bothered by that possible, who see it as part of the game. You brought chess back into it, but I'm talking about poker; there have been many many many high stakes poker games where a pro has played incredibly well, done everything right, played perfectly...and still lost because of an improbable turn of the cards. It happens, and yet poker goes on.

I'm not saying it's better, or ideal, or even good for everyone. I'm not saying Brawl is better than Melee, items is better than no items, or any of that. I'm saying that Brawl With Items, at the very least, appeals to a lot of people and can be a fun competitive experience if you're ok with some element of luck, whereas Brawl Without Items fails on most counts. Brawl With Items might not be your game, hell, it might not be most pros game, I might be wrong. But at least it's a game. Brawl Without Items, as far as I can tell, just doesn't work.

 

[WastingPenguins]

The problem isn't that a Pro might, in some obscure and really unlucky game, be beaten by a Non-Pro (possibly even a N00b). The problem is when two Pros face off.

In the finals... with a lot of money on the line. 1st place is worth more than twice as much money than 2nd. It's the crucial last match. What happens? One single lucky item turned the entire game around. It's not even player skill, it's not something the losing player could help or overcome on pure skill. That single lucky item just popped up and a close game was tipped severely in favour of one player.

Because of an entire randomly and luck-based occurence.

It's the equivalent to, in Chess, having a random occurence sometime happen when a Nuke drops onto a random board space and anything on it is killed.

Haha, Yuna, I understand what you're saying. I agree 5000%. I was attempting a joke. That post of mine describes what every items debate ever eventually boils down to. Pure sarcasm on my part.

 

[Yuna]

1) You can supposedly turn off exploding capsules in Brawl. That's a huge bonus. And you can turn off 'explody' items like Bob-Ombs. So we can eliminate the chance that a big boom just drops right on your head mid-swing.

Then there's still the element of "Hey, those really good items keep spawning in front of that one guy while the other guy gets zilch/useless ****". You can't eliminate that. Again I present the example with the Chess Nuke.

1) You can supposedly turn off exploding capsules in Brawl. That's a huge bonus. And you can turn off 'explody' items like Bob-Ombs. So we can eliminate the chance that a big boom just drops right on your head mid-swing.

2) Let's start slow then as far as items are concerned. First step is to stop being so closed-minded with the stage selection. Final Destination, Battlefield, etc. are great and all, but try playing the more 'zany' stages. PictoChat looks like a great level for competitive play because it randomly changes the terrain which can change the way the entire fight is going for just a few seconds. I'm not suggesting we start throwing the new DK level in - Icicle Mountain was bad enough - but try some of the more active levels to see how they affect the match. And keep in mind, luck isn't the only thing here, skill is involved in knocking your opponent into hazards as they appear to get KOs that your character just does not have.[/quote]
I'm all for trying out more stages.

The stages must follow patterns though. Changes cannot be random and if they are, the change itself must not in any way be able to tip the scales or be so slow it's obviously what it's changing it. How fair is it if I'm comboing my friend Armada during a stage change and whack him into a wall while 30 seconds later, he's comboing me during a stage change that luckily enough pops up a one-hit-KO thingie that he throws me into (all of the changes being random)?

1) You can supposedly turn off exploding capsules in Brawl. That's a huge bonus. And you can turn off 'explody' items like Bob-Ombs. So we can eliminate the chance that a big boom just drops right on your head mid-swing.
3) Once we can start including the more varied stages in, bring in Smash Balls (no other items yet). See how much they affect the match. We know that most Final Smashes, when done well, are KOs even from 0%. True, they are powerful, but keep in mind that they, just like any other move, can be avoided and can miss and screw over the player with afterlag. If Marth uses his Final in the air and misses, he'll go flying off the level and probably die - that right there encourages the player not to just use it whenever. Use it when he knows he can hit without the enemy dodging, like after a short combo, or as a roll chaser. The fight over the Smash Ball alone can lead to some very interesting fights, and it's always possible for a player to lose the ball after getting it if their opponent is skilled enough.

The Final Smashes are way, way, way too imbalanced. Marth's and Link's break the game. Peach's is next to useless. One hit KO's vs. Ones that are dodgable by spotdodge or simply jumping... yeah. No, thanks.

Marth's breaks the game. So he can't use it in the air, big whoop. He can combo into it. Using it on the ground presents no risk. In fact, a lot of Final Smashes can't even be used in the air, so it's not like that's a huge handicap for him.

Meanwhile, Lucas is just standing around with his arms in the air during the FS. He looks hittable. Even if he isn't, the Storm has huge holes in it so it's easy to roll or just stand in the right spot to avoid the blasts. Heck, even if you're hit, you'll only take a little bit of damage and almost no knockback!

You speak as if no varied stages existed in tournaments in Melee. There were a whole bunch of them.

 

[Yuna]

And what I'm saying is, there are many many people who aren't bothered by that possible, who see it as part of the game. You brought chess back into it, but I'm talking about poker; there have been many many many high stakes poker games where a pro has played incredibly well, done everything right, played perfectly...and still lost because of an improbable turn of the cards. It happens, and yet poker goes on.

