The British Thread : UK Circuit idea on most recent post !!!!

[Cpt.Zeppo]

lol speak for yourself,melee is anything but stagnant(imo).

I'll find out what this brawl cracks like soon enough anyway.Whats Falcon like to your/anyones knowledge?

 

[DevMBC]

melee's still the best of times - i'm gonna tear you up, z

 

[Mr P]

I've heard from good sources i.e Mew2king that brawl sucks and i've heard the same thing from a lot of other good players, i'll reserve my judgement until i play it though. I thought melee sucked when i first played it and didnt touch it for 9 months after i bought it.

 

[pictish freak]

Crazy ****. I leave smash and m2k is laughed at due to 100% accurate stuff like 25 reasons to hate m2k, and while respected for his data people could see those 25 reasons. Then he like, gets good at smash, and suddenly there's topic like in the marth sub forum where everyone's trying to suck up even harder than when Ken posted back when I left.

It's like a really creepy twilight zone and stuff.

Edit: Nb, that has nothing to do with anything I just got reminded that's all. As for the actual stuff about brawl I'm waiting to play and at least let the game flesh out a bit. Y'know, actual tournament data and evidence of shallowness or depth.

 

[Mr P]

http://boards.gamefaqs.com/gfaqs/genmessage.php?board=516492&topic=41341001

Here's the thread where Mew2king posted his thoughts if anyone is interested, he gives a lot of good insights into the game and as far as he is concerned for the time being brawl does not seem to be nearly as deep as melee is Maybe more stuff will be discovered in the future but him and a lot of other good players dont seem convinced by brawl right now.

 

[VA]

What rubbish thoughts mew2king had. I think it's logical that 'good players' don't like brawl becuase from that link you just posted, he analysed it as if it were supposed to be melee. It's high time people stopped looking at as if it were melee because obviously it's not going to be the same.

Here's a different outlook from another couple of good players I know who think brawl is hugely promising http://smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=143254

 

[Bronze]

M2K says its bad, Azen says its good. I think far more 'good' players have said Brawl's amazing than that its bad.

 

[grayfox]

Like a fresh new begining... lollz

I don't think it can be phrased any better, well said Azen, well said T_T


Good times about Ness! I would'a used him in melee if it wasn't for the fact that he is my worst character haha.

Also is that some ADAM ES MAXIMUS I SEE?! **** man you must be coming up for 11 now, good times.

 

[COEY]

http://smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=144002

 

[Kone]

I say its stagnant in comparison to brawl. I know theres till alot of life in melee and that i could do alot to even improve my game. However, the possibilities of a new game and being involved in it from the start (something the uk did not do with melee) seems greater to me than being involved in a game that'll die within 6 months.

Melee didnt have much depth imo when i first started. Heck, our community died for over a year and the likes pf pictish, quicky,deca all stopped as they thought that it was dieing/couldnt use certainc hars competitively etc etc etc. Ideas that have all been over turned.

I played n64 competitively and when i picked up melee i ****ing hated it. I love melee now. From what i can gather playing wes, another competitive player from both previous games, we cant see why anyone would think it has a lack of depth. You cant tell yet, just like you couldnt tell when you first played melee.

Im going to put vids up from smash glasgow this weekend. That'll prove my point. If you watch them vids melee looks turd and you couldnt imagine melee has got to where it is.

Play brawl and see where it goes. You cant write it off just yet.

