The attitude towards this game.

[Falconv1.0]

All I hear from you is "I can't mindlessly rush down my opponent 100% of the time, this game sucks!"

Cool strawman bro. You can't mindlessly rushdown in Melee either, but obv I want some more elements to make aggression more viable thus I want a mindless game. Right.

 

[_A1]

It's funny how defensive Melee has become nowadays. I don't know where people are still getting the idea that Melee is a rushdown-heavy neutral game.

 

[RIP_Lucas]

Cool strawman bro. You can't mindlessly rushdown in Melee either, but obv I want some more elements to make aggression more viable thus I want a mindless game. Right.

Except that wasn't a straw man, but nice try. Straw man usually means someone literally trying to redefine the opponent's argument, typically to weaken that argument by drawing attention away from its supporting arguments. When someone does a sarcastic comment summarizing an argument, like asdioh did, it is probably done with the intention to draw attention to the lack of supporting evidence, and is therefore not a straw man. You did the exact same thing in your comment. The difference is subtle, so I don't blame you for making it, but I do blame you for trying to sound smart by mentioning it without a perfect understanding of it.

A real straw man would be someone trying to convince everyone that the op it's just a rant against melee and not an attempt to site why sm4sh is perfectly good even if it isn't that similar to melee, oh wait...

First irony, now fallacies. People love trying to spread their poor understanding of the English language

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

"Hey you guys should just like this game for no reason" the thread?

You guys are so amazingly similar to the Brawl community. It's like using a time machine! Have fun with that sinking ship!

It's less to do with that and more to do with how people are complaining instead of trying to learn.

It's not asking you to like it.

 

[Swoops]

So, I have a lot of feelings that I would love to rant and rave about right now, but it won't do a damn bit of good.

I appreciate the OP and the sentiment @ Big-Cat was trying to convey, but I've seem this sort of situation before. I've seen this with Brawl, and I've seen it with SFxT.
I hope that everybody can try and understand that a lot of people in this thread (not any side in particular, seriously) are not operating off of any sort of logic. It's a lot of emotional venting, disguised as logic.

Like I said, I could partake in that emotional venting but it will start to become more detrimental than anything. I would suggest that everybody be happy with their games and go about their business. Be happy and open to sharing a game that you like and encourage/enjoy anyone that shows a willingness to learn. But you're not going to force anyone to like anything or completely curtail an opinion by calling it out.

I would suggest mods shut this down, for the sake of both sides' dignity.

#nohomo

 

[MegaMissingno]

I hate this notion that nobody's allowed to express that there are things they don't like about this game, and if you do you're just some Melee elitist. I came in hoping to enjoy Smash 4 and... I don't know, my feelings are so mixed, there's some cool things I like but a bunch of issues that stick out and are hard to ignore. I do think it's too defensive. I do wish there were more varied and effective ways of approaching. I don't like how strong shields and rolls are. And I don't see why it's so wrong of me to wish the game was more aggressive. All I'm hearing here is you trying to dictate everyone else's opinions.

 

[Gawain]

I'm sorry, but the amount of vitriol in your post towards opinions strikes me as incredibly ironic. You're putting forward your opinions as facts and using that to discredit other opinions. To me that makes your entire post garbage. The game is not perfect. There are problem with it that deserve attention. If something is causing certain playstyles to become dominant, especially ones that aren't fun to play against or watch, then there is an issue worth talking about. Instead you just go blame Melee and tell people to stuff it. I'm not even going to bother giving this a proper refute because of this, I'm sorry.

 

[Deleted member]

While I think it's a good game, I didn't enjoy Melee much personally so I'm no elitist but I think Smash 4 is easily the worst entry in the series, with Brawl not far behind.

 

[Zork]

Not being able to punish many rolls on reaction is a problem. It means you have to heavily commit to something in the hopes that they will roll. If you were wrong, this often means getting punished yourself. To the people saying rolling a lot doesn't get you far, as it's been mentioned already I'm pretty sure RollTaro just got 3rd place in the most stacked region in the US thanks to rolling and Diddy Kong.

L cancel is not the only solution to make aerials more viable. Brawl has more aerials that can autocancel than Smash 4. Thus aerials have a large place in the neutral game for many characters. Even in Smash 4, the best characters tend to either have significant autocancel aerials (cough Sheik) or something else to make them strong (such as a great grab followup game so just throwing it out smartly puts the risk/reward in their favour). Alternatively they could make aerials have less lag in general without L cancelling.