I'm not saying it's better, or ideal, or even good for everyone. I'm not saying Brawl is better than Melee, items is better than no items, or any of that. I'm saying that Brawl With Items, at the very least, appeals to a lot of people and can be a fun competitive experience if you're ok with some element of luck, whereas Brawl Without Items fails on most counts.

See, the whole competitive fighting community at large disagrees. Those who want luck-based item tournies are free to host their own. Let us who don't want luck-based item tournies host our item-free ones.

And again, in Poker, you can choose not to pursue a hand if the risks are high that you will lose. Heck, you can choose to never go all-in when you're shortstacked to eliminate the chance of losing outright because of luck. In Brawl, you can't protect against an overpowered item spawning beside your opponent. You cannot choose to not pursue the equivalent of a hand lest you be crippled for the entire match.

Good point. But...

We still don't know all the Brawl ATs, do we? Of COURSE the game sucks now compared to melee. And, granted, there is no way we can be SURE that undiscovered techniques exist that will solve part of the problem. But they *have* been popping up under scrutiny, which is what I was getting at when I linked to that youtube video.

Still, there's no reason to be SURE that Brawl will be as competitive as you want it to be. But there isn't really a reason to be 100% SURE that it will suck.

My point of view is that, based on current evidence, we can't make a judgement one way or another. Yet.

And I have to yet again repeat: The Brawl engine is in itself so restrictive and limited that not only does it limit what one can do, it also limits any possible future Advanced Techs. Unless we discover huge, huge obvious glitches that literally breaks the game (i.e. works against the game's very core engine), it won't be enough.

The game will still have no lag-cancelling, thus rendering all shield-pressure and approaches useless, especially for the slower character. The game will be slow as hell, the game will have very limited KO-options, ledgeguarding-options, etc. The game will just be very limited, despite new ATs surfacing unless they're to breaking, the entire game engine is thrown off course and we're not literally "hacking" the game on a regular basis by exploiting a huge, huge flaw in it.

 

[DerpDerpDerp]

I don't think the people on Smashboards even realizes that they're the laughing stock of the internet video game community when they type stuff like this. Seriously.

Super Smash Brothers: Serious ****ing Business.

 

[FenrirIII]

Geez, the way you talk it's like this game is Street Fighter and every stage must be set in stone in order to be perfectly fair. So a stage is a little random, so what? That makes you have to think on your toes and be ready for anything to happen at any given moment. That takes a lot more skill than being able to KO someone off of Final Destination. So a little luck is involved. That small chance is what makes the game intersting. I won't bring up the Poker example because you're right, without the ability to bluff it can't be compared.
I will, however, bring up Blackjack. You can be really good at the game, able to judge whether you should draw or not, but unless you cheat you can never tell if that next card is gonna be a five or a Queen. That's what makes it interesting - you can lose everything just because you needed to draw a seven for a 21 and you draw an eight.
Brawl has proven so far to be dull without items on. It's been dull on the flat stages. Maybe Final Smashes just need to catch on, so for now we'll ignore them, but at the very least start experimenting with the stages and items.
Is PictoChat too random? Do the WarioWare Minigames interfere too much? Does Frigate Orpheon's flip really cause that much confusion?
Are some of the Assist Trophies and Pokemon game-breaking, or do they make it interesting? How useful is the Gooey Bomb, really? How much damage can you do with a properly-placed Nova Bomb?

 

[TZarek]

And again, in Poker, you can choose not to pursue a hand if the risks are high that you will lose. Heck, you can choose to never go all-in when you're shortstacked to eliminate the chance of losing outright because of luck. In Brawl, you can't protect against an overpowered item spawning beside your opponent. You cannot choose to not pursue the equivalent of a hand lest you be crippled for the entire match.

First off, if you never go all in when you're shortstacked, you're going to get destroyed in any serious poker game; the players who are up will just buy the pot every time. So while you can "choose" that, you'll never win doing it.

And no, you can't protect against it. What you can do is learn how to better avoid and dodge the item or FS. Keep in mind, Brawl is NOT Melee, and never is that more apparent than in the damage percentages. The random-spawning-bob-omb will not do as much damage, comparatively, and therefore will not be as game-altering. When I say "Brawl was meant for item", that's what I mean; the damage percentages and weight of the characters are just too high for 1v1 play, but very solid for items play (moreso than Melee with items, I might even argue).

And for the last time, I'm not saying I think it's better or that you should play like it. I'm saying I cannot imagine serious Brawl 1v1 no-items tournaments; it won't appeal to luck players and it won't appeal to skill players. However, I can see Brawl W/items tournaments, because it appeals to luck players, and offers probably the best luck-factored competitive game yet.

 

[Phyvo]

The game will still have no lag-cancelling, thus rendering all shield-pressure and approaches useless, especially for the slower character.

Not true, from what I've heard. Some characters have aerials that have very little lag or can hit outside of grab range. Lucario's d-air could be an extremely useful shield pressuring tool since you can actually use it just above the gound. Lucario will not hit the ground until the animation is finished, so it's effectively canceled (the damage itself isn't bad either). Shields themselves decay a lot faster so it takes less pressure to kill them or force someone to go offensive.

The game will be slow as hell, the game will have very limited KO-options, ledgeguarding-options, etc. The game will just be very limited, despite new ATs surfacing unless they're to breaking, the entire game engine is thrown off course and we're not literally "hacking" the game on a regular basis by exploiting a huge, huge flaw in it.