The UK last tourney had a turnout of like 25 :/. Brawls the future.

edit: mew2king doesnt want to play brawl as hes just got to the top of the melee heap.

edit: i read mew2kings post. He has basically just said what isnt in brawl compared to melee. What a ****ing moron. Ignore him. Lcancelling and wavedashing werent discovered for over a year in melee. So, if you had compared n64 and melee you would had ths same response. And if were talking comboes n64 still has more to this day than melee. So, which game is better?

edit again as im annoyed - most comboes in melee arent real comboes. There based on knowing character matchups. Knowing what where a move can send an opponent , knowing what your characer can do to follow up , knowing what your opponent could do and what yout hink they will do. There are obvious exceptions to this, like knowing to what percent you can chain throw a fox/falco as marth etc etc etc. But without knowing brawl and the game mechanics you cant yet know how to keep strings of moves going. Ive played the game for a week now and I know that in a week ive learned alot about lucas. Im starting to string things against wes. Wes is beginning to learn how to get around them, so im adapting my strings etc etc etc

Thus the game evolves. Just like melee did.

 

[Cpt.Zeppo]

In Mew2Kings favour,he acknowledges the fact that his opinions may be rash and presumptious.I havent played Brawl but I dont think what m2k is saying is necessarily stupid.Most of the stuff hes saying there isnt even opinion,like Ed said he is just saying what is and isnt transferred from Melee.This does not mean I agree with m2k,btw.
Hes also being an egotistic prat too Im sure of that.

Also,I think people need to stop with the Brawl is a new game thing.Alot of us loved Melee so why wouldnt we compare certain things when we play or watch Brawl?Brawls going to take over and I think its a legitimate concern that it might not be as fun as Melee.
Look at it this way-I watch videos of Brawl,and I think:-
-I dont see many combos
-the matches are boring
-I dont like the edge stuff
-the game is evidently not designed with competitive play in mind

This doesnt even mean Im looking at it as if its melee-this is just a natural reaction because this game is a ****ing sequel.This doesnt even mean I wont like Brawl,I just cant help but notice these things because I have a working brain.It doesnt mean I am not acknowledging the fact the game has been out a couple weeks,I just dont see many combos.
So really,what do you have to say to me after I've said that,because I dont think 'brawl is a new game treat it as such' is fair,for the reasons I just mentioned.

Also,if you are going to reply to this post,can you please acknowledge that no-one is infact 'right' about Brawl and that it is your own opinion.There is a reason why I never post **** like this,and its because the boards are filled with self-important pricks.

Also-has anyone ever seen The Big Lebowski?omfg,ridiculous film

Jam you's gone get pasted gtfo

 

[Mr P]

What rubbish thoughts mew2king had. I think it's logical that 'good players' don't like brawl becuase from that link you just posted, he analysed it as if it were supposed to be melee. It's high time people stopped looking at as if it were melee because obviously it's not going to be the same.

Here's a different outlook from another couple of good players I know who think brawl is hugely promising http://smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=143254

Mew2king has a right to his views and considering he is the player that took melee to deeper levels than anyone else on the planet i have to take his opinions into consideration. When he goes out on a limb to say that brawl is a considerably less deep game than melee it would be stupid of me not to take his views into consideration when constructing my opinion of this game. Now i know that he may be wrong and the game is still in it's very early stages he even admits this himself but from what we do know it's not all promising. I'm getting a lot of mixed opinions from different people and this of course makes me skeptical espescially when Nintendo themselves make comments like "we want to make this game appeal to as wide an audience as possible".

I just want brawl to be the best game it can be and if it's not quite what i expected then i'm going to be a little disapointed, of course i will reserve my final judgement of the game for when i actually get a chance to play it properly myself and the compeitive scene arises (if it's deep enough) Only time will tell i guess...

 

[DevMBC]

everyone's making good points -

the way i see it, it's completely impossible to argue one way or the other. Melee's a ****ing deep game and nothing else considered, the mindgame implementation was outrageously solid. There was something in melee that attracted me initially , and this is where i'm finding it hard to tell. I'm not drawn to brawl at all like i was melee at the moment. That could be cause i'm older, because i'm taking a completely different approach to the game to begin with, because my expectations were very very high or because i'm going from an established game with established mechanics to a brand new game.

People aren't stupid, if they're weighing it up against melee that's not all they're doing. I'm approaching it like a new game an yeah like Z says, it's not totally cracked out to compare brawl an melee.