Lack of (useful) dash dancing/foxtrotting and wave dashing makes the neutral game less interesting, there is no denying this. In this case more options are definitely not a bad thing. And no, acting out of shield really quickly (which was in Brawl as well) does not inherently replace something like wavedashing. For out of shield punishes? Sure. But not for the overall neutral game. The same goes for pivot fsmashes (cancelling first few frames of a dash into this). This was also in Brawl.

I find it heavily ironic how often Smash 4 players bash Brawl while not realizing Smash 4 has a very similar neutral game, just with less precisely spaced aerials and a lot more mindless rolls.

 

[Gawain]

I didn't enjoy Melee much myself so I'm no elitist but I think Smash 4 is easily the worst entry in the series, with Brawl not far behind.

Well I definitely disagree there. I think it's tied for two. It has problems though that the OP just dismisses.

 

[Deleted member]

Well I definitely disagree there. I think it's tied for two. It has problems though that the OP just dismisses.

Well I'm a huge 64 fan of those big nasty combos (bought the game the week it released and played it for over a decade, I'm like Isai, but bad) Melee would be my second favorite. But to me Smash 4 feels like Brawl but with a slightly faster ground game ruined by an even slower air game.

 

[Swoops]

Guys, don't mistake Kuma's passion for vitriol. He loves the game and wants other people to experience the same.

I think these boards and the players have been very open about discussing some of the flaws of this game, also discussing many of the merits does not discount that. Both sides can often be guilty of ignoring their game's shortcomings. With that said, I find the Melee enthusiasts just as guilty about not critiquing a single element of that game.

 

[Will-O-Wisp]

Jiggs is back to her 64 cuteness so this game gets a 10/10 for me.

In all seriousness though these kind of posts almost never go anywhere meaningful without serious moderation. If you're gonna bash people (Melee players), they're gonna bash you back, and then vitriol tends to blind fruitful discussion.

OP is right that the game is still young and we should all learn, practice, and let the game develop first, but other posters have also noted that the general direction of the game is defensive, which I agree with. However, this does not mean that aggression is dead, you simply have to go about it in a different way. In Melee, raw offensive pressure was a powerful option due to shield stun and L-cancelling, but that is clearly not the case in Smash 4. At least when I play, I feel like aggression is more focused around the bait and punish strategy. However, just because I'm trying to bait something out does not make me a "defensive" player, it makes me aggressive in the context of the current Smash 4 meta. If I wanted to be defensive I'd just play Villager and play keep away.

That being said, I kind of get the feeling that the game is begrudgingly trying to be more competitive, while trying to maintain a low skill gap, almost like the game wants to be two different things, but can't decide which to be. For example, we have hitstun back, but KB on most moves don't allow combos to be more than 3-4 hits (matchup dependent of course). Tripping has been removed, but now we have improved rolls, and shields can be dropped fast enough to punish moves. Ledge mechanics either promote crazy off stage play, or make edgeguarding completely meaningless (mostly the latter). The game is just constantly fighting itself. I still like the game, but I can't help but feel weird playing it, and I think that's what causes people to shy away from it and criticize it. I love all the Smash games, and played them all pretty avidly, even Brawl, but this one is gonna take getting used too.

 

[RanserSSF4]

i'm giving out my 2 cents out there.

as much as i do agree with @ Raijinken post, i do also agree that rolls and shields, even though i'm adapting to it, are still huge problems for the game.

As raijinken said, since smash 4 is compatible with patches, it has the potential to be the best and most balanced smash bros game in the series by offering a balance of offensive and defensive gameplay with enough options for both playstyles. Not to mention that buffing the weak characters in smash 4 will make the character balance better. Smash 4 is not close to becoming that right now, but it has potential. The only problem about it is Sakurai. As much as i respect the guy, he definitly doesn't know much about competitive smash at all, so not all of our wishes may be granted.

People are entitled to their own opinions, but some need to seriously respect others opinions. Even if your opinion is different than mine, i'll respect your opinion as long as you respect mine without both of us being jerks about it.

As i said, although i do like Smash 4 a lot and think it's better casually and competitively than brawl, it's not perfect and it has flaws, just like smash 64, melee, and brawl. It has potential to be perfect with the right balance changes, but the problem is sakurai.

That's all i have to say and i do think this thread should get locked just because it's going to raise a war, and i don't that to happen. Remember what happened during the Brawl era when this same thing happened?

 

[M.C.Jeducation]

Okay I think some people are taking this a little over the top. No one is asking you to love Smash 4 if you don't like it. Really all that is being said is that you have two options.
1. Adapt
2. Don't play it and go back to Melee/Brawl

It's really that simple, if you're choosing to go back to the old games (I personally still play Melee while also playing Smash 4) then there's no reason for you to mindlessly bash something that other people clearly enjoy. Melee and Sm4sh are very different games, so its obvious that people are going to have different opinions and yours isn't necessarily right.