I have to disagree here as well. I've seen a G&W who, at one point, was moving up and down in the air so fast (via d-air, which has little landing lag) that it reminded me of Melee. As we have seen, spammed KO attacks become ineffective to the point where if you spam you might not kill until 200%, and saving those KOs for when you can actually knock the person out helps a lot (though I haven't seen any good KOs under 100% like in Melee).

I'm not so much disagreeing that Brawl has problems and has more limited options. It looks like it could be even more unbalanced than Melee, for sure. But I disagree that the situation is hopeless and that the engine *decrees* that it is so. Evidently, we don't know as much about the engine as we thought we did.

 

[Wolfang]

Personally I don't believe in luck, but crap like that happens anyways. I think your right in a way saying that adapting to new stages and items takes a lot more skill, but the luck factor pushes fights in undesirable directions sometimes. Not to say i wont try out the new items, but it sucks when you see a crate, shoulder bash it to break it open, and it blows up in your face. not cool

 

[Ryan-K]

Not true, from what I've heard. Some characters have aerials that have very little lag or can hit outside of grab range. Lucario's d-air could be an extremely useful shield pressuring tool since you can actually use it just above the gound. Lucario will not hit the ground until the animation is finished, so it's effectively canceled (the damage itself isn't bad either). Shields themselves decay a lot faster so it takes less pressure to kill them or force someone to go offensive.

Yeah except he's talking about how in the past games EVERY.CHARACTER had access to cutting the lag on their aerials. The fact that Lucario and his pals in the clubhouse are the only ones that can do it doesn't really matter as far as this argument is concerned >_>

 

[Yuna]

Geez, the way you talk it's like this game is Street Fighter and every stage must be set in stone in order to be perfectly fair. So a stage is a little random, so what? That makes you have to think on your toes and be ready for anything to happen at any given moment.

You can't protect against the random stage changes on the Wario Ware stage where standing in the wrong spot at the wrong time will undoubtedly get you KO:ed no matter what you do.

You cannot help it if a Bob-Omb spawn above your head while you're nairing your opponent's shield.

That takes a lot more skill than being able to KO someone off of Final Destination. So a little luck is involved. That small chance is what makes the game intersting.

You see, it's not just a little luck. It can build up to a lot of luck. Also, tell that to the guy who just lost 100,000 dollars because of "a little luck". Tell that to whoever came in 2nd in a huge sports final because of "a little luck".

I will, however, bring up Blackjack. You can be really good at the game, able to judge whether you should draw or not, but unless you cheat you can never tell if that next card is gonna be a five or a Queen.

Which is why a lot of Pros who might've made it to the Last Top5 of a major tourney might end up going home in the first round. It's, however, their choice to play such a luck-based game. It's also my choice to not have items on.

That's what makes it interesting - you can lose everything just because you needed to draw a seven for a 21 and you draw an eight.

Did you know that the competitive BlackJack scene is tiny compared to the competitive, say, Poker scene? I wonder why...

Brawl has proven so far to be dull without items on. It's been dull on the flat stages. Maybe Final Smashes just need to catch on, so for now we'll ignore them, but at the very least start experimenting with the stages and items.

Brawl will be "more fun" with items on? So will life with drugs. Doesn't mean there aren't downsides. Let's see... if BlackJack could be reworked by simply changing a certain thing to eliminate the element of luck by 75%, do you think the community would reject it outright? What if that variable was available at the conception of BlackJack, before its current form became popular?

How can 100% pure luck be fun when you can be really skilled yet lose the game due to one single lucky thing happened despite being obviously more skilled than your opponent, especially when said thing can be easily prevented?

Final Smashes are imbalanced. Royally imbalanced. Enough said.

 

[Terrorcon Blot]

I for one welcome the "slow" pace of Brawl, if only because high level Melee play always looked and played like a bunch of spider monkeys with Parkinson's got hopped up on pixie sticks and then grabbed their wave birds.

 

[Team Giza]

Looks like Teams matches all day?

 

[Neko06]

You see, it's not just a little luck. It can build up to a lot of luck. Also, tell that to the guy who just lost 100,000 dollars because of "a little luck". Tell that to whoever came in 2nd in a huge sports final because of "a little luck".

People miss out on millions of dollars in the lotto due to "a little luck". And what about high-stakes gambling? Some people thrive on luck-based competition. At least in Smash Bros the outcomes tend to be more influenced by skill than luck. It's all perspective, really.

 

[Yuna]

Not true, from what I've heard. Some characters have aerials that have very little lag or can hit outside of grab range. Lucario's d-air could be an extremely useful shield pressuring tool since you can actually use it just above the gound. Lucario will not hit the ground until the animation is finished, so it's effectively canceled (the damage itself isn't bad either). Shields themselves decay a lot faster so it takes less pressure to kill them or force someone to go offensive.

Good for the very few characters who have 1-2 moves that cannot be shieldgrabbed, ever. Ever thought of a technique called "Jumped out of shield into an aerial"? Lag from using a move = Shieldhopped nair (alternative to shieldgrabbing).