It's still early days, i'm really enjoying brawl - if it is deep in any sort of way like melee it's completely different aspects of play that'll be where depth comes about. End of the day something will seperate two players and tournies will have winners. yawwwwww mean? =D

edit: I saw the end of the big lebowski and having spoiled what is clearly a huge incident i've never gone out of my way to see it again lol

 

[grayfox]

Seeing as its up for grabs i claim best Snake in the uk. I'd make a sig but my focus on wasting time isn't what it used to be

 

[PDOT]

its smashbros 3

not melee 2

 

[J03]

give combos time mengz, how many of you could pull off a ridiculous combo after a week or 2?

 

[PDOT]

give combos time mengz, how many of you could pull off a ridiculous combo after a week or 2?

fuzzyness..

 

[Cpt.Zeppo]

its smashbros 3

not melee 2

right and Melee was what...Smash Bros 2?I think??

Jam-what a travesty lol(big lebowski).Nice points also.

 

[grayfox]

I still can't combo in 64 or melee lol it's all good times

 

[J03]

well youll be happy to know that running past someone as smashing them still works

 

[J03]

impression of wolf.

wolf for me is the combination of fox and falco. his recovery is closer to fox's then falco's in length. his illusion angles 30 degrees upwards which is strange to get used to but has its' benefits. firstly say your fox and you illusion into the edge, but your opponent grabbed it just before, oh dear you die XD. with wolf you dont really have to worry about it, if you do it right youll cancel and catch the edge normally, but if someones on the edge youll sail past them to saftey. another thing worth noticing about wolfs fire-wolf (XD) and illusion are that if they hit an opponent, they'll know about it. his fire-wolf has a moderate amount of knockback but his illusion requires more investigation. it can spike (or meteor) people downwards if you hit with a certain part. its knockback is pretty similar to foxs' except if you hit with the end of it, then he just whacks them flying!

his shine doesn't have much knock-back and it doesn't stall him at all! I have no idea of its uses atm but it might have much more usage to use of the edge then say fox's depending on hit-box/priority...remember all theory here XD. his laser offers 6-4% and brings a fair chunk of landing lag. from what I notice the knock-back it delivers offers your opponent more stun then your lag so you can laser to grab if done right. if your opponent shields the laser it still gives them a small amount of shield stun so its still useful ^_^.

Jabs are as useful as ever in brawl and wolf is no exception, he has a nice quick jab so use it like you would have used it in melee imo. his up-tilt is nice, its similar to foxes old melee one except it hits in front of him and it's a bit worse for opening lag. d-tilt has its uses obv, it sends them back though, its reasonably quick so it might be usable in some combos, who knows. lastly his f-tilt...its amazing. he lungs forward quickly and the power of it is like a mini smash...awesome.

f-smash is as ridiculous as it gets. his f-smash and f-tilt both hit a few times and the final hit has the power. the hits are quick lol so if you get hit by one your getting hit by all of them. the range on his f-smash is just plain ridiculous...a little wolf shouldn't be able to lunge that far XD. d-smash is the old hit in front, hit behind bish. not as strong as f-smash but the two hits (front, behind) are in quite quick succession so its still a nice smash. up-smash is great, not for power though. in brawl its much easier to up-smash straight from dashing and running so most up-smashes are more useful then they would be. he hits them twice and then up they go, its not the power that makes the move good, but the fact that they don't go that far so you can lead up with another move.

wolf's aerials are such a flowing set. his fair is quite like sheiks crossed with mew two's actually, but with more lag afterwards. it sends them upwards so its a pretty useful killer as its more powerful then his up-air. his b-air is the power move, its very quick too with a good range. the d-air is quite hard tbh. it has a little start up lag but when it connects its a nice, fast meteor, its incredibly useful for edge-guarding, not easy but its early days to be saying how hard it will be lol. hop off and d-air, simple. the n-air reminds me of pikachus' in melee. he spins in a ball and it has multiple hits, the hit-box is pretty much his ball so its usage is up to you tbh. what I do like about the n-air is there isn't much landing lag and the knock-back is only moderate so you can follow it with another move or a grab (depending on %). Up-air is a very good move for me being an old fox main back in melee. its not as powerful and no you cant up-throw up-air lol. but if you hit with one its fairly easy to hit with another. in a match i managed to short hop one and hit my opponent on a platform, full jump another and then another landing on the top platform for the stock, but opponents DI isn't always reliable.