People are misunderstanding and thinking that they are being told to adapt to Smash 4 even if they don't like it. I don't think that's what people are saying at all and if some people are saying this then that's wrong. People have every right to prefer Melee, but that's an opinion, just like preferring sm4sh is an opinion.

There is definitely a place for criticism and that is perfectly acceptable, but a vocal minority have taken this criticism too far into just mindless bashing and there's no real reason that this needs to be done. It divides the community and doesn't convince anyone of anything.

In the wise words of IzaKen Mang2Box, "Make love, not war...Also don't get hit"

 

[Venus of the Desert Bloom]

I agree with Kuma but I also think that there are some glaring problems with the game that should be readdressed by the dev team. However, my concern is that there will be a repeat of the post-Brawl days and we will have another schism in the community because certain individuals decided to **** on the game because it didn't fit thier expectations. You can disagree with the game and address the problems with it but when you have crowds chanting "**** Brawl"; well that's not a community I'm not proud to say I'm apart of. I'd like us as a community to approach Smash 4 less venomously and a bit more positively than how we did with Brawl. It's not healthy, it's immature, and really unbecoming of a community to outsiders.

 

[Road Death Wheel]

guh i swear so many people here think kuma is bashing melee.
like where did he say anything about melee beng bad?

 

[TL?]

People need to stop being so defensive about their games in the smash community. It's OK to admit the game you like has flaws or could be better. Arguing over the quality of the game is a never ending cycle of the same arguments on endless repeat. Just say you like the game or you're having fun, as nobody can really argue with you on that. I've played a ton of UMVC3, and the community for that game has a very healthy love/hate relationship with their own game. There's a thread somewhere on SRK where someone asks if marvel is a good game and if they should pick it up. Most of the responses are along the lines of, "Marvel is not a good game, but you should get it!". It sounds goofy but it's actually a very good attitude. They can accept the flaws and bad decisions as long as the overall package is still fun to them. People try to drop in and hate marvel by criticizing parts of the game, and the community just responds, "yeah that is pretty dumb... we're gonna keep playing though". But meanwhile in the smash community people constantly make these ultra defensive posts like the OP. Smash 4 has problems, and certain criticisms are legitimate. But if you are having fun with the overall package you don't need to defend it, just keep playing. There's plenty of things that could be improved in smash 4, but I'm still having fun for now. Remember that games don't die from people outside hating on it. Games only die when the people who like it stop showing up. Play what you think is fun and stop worrying about trying to justify it to people.

 

[Luco]

I support Kuma and his sentiment, though having some competitive experience with the game I might also drop my 2 cents on it.

I think it probably boils down to the way we play the game. Take the traditional (Emblem Lord made a good post on it that I agree with and realised my own way of viewing the game fit into that structure quite well) way of looking at it through advantage, disadvantage and footsies + neutral. In Melee, neutral was supplemented by a heavy offensive, aggressive game, where characters who couldn't keep up were ones that weren't good aggressors/didn't deal well with aggression. In Brawl, the opposite is mostly true. Brawl's defensive mechanics made punishes the optimal way to go, so defensive options were preferred and your way of getting into advantage was by punishing someone from neutral... it was more complex than this; but it's a decent basic way to explain it.

In smash 4, I think people are approaching it using one of these two mentalities. Much of the mechanics are very similar to Brawl and you could consider it a very defensive game... except punishes are generally harder to achieve across the board... Actually, I find it significantly harder to punish aggression in this game than I did in Brawl. On the other side, aggression is also hard because getting in without using laggy moves like dash attack that actually can be punished requires you to go through footsies and I think that's where the crux of this game lies. Unlike Brawl or Melee, this game idolises two opponents trying to put themselves in the advantaged state against the other, and the most common form of this is a game that utilises both defensive and aggressive tactics to do so. For instance, spacing aerials in order to be safe, trying to poke the other's shield/find an opening to work with. I suspect they've balanced it around this idea (and in this respect it's similar to more traditional fighters btw) and the cast is more balanced than in previous titles; but it means in these early stages of the meta, most game plans revolve around good spacing or characters that have good risk vs. reward in footsies that allows them to really push their advantaged state - If diddy gets past footsies you are in for a world of pain, moreso than if someone like wii fit trainer does. However most characters can to some extent play this footsies game, thus I think why it feels more balanced.