Shields themselves decay "a lot faster", you say? Funny, they look to me like they decay slower in the vids I've seen. Nowhere near "a lot faster".

I have to disagree here as well. I've seen a G&W who, at one point, was moving up and down in the air so fast (via d-air, which has little landing lag) that it reminded me of Melee. As we have seen, spammed KO attacks become ineffective to the point where if you spam you might not kill until 200%, and saving those KOs for when you can actually knock the person out helps a lot (though I haven't seen any good KOs under 100% like in Melee).

Yes, so there's a handful of moves with little lag. Big whoop? You're now limited to not use your KO-moves as much for simple damage racking. This is limiting the gameplay, not expanding it! It's giving you the choice either to "suffer large" or just not do it, which isn't really much of a choice.

phyvoI'm not so much disagreeing that Brawl has problems and has more limited options. It looks like it could be even more unbalanced than Melee, for sure. But I disagree that the situation is hopeless and that the engine *decrees* that it is so. Evidently, we don't know as much about the engine as we thought we did.[/quote]
I never said hopeless. I said "very limited".

First off, if you never go all in when you're shortstacked, you're going to get destroyed in any serious poker game; the players who are up will just buy the pot every time. So while you can "choose" that, you'll never win doing it.

I never said that's a good option. I said you always have that option.

And no, you can't protect against it. What you can do is learn how to better avoid and dodge the item or FS. Keep in mind, Brawl is NOT Melee, and never is that more apparent than in the damage percentages. The random-spawning-bob-omb will not do as much damage, comparatively, and therefore will not be as game-altering. When I say "Brawl was meant for item", that's what I mean; the damage percentages and weight of the characters are just too high for 1v1 play, but very solid for items play (moreso than Melee with items, I might even argue).

So a random spawning overpowered item will mean much less of a tipping of scales. Now you need two Bob-ombs to turn a match around! Yay!

And for the last time, I'm not saying I think it's better or that you should play like it. I'm saying I cannot imagine serious Brawl 1v1 no-items tournaments; it won't appeal to luck players and it won't appeal to skill players. However, I can see Brawl W/items tournaments, because it appeals to luck players, and offers probably the best luck-factored competitive game yet.

Well then, good luck to you and your merry band of "Luck before Skill/Boring" friends.

 

[Phyvo]

Yeah except he's talking about how in the past games EVERY.CHARACTER had access to cutting the lag on their aerials. The fact that Lucario and his pals in the clubhouse are the only ones that can do it doesn't really matter as far as this argument is concerned >_>

There are lots of other ways to pressure shields. Projectiles (oh jeez, they're everywhere, and yeah, they're campy), attacking and landing out of range or using a low lag attack (like I said), Gannondorf's side-B rush grab...

So far, different characters have different ways of doing it. Sure, it's not like Melee where *everyone* could l-cancel, but then that didn't mean that Melee was balanced, did it? I mean, Pichu could l-cancel, Bowser could l-cancel... but were they top tier? No! They were at the bottom of the heap. Things were more balanced than they would be without l-canceling, sure, but this isn't Melee without l-cancelling. This is Brawl.

In the end, I don't think it matters whether or not everyone has SIMILAR options. What matters is that everyone HAS options. If people HAVE options in Brawl that's good enough for me. If then don't, well, crap. If it's just one, two, or three characters who suck then who freakin' cares? Hardly anyone played Pichu in tournies. At least we have other characters that we CAN play.

 

[TheManaLord]

Yuna is ****** everyone so stop trying ppl Brawl is not a game for the likes of true competitors.

 

[Yuna]

People miss out on millions of dollars in the lotto due to "a little luck". And what about high-stakes gambling? Some people thrive on luck-based competition. At least in Smash Bros the outcomes tend to be more influenced by skill than luck. It's all perspective, really.

The Lotto is, of course, a huge luck based thing. But that's its entire premise.

Comptitive high-stakes gambling isn't all about luck. It all depends on what game you play. And tell me, don't all of those high-stakes gambling card games have tons of techniques and algorithms the Top Players desperately use to eliminate luck as much as possible?

Pretty much every competitive community out there tries to eliminate luck as much as they can, not add to it because "it'd be more fun". If something cannot be competed in because it'd either be so boring it'd be unplayable and the only alternative would be to introduce a lot of luck into the game, then a lot of people actually choose not to compete in it at all.

Feel free to host item-based tournies. Don't expect a lot of dedicated competitive players to show up, though.

 

[FenrirIII]

You can't protect against the random stage changes on the Wario Ware stage where standing in the wrong spot at the wrong time will undoubtedly get you KO:ed no matter what you do.

You cannot help it if a Bob-Omb spawn above your head while you're nairing your opponent's shield.

You can turn Bob-Ombs off. YOU CAN TURN THEM OFF.
Maybe if I say it enough you'll stop bringing up Bob-ombs.
Bob-ombs can be turned off. No Bob-ombs. None. An item that is off won't spawn above your head. Point is moot.

You see, it's not just a little luck. It can build up to a lot of luck. Also, tell that to the guy who just lost 100,000 dollars because of "a little luck". Tell that to whoever came in 2nd in a huge sports final because of "a little luck".