Wolf looks to be very competitive and is a nice character to ease you into melee if you loved to play the old space-animals.

what do you think Ed, i've still more to say but i always do XD

 

[captain smashie01]

nevermind all this brawl crack, big lebowski's an amazin film :D

also joe, who's got brawl in bolton? did dan come down?

 

[pictish freak]

-the game is evidently not designed with competitive play in mind

What is this evidence? It's not self evident or anything so I am curious. I'm assuming everyone has more brawl experience than me, so I was wondering what you'd found that isn't competitive.

Just from watching videos, I've not seen any evidence for it being competitive or not yet. That is to say, the total amount of evidence is too small - lots of vids, all of total brawl newbies (even the melee pros are brawl newbies) so there's a lack of supporting evidence either way.

I would say that the game already looks potentially less tech skill intensive, but let's not forget technical skill does not a competitive game make. Tech skill is simply a dexterity barrier for gameplay - for example, I heard countless comments in the past of 'Smart foxes > fast foxes' and general 'That fox is really fast but he sucks' and so on. It seems to show that while tech skill is a pre-requiste for winning, it is not what makes you win. I'd postulate that yomi/mind games - whatever you wanna call it - is what wins matches. Smart players win. So while brawl has less tech skill pre-reqs, it may be as rewarding of smart players as melee, more, or less.

So I'd say the game is evidently designed with reducing the tech skill needed to reach competitive play in mind (but we may foil that intent - I'm sure in melee they never imagined the tech skill some Fox/Falco players had would be required competitively) but that does not exclude the game's competitiveness. Tech skill is only a requirement for players to be competitive - not games. If you find this hard to believe, simply imagine melee, but with things like wavedash, shuffling and any other technical feat you care for being either simplified in execution or macro'd to a button. The game would be as deep as it is, but with less muscle memory/time investment required on the part of the player.

On the other hand maybe you found something that throws the inherent risk/reward system of the whole basis of competitive gaming off whack. I dunno, I'm just second guessing by general perceptions.

Ugh, too much philosophy reading on my part maybe ~_~

 

[Kone]

-I dont see many combos - you DIDNT when melee started. Sorry man, but thats how it went. Watch some old vids. Untily you understand a game you cant combo. 64/melee/brawl have never been standard fighters that rely on comboes anyway. Took ages till melee developed that. If this game does have less comboes it doesnt mean its a worse game.

-the matches are boring - read above. No one knows what their doing.

-I dont like the edge stuff - fair enough your opinion BUT what ill say is that its different to melee. People have to go over the edge 90% of the time instead of 60%. This area of the game still hasnt developed.

-the game is evidently not designed with competitive play in mind - was melee? i dont think nintendo ever sat down to compete with other fighters. They always aim to make it fun for everyone. Hence, why the game is sold as a four player with items on.

Dont tell me that I should post its my own opinion. Is ****ing obvious from my previous post that Im telling you how I see it from playing the game. Im also not saying im right, just pointing out flaws in what others have said. From posts ive made I think its quite obvious my underlying theme is that people need to give the game time and quit whinging. I loved melee, hell im in the top 3 of oldest uk melee players. Im saying play brawl till we discover that it could be flawed. Not say its flawed without given it a chance. Cos no-one can really tell that as there aint enough evidence.

