Completely wrong. Both Smash 64 and Melee are all about being able to capitalize on an opponent's mistakes by comboing them. 64 even more so than Melee.
What? did you not understand what I was saying? I said it's never been "about". I never said that those things weren't in there. Smash is about being able to control your character in any situation on a 2D playing field. Brawl gives you more control in that area than both melee and 64.
Top tier players steam roll lower tier players in Brawl all the ****ing time. Brawl does not require you to be smarter than melee at all. The smarter player in Melee tends to win even when they have a bit less tech skill. Do you think soccer is a bad game because pros steam roll low tier players due to having vastly superior technical prowess?
For one, top tier players don't "steam roll" lower tier players nearly as bad as they do in melee. And as proof of that, there are way more top brawl players than melee players. This last Apex was an example of that. Salem came out of nowhere and beat some of the best players brawl has upsetting everything. Yet, on the melee side top 8 were the same as it has been for the past 3 years with very slight changes. There is no way at all a random or a slightly well known player will ever have an upset and beat Armada,Dr PP, or Mango. It is possible but it's illogical to think so. And if you look back 64 has even less top players. Isai is the best and for a random to beat him is even more impossible than melee.
I think it's a pretty horrible analogy to compare soccer to smash........But if you want to go there. Did I say Melee was a bad game? I said it's a superior competitive fighter compared to brawl. Instead of jumping on me because you saw the words "rather" and "brawl" together how about you read what I said. Just like I think actual in real life soccer is better competitively than video game soccer. I don't think running around kicking a ball all day to be a top soccer player is more "FUN" than just doing it in your room and having more control over your outcomes. The payoff is better yes, but at its bare essentials the one which is more fun and easier to pick up wins out.
Once again, wrong. Melee requires reading DI and reading techs and that's just to allow a combo to continue. You seem to think that combos just happen in Melee when they really don't. It's just like brawl where you have to predict and/or react to situations to continue a string, you just get rewarded for it more in Melee. Not to mention the plethora of approach options that Melee present requiring even more reading/reacting on the part of both the attacker and defender than in Brawl.
I've played both on a competitive level so don't claim I don't know what I'm talking about. I was placing 2nd and 3rd consistently in LA and top 16 at HOBOs when I played Brawl seriously. Brawl is not a bad game by any means but the only thing you posted that it has over Melee is that it's slower paced, and some people prefer a slower pace. The rest is factually wrong.
Once again, instead of actually reading what I posted, it seems that you just skimmed over it. Don't act like you're the only person who has played both. Brawl obviously requires more reads than in melee. The entire game is based on reads lol. Strings hardly exist and reads take their place. Also don't make DI/reading techs sound harder than it is. In melee the more you play the easier it is to read that stuff till it's almost like a science. When you hit someone they don't have NEARLY as much options as in brawl and you can actually hit them into a pre-planned/practsed string. In brawl ,however, even Ally drops dthrow reads and when he does get them he had to be a lot smarter than covering the 1 or 2 options the same read requires in melee