But basically what this means is that for a while the meta will feel very repetitive until more optimal ways of playing footsies/getting people into the advantaged state are found, and that's probably why it feels so stale to people. In response to that, all I can really say is, the meta is literally 2 months old; problems for this will probably be found, so while I respect criticism for this game, I also think our perception of the game will change drastically over the coming months and onward into the year ahead. Thus why I agree with Kuma. Our perception of this game is naturally affected by our perception of past games; but be aware that it will change, so try not to be the prophet of doom on this game's competitive viability when realistically, that hasn't been determined quite yet.


tl;dr this game is different from past smash games in more subtle ways than we know and it will take some time to fully realise the consequences of that. In the meantime, making a judgement call on the game's viability before that point is a case of counting your chickens before they've hatched.

EDIT: I hope i've explained my neutral game effectively enough and it isn't just crazy talk. Someone who knows more about can feel free to tell me how wrong I am, but I think the overall point is pretty solid, at the least.

 

[Teran]

I agree with Kuma but I also think that there are some glaring problems with the game that should be readdressed by the dev team. However, my concern is that there will be a repeat of the post-Brawl days and we will have another schism in the community because certain individuals decided to **** on the game because it didn't fit thier expectations. You can disagree with the game and address the problems with it but when you have crowds chanting "**** Brawl"; well that's not a community I'm not proud to say I'm apart of. I'd like us as a community to approach Smash 4 less venomously and a bit more positively than how we did with Brawl. It's not healthy, it's immature, and really unbecoming of a community to outsiders.

I don't necessarily see why we have to be one big happy family because these games are in the same series.

I'm not saying we have to segregate and be nasty, or that we can't have people who do legitimately enjoy all the games, but do we really all have to hold hands and skip into the sunset?

I honestly don't care that much if there's a divide in the community. Smash 4 is a shiny new game that will no doubt have a huge playerbase for the first year, Melee has already proven it's perfectly fine on its own.

If either dies out, I doubt it will be due this divide everyone is trying to avoid. Differences in taste and opinion are a natural diving force. Just the way it is.

 

[Venus of the Desert Bloom]

I don't necessarily see why we have to be one big happy family because these games are in the same series.

I'm not saying we have to segregate and be nasty, or that we can't have people who do legitimately enjoy all the games, but do we really all have to hold hands and skip into the sunset?

I honestly don't care that much if there's a divide in the community. Smash 4 is a shiny new game that will no doubt have a huge playerbase for the first year, Melee has already proven it's perfectly fine on its own.

If either dies out, I doubt it will be due this divide everyone is trying to avoid. Differences in taste and opinion are a natural diving force. Just the way it is.

Each games fan base as thier own standards, cultures, rules, etc and getting rid of those in exchange for a unified fan base wouldn't be a good idea. So no, we don't need to be holding hands into the sunset but I feel there needs to be a certain amount of respect and compassion for the fan bases. I don't think this lack of respect/compassion is a rampant, out of control problem but it is something that has been a persistent issue within the greater Smash community for some time. We don't need to always get along but communicating and working together more would bolster/improve the community as a whole.

I just wish to urge people to not jump down Smash 4's throat early based on what happened to Brawl "lol new game = exact situation as Brawl = will be a horrible dissapointment #smash4sucks"

 

[RetroBro]

Since this game’s release, I’ve been seeing mixed opinions on this game, as to be expected. It’s a new game after all. However, some of its criticism has been really getting on my nerves.

Rolls are too good.

No, they’re not. If you’re having a problem countering rolls, learn to read them. Rolls are still punishable, even if the window is smaller than it has been in the past. Meanwhile, I see people requesting these to be patched up later. How about you adapt instead of asking for nerfs. A more logical nerf request would be Diddy, and he’s most definitely manageable.

One proposal I had seen was that after X amount of rolls, you can’t roll or something like that. I’ve seen something like this in Bayonetta, but I don’t think it’d work for Smash. The rewards for rolling in Smash are not that big most of the time UNLESS you use it to evade a read attack and you whiff punish. Bayonetta’s dodge, in comparison, has a much larger reward for successfully dodging attacks so discouraging spamming there is a good idea.

I'll agree to a certain extent that rolls aren't as bad as everyone says. But they are DEFINITELY different then previous installments. I won't use Brawl as a comparison because that game had many other glaring issues. But however, I will use Melee as a comparison. Despite your clear disdain for anyone talking about the game... Melee had punishable rolls because of the varying differences in each character's roll, and even then... rolling wasn't an optimal movement option because of wavedashing. Nonetheless I still maintain that rolling is harder to punish than ever. Anyone who denies that is a fool. You have a relatively balanced game at the moment, with most rolls being very similar to each other.