Jam - i think its a combination of being older/ having to deal wtih a new game mechanics and the lack of playing anyone else. No games going to be fun if you cant play anyone and see how your doing/imrpove/think etc like you do in melee. If i was sitting playing brawl on my own id not like it. If you cant see yourself playing brawl like you do melee then you would be unhappy? but thats cos you aint played anyone yet >_<

Basically give it time. I will do. There enough there to suggest itll be fun/competitive and not enough negatives to suggest to put it down just yet. Ill invest the time, as theres not much need in putting that into melee. Ive always enjoyed the active community rather than the game itself....something brawl can deliver alot more in the future.

ed

edit- read what fergus said ^^]

edit - I was just thinkign about this. And its a contradiction to comments ive made above. But i really do enjoy playing brawl. IF its not competitive to the extent to melee then meh. I just like to play it . Maybe im just less bothered about the competitive scene these days but Ive never played to be no.1. Ifs its competitive enough to have a community then cool ^^

 

[J03]

Z: lol this game has been out for 2 weeks XD. and already people have mastered the game (obv) so they can say it lacks depth and isn't competitive. i don't remember my matches being great to watch after 2 weeks (not that there much to look at now ). how many combos were discovered in melee after 2 weeks? how can you not like the edge stuff?. just because you have to work for a kill rather then baby a little coward XD. if anything it makes the game MORE competitive. I don't even agree with what Ed's saying on going off at 90% instead of 60%, i think this game will be quicker then melee, in fact i'm pretty sure of it. for the time being it just means your less likely to get killed by a lucky one off hit from the stage. it'd have to be followed up by an off stage attack.

ED: i'm not sure why no-ones mentioned it (maybe they have) but once you grab the edge you cannot leave it via drop off (i.e. double jump attack) until your invincibility frames are gone. you can still roll off, get up or jump up. it sounds worse then it is tbh, its just a little annoying, nothing more. (actually Ed can you check this for me lol, me and will both remember it, but id rather it be checked for certain).

Marth can just run off the edge and d-air and still recover, its actually **** =).
ill be having more time with brawl this weekend so ill look into Marth and make a impression for him. i could make one now but id rather play with him again. from what i remember he's pretty easy to combo with (again prolly bad DI) and his n-air was a bit better, more on that tonight. ill look into the old Spacies too and Wario lol (who is the only character i've found that i don't think will be very good). maybe some other impressions too.

PICTISH: I honestly think people cant imagine melee without WD and SHFFL, its pretty impossible tbh. but its also pretty impossible to see brawl as a new game till you play it. trust me, not being to WD is pretty annoying. not being able to light shield (for me) is a nightmare because that's all i do! i originally thought that these things reduced the amount of mind-games that you can use. but that's balls. it reduces the amount of mind-games that I used. more will come in time obv, and then people will get the 'depth' they so deeply want.

 

[Cpt.Zeppo]

I did not develop anything I said in any way,and the things I said werent even the point-the point was that it is perfectly normal to speculate about the game.Anyway:

Pictish-Actually,basically what Kone said:-"i dont think nintendo ever sat down to compete with other fighters. They always aim to make it fun for everyone. " was pretty much my line of thought-that,and the fact that they took out L-cancelling,which gave the game layers of depth.
It wasnt the most thought out statement,but technicalities-and by that I mean technical skills eg wavelanding-give the game depth-and by that I mean more variables,more variety in the way people play,more ways in which to win.Melee is easily the most in-depth game Ive ever played.
Regardless of that,I am just speculating.I have no real,developed opinion of Brawl because I havent played it.The game may be very in-depth in other respects,I do not know,but it obviously wasnt the depth i was ever criticizing.

"So I'd say the game is evidently designed with reducing the tech skill needed to reach competitive play in mind but that does not exclude the game's competitiveness."

Yeah,that is probably a better way of phrasing what I said.With all due respect though,I reccomend you dont waste your time thinking too much more about it It was an off-the-cuff statement and if anything presumptious.