Please. There's a lot of random factors in sports. It's called wind, heck even the FANS can screw up a game. A sudden gust of wind might blow the ball off course, or a fan might catch that foul ball you could've caught. Does this mean that all sports are played in interior stadiums, or that fans aren't allowed? God no, they're almost entirely played outdoors with tens of thousands of fans. It happens, deal with it.

Which is why a lot of Pros who might've made it to the Last Top5 of a major tourney might end up going home in the first round. It's, however, their choice to play such a luck-based game. It's also my choice to not have items on.

And from the way everyone keeps talking above the dullness and lack of depth of 1v1 played Melee-style, the people that agree with you can go have a blast. It's my choice to increase the depth and competitiveness by putting on items.

Did you know that the competitive BlackJack scene is tiny compared to the competitive, say, Poker scene? I wonder why...

Because Poker is more interesting because it involves luck AND skill?

Brawl will be "more fun" with items on?

First off, I never said that. I'm sure it can be a lot of fun with items off if you figure some way to do it.

So will life with drugs. Doesn't mean there aren't downsides. Let's see... if BlackJack could be reworked by simply changing a certain thing to eliminate the element of luck by 75%, do you think the community would reject it outright? What if that variable was available at the conception of BlackJack, before its current form became popular?

How can 100% pure luck be fun when you can be really skilled yet lose the game due to one single lucky thing happened despite being obviously more skilled than your opponent, especially when said thing can be easily prevented?

Because maybe people like the sense of danger? The rush of knowing they could lose everything in an instant just on a single card? That's called living. If you eliminate every little piece of luck from BlackJack, where's the fun in it?

Final Smashes are imbalanced. Royally imbalanced. Enough said.

So then we won't use them. No big deal, that's just one item.

 

[Wolfang]

Brawl will be "more fun" with items on? So will life with drugs. Doesn't mean there aren't downsides. Let's see... if BlackJack could be reworked by simply changing a certain thing to eliminate the element of luck by 75%, do you think the community would reject it outright? What if that variable was available at the conception of BlackJack, before its current form became popular?

How can 100% pure luck be fun when you can be really skilled yet lose the game due to one single lucky thing happened despite being obviously more skilled than your opponent, especially when said thing can be easily prevented?

Final Smashes are imbalanced. Royally imbalanced. Enough said.

Exactly. A Landmaster tank spawning in front of you on a very small stage is ****.

 

[Ryan-K]

It has nothign to do with pressuring shields, it has to do with lag cancelling. Also lack of l cancel just makes slower characters slower, so how would it make things more balanced? Bowser could actually attack your shield and do something in melee which doesn't seem to be the case in brawl.

Also the guy who came up with the lotto analogy- the lotto is 100% luck; there is no skill factor, not to mention you don't spend loads of time preparing/practicing. I wouldn't mind losing to dumb luck as much if it took little to no preparation to learn how to play as opposed to taking a year to learn the game.

 

[Neko06]

The Lotto is, of course, a huge luck based thing. But that's its entire premise.

Comptitive high-stakes gambling isn't all about luck. It all depends on what game you play. And tell me, don't all of those high-stakes gambling card games have tons of techniques and algorithms the Top Players desperately use to eliminate luck as much as possible?

Pretty much every competitive community out there tries to eliminate luck as much as they can, not add to it because "it'd be more fun". If something cannot be competed in because it'd either be so boring it'd be unplayable and the only alternative would be to introduce a lot of luck into the game, then a lot of people actually choose not to compete in it at all.

Feel free to host item-based tournies. Don't expect a lot of dedicated competitive players to show up, though.

Keep the stakes low, and it could be a lot of fun. I guess I'll never understand the competitive mindset, especially when it comes to Smash Bros.

 

[TZarek]

So a random spawning overpowered item will mean much less of a tipping of scales. Now you need two Bob-ombs to turn a match around! Yay!

Yes. That's precisely the point. Two Bob-ombs in the exact wrong place at the wrong time for the same player is much less likely than one. Now, if it took, say, ten of them, then it would happen so rarely and be so unlikely that it wouldn't be a major game-breaking factor so much as one minor variable out of many to consider. There's a reason we tolerate Peach's turnips; on the whole, they are so non-damaging that they are just a move and not a game-breaker. Look at the videos we've seen of Brawl so far; many of the most exciting and interesting new tactics of the new characters are coming from people finding ways to use character-items, like Diddy's bananas or Snake's bombs.

Well then, good luck to you and your merry band of "Luck before Skill/Boring" friends.

It's not luck before skill, it's luck AND skill. And it's fine man. I'm great and having a blast; you're the one pissy and upset. I'm the one with an exciting new game to look forward to playing for the next 8 years; you're the one who's going to be playing yet another Fox v. Shiek on Final Destination. I'm the one talking about interesting and exciting new possibilities; you're the one bemoaning failure. So who's really winning? I'm sure as hell having more fun than you are, that's for sure.

Like I said, for the last time, this is not a rehash of the Melee-items argument. That's not what we're talking about here, even though you keep using the tired Melee arguments ("Host your own tournament!"). No one (rational) doubts that Melee is a better competitive game with items off. No one. I agree 100%. But it is widely conceded and accepted that Brawl with items off is not very good. However, Brawl with items on, as played by competitive players, has NOT BEEN THOROUGHOLY EXPLORED, and, in my limited experience, is very different and much more balanced, manageable, and non-random than Melee with items. It's worth checking out. That's all.