I think what bothers most people (Whether they realize this or not) is that this game has become defensive as opposed to the normal offensive game that we've witnessed in the past. Shields are more powerful than ever. The frequency of power shielding, the regeneration of shields, lack of hitting under or over shields has provided us with... a very grabby defensive **** fest of waiting for the other opponent to make a mistake, rather than the ballsy gutsy offensive plays that we're used to seeing. I'd like to point out that most characters actually stand a chance this time around because of the defensive options. Which.. can be perceived as a good thing maybe? Depends on your perspective.

In all honesty, I've gotten used to it.

On a side note, most people's perspectives are coming from "For Glory" and from various online modes that... in reality it IS that hard to predict and counter rolls. The varying degrees of latency and lag WILL make it improbable to fight spam rollers. So keep in mind, the feedback ISN'T tournament oriented.

 

[RODO]

People need to stop being so defensive about their games in the smash community. It's OK to admit the game you like has flaws or could be better. Arguing over the quality of the game is a never ending cycle of the same arguments on endless repeat. Just say you like the game or you're having fun, as nobody can really argue with you on that. I've played a ton of UMVC3, and the community for that game has a very healthy love/hate relationship with their own game. There's a thread somewhere on SRK where someone asks if marvel is a good game and if they should pick it up. Most of the responses are along the lines of, "Marvel is not a good game, but you should get it!". It sounds goofy but it's actually a very good attitude. They can accept the flaws and bad decisions as long as the overall package is still fun to them. People try to drop in and hate marvel by criticizing parts of the game, and the community just responds, "yeah that is pretty dumb... we're gonna keep playing though". But meanwhile in the smash community people constantly make these ultra defensive posts like the OP. Smash 4 has problems, and certain criticisms are legitimate. But if you are having fun with the overall package you don't need to defend it, just keep playing. There's plenty of things that could be improved in smash 4, but I'm still having fun for now. Remember that games don't die from people outside hating on it. Games only die when the people who like it stop showing up. Play what you think is fun and stop worrying about trying to justify it to people.

Pretty much this. I have tons of fun playing this game but man could it be so much better. Telling people to either shut up and adapt or get out worked in the past but now that there is balance patches in smash I think people should voice their opinion so that something might come of it.

 

[GrownManJones]

I don't understand why people cannot complain about a game that's nothing what we wanted. (we the competitive and spectator crowd)

I mean just look around your own board. The treads are all like "look at this new tech I found!" and its nothing but situational garbage. Or "Lets use these settings to make the game better." because the games not good by itself.

75% of people posting don't know what they are talking about and honestly it takes 100 matches to see a single exciting match of this game. This game is seriously garbage as a fighting game.

I never thought I would ever say this in my life but Brawl was more hype than this game. Everything looks so beautiful but feels absolutely hollow.

One last thing, you know this game sucks because everyone who you talk to the first thing they say is "wow the game is beautiful" they don't say a damn thing about the gameplay.

 

[chipz]

my attitude is as follows: Nintendo ****ed up by not making 'with anyone' have a region option so im playing with about a second delay against most people online. Camping is almost as effective as it was in Brawl, and theres not nearly enough hitstun so people escape what should be finishing combos fairly easily. Hell even when I do meteor someone out of a combo, some of the recoveries are just crazy and can meteor cancel.

edit: forgot about the most annoying thing from brawl making a return, and thats the edge magnets. People grab the edge from an inch away, facing either direction, so theres almost no reason to sweet spot your recovery and just overshoot it because its so easy.

my 2cents after 2 days playing it _b

 

[cpulord]

i have to say one thing for this post.If you dont like the game dont play it then none forces you if you dont then play your melee till it dies when that happens(nothing is permanent) then you will have every right to want a new melee but until can the melee community just shut up and let the other games be

 

[chipz]

i have to say one thing for this post.If you dont like the game dont play it then none forces you if you dont then play your melee till it dies when that happens(nothing is permanent) then you will have every right to want a new melee but until can the melee community just shut up and let the other games be

no **** we don't have to play it, but we're allowed to express what we find works against it being competitive.
you don't need to get defensive about it. Its a game and it doesn't get its feelings hurt.

If you don't like people discussing things relevant to the subject of the thread, maybe you don't understand the purpose of an internet forum.

 

[cpulord]

ya know this reminds me of ancient greek mythology where one would start a fight for no reason and **** endlessly and well i could go on for 3 pages with the problems melee has and i would not have been half done but you dont know how much i will enjoy seeing melee die out if i will still be around in smash

 

[Luco]

Can we try for once not to turn this into a 'melee vs smash 4' thread? It's not needed, the discussion here often refers to Melee/Brawl for use as comparisons. Doing that should not imply a sense of "melee/brawl elitism". Of course people have a right to voice their opinions on stuff.