Kone:-

I do not see how you can deduce from the simple statement "I dont see many combos" that I am assuming there should be.I just do not see many combos.Do you?I dont have the game,so I can only go by vids,and as far as the vids have told me,I do not see many combos.

The matches really do not capture my attention.I am aware that they may well do so in months/years to come,but right now they do not.

To quote something that I said to Robby(VA) last night,who basically opened a conversation with me surveying the same sort of crack:-

"The passage underneath DEFINES what I was saying,I am not criticising the game I am simply making observations on what Im seeing,and I was basically saying that theres nothing wrong with that."

"can you please acknowledge that no-one is infact 'right' about Brawl and that it is your own opinion."

That is in no way telling you to post that its your own opinion,I am just saying that if people are going to post what they think,it should be recognised that there is no real right or wrong involved.I understand though that you have said alot of fact-based stuff on Brawl,I am just talking about first impressions.And in all fairness,your comment about brawl being less stagnant is opinion-based.There is no way in which we can judge or define completely accurately how stagnant a game is in comparison to another.When I play Brawl tomorrow,I may think that Melee is less stagnant[than Brawl],and I really dont see why that would be wrong to think-I probably wont,but all the same.

And just to clarify-I did not suggest that the game had specific flaws of any kind.I do not see many combos.I find matches boring and I dont like the edge stuff(opinion).I have about as much good things to say about brawl from what I've seen as bad.I was just trying to exemplify a point and it would seem a few people have exaggerated or misinterpreted that.

Joe-Are you serious?I didnt say it lacked depth and wasnt competitive,and if m2k did(I cant remember),I even said afterwards that I did not necessarily agree with him.
I disagree about the edge crack-half of the edgeguarding game from melee is basically gone.Getting to the edge used to be a very specific and complicated business and there was alot of mindgames involved in it-now you simply sweetspot the edge.I dont like that.
Everything else is pretty much answered above.I also find it questionable that you decided to post that after Ed had posted.

And its not impossible to imagine Melee without SHFFLs and WDs-you simply watch Masashi(not so much now though-guys gone mainstream).

Also,if Brawl doesnt stimulate me competitively I dont think I'll care-it still looks like mad fun.I dont even know if I'll bother with Brawl competitively regardless,I doubt I'll have the motivation.Maybe I'll just happily suck.

 

[J03]

Z: i love how that's 'questionable' . not everything i said was necessarily answers to what you said. but alot a people say alot of ****, was just targeting all the **** in one statement. but getting to edge was also pretty hard, alot of sweetspots were ridiculous to get constistantly and some impossible (you main falcon, how many times have you been gimped by smashes to the edge). i understand what your saying but the fact is by making sweetspots simpler it makes the game easier to use for new people and more pro-active for veterans. everything you said is 'time will tell' but doubting a game is pretty easy bish, not many people are saying the games an improvement on melee, but having played it, i think its a better game.

actually dude its not a matter of simply sweetspotting at all. that the easy option, so if you know it, then it makes you the most vulnerable. alot of characters have spikes/meteors and intercepting recovers is as easy as ever.

An example for your ears. in brawl if you know fox is going to illusion into the stage and your marth you can just as easily run off the stage and attack as in melee. in fact
1. going off the stage is much more diverse/forgiving then in melee due to the floatiness and the fact that if your opponent gets the edge anyway they cant instantly attack you off the edge anymore.
2. most characters are flexible enough to run off the stage and perform most/all of there aerials and still recover.
3. I've always thought of all types of 'edge-guarding' where discussed under terms of 'edge-game'. well you need a good edge-game this time round, i never thought of smashing or tilting the edge as a good edge game, everyone throws around the term 'depth' well increasing the variables and having more options whilst recovering and intercepting is surely adding depth.
4. i cant stress enough how much more flow the sweetspots add to the game. and for people like me im happy there are still ways to gimp, and for things like Ben's anger levels because it isnt as easy to get gimped.