 

[xXx-NoobKing-xXx]

SyniKaL: Thanks for saving me the time. I would rather play something competitive like Streetfighter or Marvel vs Capcom then waste my time on a non-competitive game.

However, I fully intend to try the game out myself and test the depth of gameplay you've clearly labelled as 'weak'.

 

[TheCatPhysician]

Well then, good luck to you and your merry band of "Luck before Skill/Boring" friends.

And thus the community was divided.


It looks like Brawl isn't going to cut it as a competitive fighting game. Still awesome in many other ways, no doubt. I'm still excited for it. But I hope competitive Melee survives.

 

[TheManaLord]

You can turn Bob-Ombs off. YOU CAN TURN THEM OFF.
Maybe if I say it enough you'll stop bringing up Bob-ombs.
Bob-ombs can be turned off. No Bob-ombs. None. An item that is off won't spawn above your head. Point is moot.



Please. There's a lot of random factors in sports. It's called wind, heck even the FANS can screw up a game. A sudden gust of wind might blow the ball off course, or a fan might catch that foul ball you could've caught. Does this mean that all sports are played in interior stadiums, or that fans aren't allowed? God no, they're almost entirely played outdoors with tens of thousands of fans. It happens, deal with it.


And from the way everyone keeps talking above the dullness and lack of depth of 1v1 played Melee-style, the people that agree with you can go have a blast. It's my choice to increase the depth and competitiveness by putting on items.


Because Poker is more interesting because it involves luck AND skill?



First off, I never said that. I'm sure it can be a lot of fun with items off if you figure some way to do it.
Because maybe people like the sense of danger? The rush of knowing they could lose everything in an instant just on a single card? That's called living. If you eliminate every little piece of luck from BlackJack, where's the fun in it?

So then we won't use them. No big deal, that's just one item.

Wind affects everyone equally.

Items don't.

There is wind in melee, that stage isn't banned now is it?

You're wrong.

 

[Phyvo]

Good for the very few characters who have 1-2 moves that cannot be shieldgrabbed, ever. Ever thought of a technique called "Jumped out of shield into an aerial"? Lag from using a move = Shieldhopped nair (alternative to shieldgrabbing).

Just because it exists doesn't mean that it's practical if the person lands out of range of a grab. Going on theory here, but it's possible they could shield THAT aerial. People do move slower...

Shields themselves decay "a lot faster", you say? Funny, they look to me like they decay slower in the vids I've seen. Nowhere near "a lot faster".

It looks to me like they decay faster when they aren't getting hit at least. In at least one of the tournament videos I saw a Marth went and shieldbroke himself just from playing defensively. The other player didn't even land a hit...

Yes, so there's a handful of moves with little lag. Big whoop? You're now limited to not use your KO-moves as much for simple damage racking. This is limiting the gameplay, not expanding it! It's giving you the choice either to "suffer large" or just not do it, which isn't really much of a choice.

Granted. However, two things we should chew on.
1) It's fairly easy to avoid this by mixing up attacks rather than spamming one over and over.
2) This also affects projectile camping, which could be a good thing (since it gives more options to the opponent if they don't have a reflecting move).

I'm not so much disagreeing that Brawl has problems and has more limited options. It looks like it could be even more unbalanced than Melee, for sure. But I disagree that the situation is hopeless and that the engine *decrees* that it is so. Evidently, we don't know as much about the engine as we thought we did.
I never said hopeless. I said "very limited".

Ok. I think we're done here (I get your point. It's good. I just disagree with exactly how limited Brawl will be, I guess). "Very limited" does sound a lot like "hopeless" to me on these high-strung boards.

 

[WastingPenguins]

*peeks head in*

Yep, same exact stupid argument that's been exhausted thousands of times. This thread is not for people who want to play with items. If you want to play with items then good for you, but why are you in this thread?

 

[Neko06]

I think what it boils down to is this: Luck can be a very stressful factor when stakes are high, it can be an enjoyable factor when the stakes are low. Maybe Melee is more suited for these crazy $100,000 tourneys, and Brawl (with items) is more suitable for $100 "for fun" tourneys? Both can be enjoyable, yes? Just a thought.

 

[Xengri]

No guys, lets not go there.

This how item/stage, luck/no luck, topic has been discussed to death. It usually just ends up in a senseless flame war or worse; a broken record argument (those aren't even funny...).

Thing is Items and stages are completely subjective and it all depends on what you think is fun.


To those that say "well give them a chance and test them out first".
We DO that.

Standard Melee rules weren't made out of no where. The players (the ones interested in tournaments) came together and the rules were based out towards what the majority thought was fair.

The reason why most matches are being played with Melee rules is because right now we don't know the game well enough to start molding its rules (same thing with tier list and its depth).
Once we get more familiar with Brawl, the player base will conger up the rules that will be used for the majority of tournaments because the majority decided it was fair.


And even if you don't agree with the majority, you can always make a unorthodox tournament. No one is stopping you from hosting a tournament with your own rules.

All stages, items and Fsmashes will be tested just like it was done with Melee. We just haven’t gotten around to it cause we need to be more familiar with the game.