Though ironically, I also believe that we may be misguided in coming to those conclusions just yet and if there's any reason the game is feeling 'stale' to you it's because it's being played like previous iterations of smash and its own, ideally more exciting meta will emerge over the upcoming months. THAT is why I think people dismissing this game atm are not, perhaps, looking at the bigger picture here.

 

[chipz]

ya know this reminds me of ancient greek mythology where one would start a fight for no reason and **** endlessly and well i could go on for 3 pages with the problems melee has and i would not have been half done but you dont know how much i will enjoy seeing melee die out if i will still be around in smash

what absolute nonsense
there's no need to wish for a game to die because people prefer it in the tournament scene
if you're not competing, then let it be.

 

[cpulord]

i dont wish for a game to die i actually enjoy watching melee but the community is more annoying than 6 swasgger prankster users team in pokemon.i will prolly enjoy big house 5 but sadly smash in general will die nothing escapes death sadly we just have to deal with it

 

[Ulevo]

For those of you consistently crying about people's criticisms with "This is not melee, it will never be melee, so stop trying to make it be melee and go play melee", you need to realize that Melee is a good game. A very good game in fact. It set a precedent of what and what not to do in a Smash game to make it competitive and of high quality. You can't just ignore it in favor of making a game "different". Melee got a lot of **** right, and thanks to that, people will continue to make suggestions in line with what Melee has done for future Smash iterations because those specifics have proven to be work. Just because someone makes a suggestion or criticism about Wii U or any other game for that matter doesn't mean they want to bust out their GC. Tired of reading this Melee 2.0 nonsense. Use your brain before you post.

 

[Raijinken]

I support Kuma and his sentiment, though having some competitive experience with the game I might also drop my 2 cents on it.

I think it probably boils down to the way we play the game. Take the traditional (Emblem Lord made a good post on it that I agree with and realised my own way of viewing the game fit into that structure quite well) way of looking at it through advantage, disadvantage and footsies + neutral. In Melee, neutral was supplemented by a heavy offensive, aggressive game, where characters who couldn't keep up were ones that weren't good aggressors/didn't deal well with aggression. In Brawl, the opposite is mostly true. Brawl's defensive mechanics made punishes the optimal way to go, so defensive options were preferred and your way of getting into advantage was by punishing someone from neutral... it was more complex than this; but it's a decent basic way to explain it.

In smash 4, I think people are approaching it using one of these two mentalities. Much of the mechanics are very similar to Brawl and you could consider it a very defensive game... except punishes are generally harder to achieve across the board... Actually, I find it significantly harder to punish aggression in this game than I did in Brawl. On the other side, aggression is also hard because getting in without using laggy moves like dash attack that actually can be punished requires you to go through footsies and I think that's where the crux of this game lies. Unlike Brawl or Melee, this game idolises two opponents trying to put themselves in the advantaged state against the other, and the most common form of this is a game that utilises both defensive and aggressive tactics to do so. For instance, spacing aerials in order to be safe, trying to poke the other's shield/find an opening to work with. I suspect they've balanced it around this idea (and in this respect it's similar to more traditional fighters btw) and the cast is more balanced than in previous titles; but it means in these early stages of the meta, most game plans revolve around good spacing or characters that have good risk vs. reward in footsies that allows them to really push their advantaged state - If diddy gets past footsies you are in for a world of pain, moreso than if someone like wii fit trainer does. However most characters can to some extent play this footsies game, thus I think why it feels more balanced.

But basically what this means is that for a while the meta will feel very repetitive until more optimal ways of playing footsies/getting people into the advantaged state are found, and that's probably why it feels so stale to people. In response to that, all I can really say is, the meta is literally 2 months old; problems for this will probably be found, so while I respect criticism for this game, I also think our perception of the game will change drastically over the coming months and onward into the year ahead. Thus why I agree with Kuma. Our perception of this game is naturally affected by our perception of past games; but be aware that it will change, so try not to be the prophet of doom on this game's competitive viability when realistically, that hasn't been determined quite yet.


tl;dr this game is different from past smash games in more subtle ways than we know and it will take some time to fully realise the consequences of that. In the meantime, making a judgement call on the game's viability before that point is a case of counting your chickens before they've hatched.

EDIT: I hope i've explained my neutral game effectively enough and it isn't just crazy talk. Someone who knows more about can feel free to tell me how wrong I am, but I think the overall point is pretty solid, at the least.

I like this analysis. That approach actually reminds me somewhat of how a lot of Project M matches went in 3.02. Players who came from Melee would play aggro, players who came from Brawl would play defense, and both styles were valid around a central game of looking for the needed opening. Some characters could make that opening, and other characters preferred to wait for that opening. And it just so happened that you could still run into a match that looked like a camp-fest if two players both played Diddy.