 

[Mr P]

Pictish, mostly i agree with what you have to say. Tech skill is certainly a pre-requisite in todays melee metagame there is no question about that, all of the top players bar possibly Azen and masashi are incredibly technical players. What makes melee such an incredibly deep game though is the technical depth that it has, wavelanding, light shielding, l cancelling etc etc all make for endless options and opportunities in manipulating your opponent and without them the top players would not be as diverse as they are.

What concerns me is the removal of soo many of the staple techniques that were in melee, techniques that made the game what it was. Something like L cancelling which is certainly a skill in itself and has a lot of depth has been removed completely now there is automatically no lag after an aerial or in some cases a lot of lag which you cannot (as far as we know), in no way control. No wavedash, no light shield not even crouch cancelling is not there anymore it's incredibly hard to combo from throws with a lot of characters because of the knockback and a lot of characters automatically sweetspot the edge which removes a lot of edge guard/recovery mindgames that were used in melee. I'm concerned and so are a lot of other players.

Now i know this is not melee 2.0 a phrase that is being thrown around far too often thanks to Gimpyfish but it is the sequel to melee and i would have liked/expected a lot of the same mechanics to have translated into brawl. a lot of those mechanics made melee a great competitive game and i can only hope that within time new strategies will be discovered that will make the game a lot deeper than it appears to be right now. The top players playing brawl at the moment are not idiots and a lot of the things they are saying are certainly things to consider. I will buy Brawl regardless but whether or not i play this game like i have melee is really still a big question, i dont know if i can afford to put the effort into getting good or whether this game is even as fun. though Brawl will become the main attraction at tournaments from now on i hope that melee mini tournies can still happen aswell.

EDIT; Joe you ramble the biggest bunch of ****e ive ever seen, do you actually have a point ?

 

[J03]

honestly theres no points to made here lol. except brawl is a very good game with 'depth' and competitive potential, why ***** about it

 

[Mr P]

honestly theres no points to made here lol. except brawl is a very good game with 'depth' and competitive potential, why ***** about it

Thanks, this explains everything to me.

 

[J03]

Paul says (16:01):
seems pretty logical to me
Paul says (16:02):
he links everything he is trying to say
Jo3 says (16:02):
i agree, its a very good piece of writing
Paul says (16:02):
the complexities of melee gameplay and how that makes him worry about brawls 'depth' lol
Jo3 says (16:02):
but melee isnt deep or complex so to speak
Jo3 says (16:03):
ultimately everything you do/can do gives more options
Jo3 says (16:04):
the more options you have at any/all given points/against your opponents counter options with the difficulty/effectiveness of all said options
Jo3 says (16:05):
but adding/taking a few options from a game containing an almost unlimted supply is just an intelligent way of crying out 'i love WD, i want it back'
Paul says (16:05):
rofl no its not
Paul says (16:06):
not in P's case,thats really not fair for you to say that
Paul says (16:06):
he is just saying he is concerned
Paul says (16:06):
and justifying his concerns
Jo3 says (16:06):
thats what i just said
Jo3 says (16:06):
justification = intelligent
Jo3 says (16:07):
concern = crying

my point is in here somewhere.

sorry about being a **** obv

 

[Mr P]

Paul says (16:01):
seems pretty logical to me
Paul says (16:02):
he links everything he is trying to say
Jo3 says (16:02):
i agree, its a very good piece of writing
Paul says (16:02):
the complexities of melee gameplay and how that makes him worry about brawls 'depth' lol
Jo3 says (16:02):
but melee isnt deep or complex so to speak
Jo3 says (16:03):
ultimately everything you do/can do gives more options
Jo3 says (16:04):
the more options you have at any/all given points/against your opponents counter options with the difficulty/effectiveness of all said options
Jo3 says (16:05):
but adding/taking a few options from a game containing an almost unlimted supply is just an intelligent way of crying out 'i love WD, i want it back'
Paul says (16:05):
rofl no its not
Paul says (16:06):
not in P's case,thats really not fair for you to say that
Paul says (16:06):
he is just saying he is concerned
Paul says (16:06):
and justifying his concerns
Jo3 says (16:06):
thats what i just said
Jo3 says (16:06):
justification = intelligent
Jo3 says (16:07):
concern = crying

my point is in here somewhere.

sorry about being a **** obv

Have i not justified my concern or (crying) as some would say ? Linking the two said things together quite nicely.

