The New Tier List

[The Star King]

If a game doesn't have a competitive element to it, I get bored fairly quickly, eg. 1p games.

Yeah, because 1P player games have less replay value than competitive games. You beat it, and that's most of the game right there.

But you can still have fun playing it the first time through. Right?

 

[Battlecow]

You can always compete with yourself; scores, etc.

I've yet to meet one that can be as entertaining as multiplayer games though.

 

[ciaza]

Clearly you guys have never played Final Fantasy X.

 

[The Star King]

You can always compete with yourself; scores, etc.

Right, but you don't have to in order to have fun.

I've yet to meet one that can be as entertaining as multiplayer games though.

I agree, but 1P games can still be fairly fun. Ocarina of Time is hailed as the best game of all time by many people, and it's not competitive. Even you disagree, a lot of people obviously enjoy it.

 

[Battlecow]

Right, I love lots of 1p games, but not as much as I do smash. I should have said "the best multiplayer games" rather than "multiplayer games"

 

[The Star King]

Same for me.

I'm not sure what your point is.

 

[Battlecow]

You said "1p games have less replay value than multiplayer games"

I responded with "You can always compete with yourself"

So they could still theoretically have replay value equal to that of the best multiplayer games, although I've never encountered such a 1p game.

 

[The Star King]

I meant that multiplayer games USUALLY have more replay value, not that it's a definite law of video games. Competing with yourself gets old much faster than competing with others.

Probably should have worded it better.

 

[Battlecow]

Agreement reached.

 

[DMoogle]

I tend to prefer 1-player games over multi-player games, but I agree they definitely have less replay value.

OTOH, I've probably played FF6-10 and Tactics a combined total of, I dunno, 40 times?

 

[ballin4life]

In a shocking turn of events, I'm going to have to agree with NixxxoN here.

Plenty of people don't have fun with something being competitive, especially girls. Don't make generalizations based on your own personal preferences. And no, ballin, it's not weird. I'm sure there are quite a few people out there who think you're "weird" for playing a video game competitively. This is coming from someone who probably puts more effort into this game competitively than most people here, and enjoys competition above anything else.

Also agree 100% with Blue Yoshi.

I'm talking about games. I find posting on this forum fun (sometimes) even though it is not a competitive game.

But a noncompetitive game will not be as fun as a competitive one will.

Also, we've had a lot of definition shift here. When I originally said competitive = fun, I mean competitive in the sense of a sliding scale for multiplayer games (from more competitive/balanced/nonrandom to less competitive).

I say that people who disagree with me are weird because they prefer something less interesting and complex over something more interesting and complex. This is different from saying that someone is weird merely because one has different preferences.

1P games are like puzzles or books to me. I can like them, but interactions with humans are more interesting.

 

[ciaza]

Woe woe woe. I find games like Final Fantasy X, Phoenix Wright, Kingdom Hearts, Fallout 3, most JRPGS more fun than practically any given competitive multiplayer. Other than maybe Smash or CoD4 where it's equal.

Star King is dead right, it's personal preference, and it's not weird at all. I'm sorry but I can immerse myself in the world of 1p games and it feels amazing. Less interesting? Hardly.

 

[The Star King]

OTOH

You keep forcing me to look up abbreviations I don't know >_>

I'm talking about games. I find posting on this forum fun (sometimes) even though it is not a competitive game.

But a noncompetitive game will not be as fun as a competitive one will.

Also, we've had a lot of definition shift here. When I originally said competitive = fun, I mean competitive in the sense of a sliding scale for multiplayer games (from more competitive/balanced/nonrandom to less competitive).

1P games are like puzzles or books to me. I can like them, but interactions with humans are more interesting.

I don't really disagree with any of this. From what I understand, you can still find fun in a game that's not competitive, it's just that competitive games TEND to be more fun.

However, my one issue is that I don't think everyone has the same preference for competitive games. I do, and you do, but that's just you and me.