And yet, people were still happy, because Project M is heralded as the successor to Melee, while some view Smash4 as the successor to Brawl. And while PM is intended to capture Melee, Smash4 by all appearances is not trying to be so Brawl-inspired. And thus an unfair bias is placed on a new and largely unique game.

For those of you consistently crying about people's criticisms with "This is not melee, it will never be melee, so stop trying to make it be melee and go play melee", you need to realize that Melee is a good game. A very good game in fact. It set a precedent of what and what not to do in a Smash game to make it competitive and of high quality. You can't just ignore it in favor of making a game "different". Melee got a lot of **** right, and thanks to that, people will continue to make suggestions in line with what Melee has done for future Smash iterations because those specifics have proven to be work. Tired of reading this Melee 2.0 nonsense. Use your brain before you post.

Melee is a very good game, but while it got a lot of things right, it didn't get everything perfect (not that Smash4 has by any means). It has accessibility barriers to the higher level of play that some players, and Sakurai himself, don't like. It has playstyle imbalance that, as Luco said, locked characters who couldn't aggressively hold their own out of the meta. And that was all fine for some people, particularly players who don't mind a small viable roster, and who have the reflexes and timing to keep up with a game that is actually detrimental to one's health to play at a high level.

Personally? I'd love it if more Melee players would play Smash4. They'd give us some unique perspectives and could open new paths in the meta by playing aggressively. But they'll also have to treat it as an unique game, because it isn't Melee and it isn't Brawl. Playing for ten minutes and then complaining isn't contributing - it's elitist whining. It's completely normal for some versions of a game to not "click" with a person (try having a player who started on Awakening go play Fire Emblem 4, they're vastly different), but it's not constructive for those people to sit around railing on the game they dislike. Nor is it constructive for the opposite group to rag on 'em either.

There's far too little "Ah you play another variant of Smash that I didn't care for, but it's cool" and far too much "Oh you're a Melee tryhard. Oh you like that Brawl campfest. Oh you're just playing the newest game because it's the shiny toy on the block. What you actually still play 64?" Productive discussion is great, but none of the games are perfect, and most of the time it becomes complaining (often very loudly) about the speck and ignoring the log, as the saying goes.

 

[chipz]

For those of you consistently crying about people's criticisms with "This is not melee, it will never be melee, so stop trying to make it be melee and go play melee", you need to realize that Melee is a good game. A very good game in fact. It set a precedent of what and what not to do in a Smash game to make it competitive and of high quality. You can't just ignore it in favor of making a game "different". Melee got a lot of **** right, and thanks to that, people will continue to make suggestions in line with what Melee has done for future Smash iterations because those specifics have proven to be work. Just because someone makes a suggestion or criticism about Wii U or any other game for that matter doesn't mean they want to bust out their GC. Tired of reading this Melee 2.0 nonsense. Use your brain before you post.

it was also accidentally a tournament viable game, in which Sakurai himself has absolutely no interest of repeating.
People who thought smash 4 was going to be anything like melee were kidding themselves. Its still a party game at its core (a very good one) so Nintendo is going to continue to ignore us as the minority. And that is understandable, but unfortunate.

So if people are going to act like melee should just die,or people to "get with the times", then offer an alternative that legitimately compares with it.

 

[Teran]

it was also accidentally a tournament viable game

No

 

[Raijinken]

it was also accidentally a tournament viable game, in which Sakurai himself has absolutely no interest of repeating.
People who thought smash 4 was going to be anything like melee were kidding themselves. Its still a party game at its core (a very good one) so Nintendo is going to continue to ignore us as the minority. And that is understandable, but unfortunate.

So if people are going to act like melee should just die,or people to "get with the times", then offer an alternative that legitimately compares with it.

There's a mod for that, but it comes with the same issues for many people.

But light snark aside, there isn't a cure-all for Smash. Each game is different, and there really is no need to get with the times if your preferred game isn't the one with the times. It's like telling people to stop listening to classical music and go listen to more hip-hop. The only reason is that there is more new hip-hop being created, which means there's potential for something new and unexpectedly good.

No

Yes. It was. Sakurai has specifically stated that Melee turning out how it did was him failing at his intent.

Accidental double-post, please ignore.

 

[chipz]

No

yes.
their 8 playtesters, 0 input from the community and being marketed specifically as a party game (don't make me quote Sakurai on what he thinks of competitive melee)

as evidenced also in its successor, with all its glorious tripping so everyone can win!
but you knew that already.

 

[Teran]

T
Yes. It was. Sakurai has specifically stated that Melee turning out how it did was him failing at his intent.