P|³ says:
i dont understand people who dont have a questioning or skeptical persona, when i see soo many of the things that made melee great being removed why shouldnt i ask questions ?
Paul says:
exactly

 

[grayfox]

Ryan (R) says:
Sorry meng, im not having a conversation with you nor am i even on msn but isn't this good times?
Paul says:
Touché

 

[ac_anon]

im going to wait and see how brawl turns out before saying whether or not its competative, after all im going to have to completely change my playstyle anyway, they removed crouch canceling im so gutted

 

[Cpt.Zeppo]

ROFL,my goodness at the two Samus'.

 

[J03]

your putting me in a ridiculous position P. of course i have a sceptical persona. the difference between you and the people who are talking against you is that we've played the game for more then 15 minutes. your concerned about the depth being lost when after 2 weeks more then 10 'advanced techs' have been found. some things are gone boo hoo. they've been replaced. hell for all we know l-cancelling will be discovered next week or some type of new WD. would that make it a deeper game? or would you like me to just a copy and hold it as far underwater as i can. and your talking about it on a forum where people come to express there love for a game, and you don't expect anyone to disagree with you? because that's a pretty amazing assumption.

footnote: WD and l-cancelling made melee great???? im gutted there gone but i thought melee was great before i learnt how to WD and i would love it just as much if i couldn't ffs. game play makes a game great not how many glitches you can do. i agree that WD and l-cancelling are both essential to the flow of melee in competitive matches. but removing does not reduce the flow of brawl, just play the god-**** game.

 

[ac_anon]

ryan get on msn a minute

 

[grayfox]

My opinion on it all for what it's worth comes from what Wes said in that post of his in another thread. Chess doesn't have L canceling either.

It was something like that anyways. The way i look at it is just because these things aren't present (which i would argue at top level play get negated none the less as all the top players are capable of doing everything) the game CAN BE still very much competitive.

No L canceling simply just means the L cancel is automatically happening. It is essentially boasting everyone to a slightly higher level of play than they would begin with in melee. That is not to say that the game is void of competition because of it.

From a player who has been around for a long time and at one time done pretty well now and then - i've NEVER had any tech skill. I've always struggled to do the most basic of ****. And yeah i've done pretty well. On the other hand theres people, stadium players for example, who are insanely good technically but that is a farcry from saying they are good at competitive versus play. Both ideas negate the reliability on tech skill for a competitive scene.

 

[COEY]

Ryan (R) says:
Sorry meng, im not having a conversation with you nor am i even on msn but isn't this good times?
Paul says:
Touché

This has brightened up my day.

 

[J03]

this is all going off topic. Z basically started saying its totally relevant to compare brawl to melee. P basically said look at all these things we cant do any more. l-cancelling sped up melee, WD added flow and general technical abilities gave more options/depth. but its not that brawl is a new game. its that brawl has a new flow. its vague i know but its understandable once you start playing the game for even a short time. by flow i generally mean how consistent the game play is for attacking, defending, recovering and intercepting. there are just as many options as there have ever been. removing l-cancelling really just means you have to know the game, in the same way you had to know in melee. the floatiness generally balances out the lack of l-cancelling and its only a matter of a few frames so its hardly like it slows the game down or provides anyone with more thinking time. its this simple, play the game, until then your opinion means as less to the conversation then my opinion means to you.