With that being said, lets not get into Items/Stages/Luck, since there‘s no wrong or right way, just what the majority thinks. All of these will be tested, and the fairest (as according to the majority of the smash players that go to tournaments) way to play Brawl will be determined.

However, you will still be able to play it as you want, and same thing goes for the guy next to you.

 

[Wolfang]

No one is saying that just b/c Peach might pull out a bob-omb from the ground means she should just be turned down, but when your losing money over a luck factor, of course you want to play without items. Those are unnecessary in 1 v 1 matches or when the stakes are serious, but if your just having fun and scewing around, go for it. Fun is an opinion, remember that.

 

[Neko06]

*peeks head in*

Yep, same exact stupid argument that's been exhausted thousands of times. This thread is not for people who want to play with items. If you want to play with items then good for you, but why are you in this thread?

This is not an items vs no items thread. This thread has touched on many aspects of the whole casual game vs tourney game argument, including items. Anyone who wishes to chat and contribute to an argument may.

 

[Yuna]

There are lots of other ways to pressure shields. Projectiles (oh jeez, they're everywhere, and yeah, they're campy), attacking and landing out of range or using a low lag attack (like I said), Gannondorf's side-B rush grab...

Attacking out of range: Shieldhopped fair/bair/nair/projectile (depending on character). It's not a reliable tactic, especially not as a spam.

Low lag attacks? And what, pray tell, would you to afterwards? Land safely? Do another one in hopes they try to shieldgrab and get hit by the 2nd attack? 50/50 and very risky. Not reliable.

Ganondorf's Side B rush grab: Easily dodged, especially if spammed.

So far, different characters have different ways of doing it. Sure, it's not like Melee where *everyone* could l-cancel, but then that didn't mean that Melee was balanced, did it? I mean, Pichu could l-cancel, Bowser could l-cancel... but were they top tier? No! They were at the bottom of the heap. Things were more balanced than they would be without l-canceling, sure, but this isn't Melee without l-cancelling. This is Brawl.

L-cancel made the game more balanced. No one said it made it 100% balanced.

In the end, I don't think it matters whether or not everyone has SIMILAR options. What matters is that everyone HAS options. If people HAVE options in Brawl that's good enough for me. If then don't, well, crap. If it's just one, two, or three characters who suck then who freakin' cares? Hardly anyone played Pichu in tournies. At least we have other characters that we CAN play.

In limited capacities. Unless we play them outside of their metagame by introducing items.

You can turn Bob-Ombs off. YOU CAN TURN THEM OFF.
Maybe if I say it enough you'll stop bringing up Bob-ombs.
Bob-ombs can be turned off. No Bob-ombs. None. An item that is off won't spawn above your head. Point is moot.

Bob-Ombs are used as an example because they're one of the most imbalanced items in the game. What items, pray tell, would you like to see in an item-based tournament? Keep in mind, it'd have to be balanced so everything overpowered has to go.

Which dwindles the list down to very few items. Following this, there's still the very real problem with item spawning. No matter how much skill, what items fall where are entirely random. One player might be unfairly favoured by items in a match while the other gets either squat or only useless things.

Please. There's a lot of random factors in sports. It's called wind, heck even the FANS can screw up a game. A sudden gust of wind might blow the ball off course, or a fan might catch that foul ball you could've caught. Does this mean that all sports are played in interior stadiums, or that fans aren't allowed? God no, they're almost entirely played outdoors with tens of thousands of fans. It happens, deal with it.

Yeah, and said things are limited as much as one can. For one thing, one would never schedule big games during Monsoon Season in India. For another, how often does a ball fly right to the place where a player just misses the ball barely because a fan caught it before him? There's kinda a barricade in the way so the ball had to be pretty high up for the fan to even get it.

Also, isn't it kinda frowned upon to catch a baseball a player could've caught? A lot of booing? It's like saying a fan can throw beer cans at players. Yeah, it's not really accepted.

Also, random occurences =/= santcioned and institutionalized elements of luck. No one's encouraging the wind to screw up a match or fans to steal balls that could so have turned the game.

And from the way everyone keeps talking above the dullness and lack of depth of 1v1 played Melee-style, the people that agree with you can go have a blast. It's my choice to increase the depth and competitiveness by putting on items.

Your choice, yeah. My choice not to. And my opinion to argue against what I perceive to be flawed arguments in favour of items.

Because Poker is more interesting because it involves luck AND skill?

Exactly. It involves less luck. Why is it more interesting? Because you say so? How many sports are really popular where the majority of it all is based on luck?

First off, I never said that. I'm sure it can be a lot of fun with items off if you figure some way to do it.
Because maybe people like the sense of danger? The rush of knowing they could lose everything in an instant just on a single card? That's called living. If you eliminate every little piece of luck from BlackJack, where's the fun in it?

Because it might still be fun? Because some people don't wanna stake 100,000s of dollars on "Random **** Luck You Have No Control Over No Matter How Much of a Pro You Are"?

So then we won't use them. No big deal, that's just one item.

Give me a list of all items you deem tournament-worthy.

 

[Neko06]

No guys, lets not go there.

This how item/stage, luck/no luck, topic has been discussed to death. It usually just ends up in a senseless flame war or worse; a broken record argument (those aren't even funny...).