He's actually said that the competitive fighter design philosophy was the general mentality in the 90s and early 00s, leading to a bunch of the choices they made which Sora then did a 180 on after HAL left Smash.

Also if you look at the changes made across versions of Melee, you see clear nerfs to top tier characters such as a reduction in Fox's usmash/uair knockback, changing the trajectory of Sheik's dthrow, nerfng Falco's dair etc.

You know, maybe it wasn't Sakurai's intent, but HAL's intent was perfectly clear.

 

[Nobie]

No game with a balance patch as specific as "Zelda hits .75 damage harder" at the same time that a character like Shulk gets overall buffs is ignoring a game's competitive potential.

I think the whole "adapt or shut up" thing isn't about silencing criticism, but rather about creating awareness about what one is doing when one throws out a criticism. Are you expressing an actual criticism of the game from a logical place or an emotional one? The latter isn't a bad thing, as it's usually an expression of frustration, and those who stick with a game despite taking issues with it probably at least still enjoy it on some level. The question then is, can this frustration be overcome through personal improvement in the game, or is it something so intrinsically a part of the game that no amount of increased skill, calm, practice, or awareness can deal with it? The former is tied more to a competitive spirit, but of course not everyone who enjoys Smash Bros, even competitively, enjoys it purely for its ability to determine winners and losers.

 

[LightLV]

The discovery of microwave properties were purely by accident, and now we have delicious hot pockets. Whether or not melee was intentional or an accident is irrelevant. The "accident" argument is so pointless, it is so utterly pointless and hypocritical, and i wish people would stop bringing it up. It's irrelevant because the beneficial effects of "unintended" things have already been acknowledged throughout videogames in general, just like literally everything else awesome about the world that we know.

...And why do you people keep ending up on Melee anyway? Any time movement options, approach options, hitstun and general competitive mechanics show up, people kneejerk to Melee as if it's the only fighting game on earth. The director himself already said Melee was the sharpest game in the series, there's no point arguing it's integrity anymore.

YES, 80% of the mechanics in Melee were clearly intentional. NO, the tier list and 13 year meta was not predicted or intended, because that's impossible. YES, brawl was overly defensive and campy as **** (the most egregious example of slingshot balancing i've ever seen in my life), and obviously Smash 4 is trying to fit between these 2 games.

In all seriousness though these kind of posts almost never go anywhere meaningful without serious moderation. If you're gonna bash people (Melee players), they're gonna bash you back, and then vitriol tends to blind fruitful discussion.

OP is right that the game is still young and we should all learn, practice, and let the game develop first, but other posters have also noted that the general direction of the game is defensive, which I agree with. However, this does not mean that aggression is dead, you simply have to go about it in a different way. In Melee, raw offensive pressure was a powerful option due to shield stun and L-cancelling, but that is clearly not the case in Smash 4. At least when I play, I feel like aggression is more focused around the bait and punish strategy. However, just because I'm trying to bait something out does not make me a "defensive" player, it makes me aggressive in the context of the current Smash 4 meta. If I wanted to be defensive I'd just play Villager and play keep away.

That being said, I kind of get the feeling that the game is begrudgingly trying to be more competitive, while trying to maintain a low skill gap, almost like the game wants to be two different things, but can't decide which to be. For example, we have hitstun back, but KB on most moves don't allow combos to be more than 3-4 hits (matchup dependent of course). Tripping has been removed, but now we have improved rolls, and shields can be dropped fast enough to punish moves. Ledge mechanics either promote crazy off stage play, or make edgeguarding completely meaningless (mostly the latter). The game is just constantly fighting itself. I still like the game, but I can't help but feel weird playing it, and I think that's what causes people to shy away from it and criticize it. I love all the Smash games, and played them all pretty avidly, even Brawl, but this one is gonna take getting used too.

This is almost entirely my stance on this game. It's clear that Sakurai tried his hardest to appeal to 2 crowds that are literally on the opposite sides of the appeal spectrum -- casuals and hardcore competitive gamers. You can't put these 2 types of players in a room and have them be equal, not without a game that encompasses complete bull****. If brawl has proven anything about smash or fighting games in general, it's that bull**** mechanics will not stop people from becoming good enough to create a massive skill gap between eachother.


Sakurai clearly isn't "INTENDING" to ignore competitive play with this game. If EVO and E3 are any indication, Nintendo this year has very clearly shown that 1) they are completely ignorant to competitive smash potential, and 2) they now understand how foolish that's been, and are slowly beginning to catch on to its strength. I really don't have any ominous feelings about this game's direction, i'm going to have to see about the next balance patch before i get scared. But there is no harm in looking to Melee when it comes to bettering this game's longevity.