 

[ballin4life]

Ballin, in my example, we are not competing the same way. In fact, we aren't competing at all. We don't care who wins, the stock count doesn't change anything (aside from I usually change my character every game). Essencially, we could instead put the time limit to infinite and when we get bored, turn off the game without looking at the scores at the end.

I agree with you that competitiveness leads to fun, but all I'm saying is that it's not the only way to have fun.

You're competing to do the best combo or whatever.

Also I 100% guarantee that you are still trying to not get hit and stuff. Otherwise you would just play training mode.

You keep forcing me to look up abbreviations I don't know >_>



I don't really disagree with any of this. From what I understand, you can still find fun in a game that's not competitive, it's just that competitive games TEND to be more fun. And I think NixxxoN and Blue Yoshi mostly agree with you, too, if I may be so bold as to speak for others.

However, my one issue is that I don't think everyone has the same preference for competitive games. I do, but that might just be you and me.

I'm not saying everyone has the same preferences. There may be some people who prefer to play war. I think that's weird though.

1P games are different beasts. As I said, I play those for puzzles or story, which are legitimate reasons to play a game. If you're playing a game for the specific purpose human interaction within the game though, then it makes sense that you would want a game that is more interesting and complex.

 

[SuPeRbOoM]

Yeah, because 1P player games have less replay value than competitive games. You beat it, and that's most of the game right there.

But you can still have fun playing it the first time through. Right?

I usually don't finish 1p games. There are a few exceptions though.

 

[Blue Yoshi]

Also I 100% guarantee that you are still trying to not get hit and stuff. Otherwise you would just play training mode.

We don't care if we get hit. I've had countless times where, for example, we're doing a Roy ditto, and we both so happen to pull out neutral B at the same time, and just let both fully charge just to see which hits first.

And if you think we are being super competitive with this, one person's favourite Samus combo is up-air to reverse back air (completely pointless, but that's the entire point). Another common combo is high percent Falcon dair to jab, and that's it (no follow up). Obviously we do more than just stupid stuff... but I'm trying to show how uncompetitive we are (suicide kills happen during 50% of all kills).

Obviously when we actually play properly, we're playing competitively... or at least trying to... but due to the huge skill gap, playing for fun completely non-competitively with nobody trying at all and everyone just playing for shenanigans reduces the skill gap, and everyone enjoys playing.



OTOH, I also agree that lots of 1p games have very little replay value. Super Mario Galaxy 1 and 2, for example. Both are really fun at first, but as you play on, it gets repetitive. And once you beat it... you've already beaten it, you've probably already memorized everything, nothing's a surprise, and... well, gg.

 

[ballin4life]

You guys should play training mode if you're not trying to avoid getting hit.

 

[Blue Yoshi]

But where's the fun in playing with someone else? And how will a Training mode dummy use terrible DI to make stupid 0-999% combos possible? And when is a Training mode dummy ever going to rush way off the stage and suicide reverse Falcon Punch you back on to the stage?

Basically, all I'm saying is that although playing competitively is fun (we do our fair share of that as well... though mainly in the other smash games), you can also have fun in doing random stuff as well.

 

[ballin4life]

if you don't have a goal then it is uninteresting

trying to do flashy combos and whatever else may be the goal

 

[Blue Yoshi]

There really is no goal.

Quite obviously we do serious matches as well... but my entire point of all of this is that sometimes we do non-competitive random stuff, and people actually enjoy it.

 

[StretchNutz]

the goal is to not get your **** sucked.

 

[The Star King]

if you don't have a goal then it is uninteresting

trying to do flashy combos and whatever else may be the goal

That's not really being competitive. If you're playing the way Blue Yoshi described, you're not going to be like, "I must get a flashier and sillier combo than the other guy!" You're not competing for anything.

 

[NixxxoN]

if you don't have a goal then it is uninteresting

trying to do flashy combos and whatever else may be the goal

Having some fun and good times with friends is pretty much a goal.