Thing is Items and stages are completely subjective and it all depends on what you think is fun.


To those that say "well give them a chance and test them out first".
We DO that.

Standard Melee rules weren't made out of no where. The players (the ones interested in tournaments) came together and the rules were based out towards what the majority thought was fair.

The reason why most matches are being played with Melee rules is because right now we don't know the game well enough to start molding its rules (same thing with tier list and its depth).
Once we get more familiar with Brawl, the player base will conger up the rules that will be used for the majority of tournaments because the majority decided it was fair.


And even if you don't agree with the majority, you can always make a unorthodox tournament. No one is stopping you from hosting a tournament with your own rules.

All stages, items and Fsmashes will be tested just like it was done with Melee. We just haven’t gotten around to it cause we need to be more familiar with the game.

With that being said, lets not get into Items/Stages/Luck, since there‘s no wrong or right way, just what the majority thinks. All of these will be tested, and the fairest (as according to the majority of the smash players that go to tournaments) way to play Brawl will be determined.

However, you will still be able to play it as you want, and same thing goes for the guy next to you.

There's no harm in argument. It's when emotions run high that it becomes a problem. It is, after all, just a game.

 

[FenrirIII]

Wind affects everyone equally.

Items don't.

There is wind in melee, that stage isn't banned now is it?

You're wrong.

Wind affects everyone equally? Funny, last time I checked the wind doesn't blow a golf ball off course for the first player, then change so that it affects the second player differently in order to keep things equal. The second player clearly has the advantage because he knows how the wind is going to affect his ball because the wind is still blowing the same direction at the same speed.

 

[TZarek]

No guys, lets not go there.

This how item/stage, luck/no luck, topic has been discussed to death. It usually just ends up in a senseless flame war or worse; a broken record argument (those aren't even funny...).

Thing is Items and stages are completely subjective and it all depends on what you think is fun.


To those that say "well give them a chance and test them out first".
We DO that.

Standard Melee rules weren't made out of no where. The players (the ones interested in tournaments) came together and the rules were based out towards what the majority thought was fair.

The reason why most matches are being played with Melee rules is because right now we don't know the game well enough to start molding its rules (same thing with tier list and its depth).
Once we get more familiar with Brawl, the player base will conger up the rules that will be used for the majority of tournaments because the majority decided it was fair.


And even if you don't agree with the majority, you can always make a unorthodox tournament. No one is stopping you from hosting a tournament with your own rules.

All stages, items and Fsmashes will be tested just like it was done with Melee. We just haven’t gotten around to it cause we need to be more familiar with the game.

With that being said, lets not get into Items/Stages/Luck, since there‘s no wrong or right way, just what the majority thinks. All of these will be tested, and the fairest (as according to the majority of the smash players that go to tournaments) way to play Brawl will be determined.

However, you will still be able to play it as you want, and same thing goes for the guy next to you.

I agree with you and wish you were right. However, let's take a look at what happened in this thread:

1) I posted my impressions saying that I don't think 1v1 no items is very fun or competitive in Brawl, despite having loved it in Melee, but that turning items on actually made it more enjoyable and competitive.

2) Yuna immediately jumped down my throat saying that I was wrong, I should make my own tournaments, and despite having not played the game, that there is no way items are ok in competitive play.

I wish you were right, but as you can see, people like Yuna are deeply against trying new things, against even considering items in tournament play. They've decided based on Melee that This Is How It Is, and that's it. It's not even a matter of "No, we played with items for 5 hours and didn't like it", it's "ITEMS ARE LUCK THE END". And that's bull****. What if Gimpyfish were the one saying this? Hugs? Mew2King? Whoever? If my opinion that Brawl (BRAWL NOT MELEE) is enjoyable with items in a deeply competitive way is immediately dismissed, what hope is there for exploring the possibilities of Brawl with anything resembling an open mind?

Here's a reasonable skeptical response to my post: "Huh, that's intersting, well, I'll have to try Brawl with items to see, I have my doubts though." Immediately launching into the tired "BUT WHAT IF A BOB-OMB FALLS IT HAPPENED TO KEN" Melee jargon is most distinctly not giving Brawl a chance.

 

[Wolfang]

From what I've been reading some aspects of the game have been either removed or dulled down just to make the game more fair for everyone anyways

 

[Ryan-K]

Just because a few people disagree doesn't mean the community at large does >_>. In melee items were tested and the rulesets varied on the East and West coasts of the US but wifi should bring the community closer I guess.

I just don't wanna play with items because they are just boring to me and that's that lol.

 

[FenrirIII]

This is pathetic. ITEMS BEING ON WILL NOT CHANGE THE GAME TO 100% LUCK. You're acting as if by turning on just a single item, even a crummy one, suddenly the entire game will change so that a single player has the advantage and the other player can't do a thing about it. You must be a horrible player if you can't dodge an item thrown at you every now and then. We're not talking game-breaking here, we're talking little items. I mean geez, the Gooey Bomb? Lip's Stick? Sandbag? Giving a player a clear 100% advantage? Geez, are you that concerned about having to deal with a little luck that you're afraid of something that might cause a little damage and that you can dodge or even stick back onto your enemy?