 

[TANK64]

Finally, I thought I was alone on this. Sometimes (/a lot) I just play for silly stuff. Like Blue Yoshi said, combo that are cool but don't "serve a purpose" competitively because there is a more efficient combo that you can always do instead; sometimes I'll go for suicide kills only, or reversed moves only. Other times I can play seriously to win at all costs, as I am very competitive in this game. I think others should be able to switch between the two as well. You just have to know how to control different mindsets (an art I have mastered recently)

Most of the time I just try crazy stuff, but genuinely try to win with it.

 

[The Star King]

You're nowhere near alone on that

 

[Blue Yoshi]

As I said, we sometimes play our non-competitive method, but that's mainly to remove the skill gap instead of me 0-deathing everyone non-stop (you know what I mean). We do our fair share of normal smash 64 as well.

 

[SSBPete]

most of the time i'll play to win at all costs, since the ultimate goal of the game is to win.
if im up 2 or 3 stocks i might go for some fancy combos but i usually just save that for training mode.
an exception to my rule is 3-4 player were i just go nuts

 

[Flutter NiTE]

I kind of think Jiggly should have been a spot or two higher. but still **** list

 

[B Link]

I like training mode combos that I know must have taken a lot of hard work to do. Usually, they're "fancy" as a result.

I like in-game combos that WORK against an opponent who KNOWS HOW TO DI . Usually they're "simple" looking as a result.

 

[Shibbypod]

I think this tier list is great. I am somewhat surprised to see that kirby is not in the top tier, but I still agree with his position. I main kirby, and holy crap that dair is better than falco's in melee.

 

[Sangoku]

Indeed and his uptilt grrrrrrrrrrr I hate him so bad makes me rage everytime I play against a good one. grmpslgwlkg mspgsdpmgm.

I know it has probably been discussed ten thousand times, but is samus really bottom? I might be biased since there are samus mains, but I feel luigi is real s*** and thus should take samus place. Tell me why I am wrong =).

 

[Shibbypod]

I'm just not good enough with fox yet. I want to get good at stuff like his shine cance (I'm a little slow so usually I just do it here and there to be flashy, but can't seem to do in in match unless I short hop and do it right before i touch the ground instead of doing it right off the jump)

I play yoshi link and samus a lot with my newb friends, and I notice it is a lot harder to combo, I just have to make sure I stay on them and tech chase everything.

 

[Olikus]

I dont think samus is on the bottom. At least not now with the new stages system, Link should be bottom imo.

 

[ballin4life]

I'm just not good enough with fox yet. I want to get good at stuff like his shine cance (I'm a little slow so usually I just do it here and there to be flashy, but can't seem to do in in match unless I short hop and do it right before i touch the ground instead of doing it right off the jump)

I play yoshi link and samus a lot with my newb friends, and I notice it is a lot harder to combo, I just have to make sure I stay on them and tech chase everything.

Slide your thumb from left c to b (while holding down) for fast shine cancels

 

[The Star King]

Everybody in C tier is extremely close IMO. I still think Samus is the worst, but not by much at all.

 

[asianaussie]

i honestly believe luigi could be the worst, link > samus > luigi, since luigi is only above samus since he beats puff readily

like star king said, the difference is miniscule anyway

samus has to play attrition, but she can actually do it, unlike luigi, who needs to get lucky by throwing out empty aerials and getting very good reads

link can just camp for years

 

[ballin4life]

Hey guys, you know if you get close enough and use Luigi's upB it hits them with fire? It's super powerful

 

[Ocean]

Hey guys, you know if you get close enough and use Luigi's upB it hits them with fire? It's super powerful

I'm calling bull****, developers would never let a glitch like that by.

 

[The Star King]

Hey guys, you know if you get close enough and use Luigi's upB it hits them with fire? It's super powerful

Holy ****! Alert the media!

This better not be a hoax, like the time this one guy tried to tell me you can hit people by falling asleep with Jigglypuff. LOL, cuz that makes sense.

 

[t3h Icy]

If you guys want and the 64BR won't, I could restart the match-up project to help towards a newer tier list. I have more confidence **** gets done here than Melee. :3 Plus I'd have more experience doing these things this time around.