Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
Don't want to derail the chat but the internet does have more than it's fair share of stupid, people think glass would make a viable replacement to asphalt, which is worrying >.<
Well, we got the Miis, which are one of the most popular video game avatars of all time, Palutena, who was teased like crazy by Sakurai (who in turn probably thought she was more important to reveal than Ridley), and Pac-Man, who's a legendary third-party newcomer.
There is a guy on my school that is homophobic, we hated him because he was so irritating, so we started to talk about how rong he was everytime he come close to us, now, he barely talks to us. Can that work with detractors?
Would work of the majority are Ridley supporters. Sadly on YouTube/facebook/non competitive forums there are a crap ton of Ridley haters. They all say the same crap that he's too big or his shadow. When you present evidence they just ignore because their small brain can't compute information apparently.
Not saying that his chances are nil (I assume it would mean null?). I'm saying that I'm less sure.
[...] (was talking about possible counterarguments which imo, didn't make sense but it doesn't have to do with E3 so...)
This was written on June 8 2014, 2 days before nintendo's digital event. That evidence was VERY solid because for so much talk it got, it would've been worthy for E3 but losing hype for E3 is what he don't want to do. Because we now know that he didn't intend to show him at E3, we don't know when we would know which break this evidence. There's really nothing to make us wait for now that is really worthy. A k a, he's free to deconfirm him whenever he wants.
But what if Ridley just moves slow when he's not attacking and has ten second windows between attacks?
And like one person brought up in the thread, what if Ridley just follows exclusive lighting physics from EVERYONE ELSE in the entire game? Obviously this is the pinnacle of intelligence and logic.
Now that you mention it, how long does the Ridley we saw in the Direct go without attacking? And can we compare that to the Yellow Devil and see how different their attack frequencies are?But what if Ridley just moves slow when he's not attacking and has ten second windows between attacks?
Is flying awkwardly an attack? Than grabbing Pikachu and doing nothing and finally jumping also an attack?
It's all a part of Ridley's strategy, he spends the first 2 minutes of the fight flying around awkwardly and jumping around, he'll grab people, but won't damage them during this time to lure them into a false sense of security and then once 2 minutes is up Ridley will take advantage of their lowered guard and attack mercilessly.
He didn't grab Pikachu. We've gone over this. Yes, there was a brief segment where most people here thought he grabbed Pikachu, but we then determined that it was just Ridley's leg in front of his tail, especially since "Pikachu" disappears a second later. Which means he never once attacked at all or did anything except hover there.
The implications aside, I think Sakurai would win troll of the decade/century with this move alone.
That implies that he hasn't already.
Assuming Ridley doesn't grab Pikachu, he goes about 11 solid seconds without attacking. In that timeframe, I watched another video of Yellow Devil gameplay. In 11 seconds, he fired off eleven eye lasers and was defeated, causing the explosion.
Flawed and stupid? Oh please, you have be utterly ******** to believe "Ridley Haters" have flawed and stupid logic. It actually makes perfect sense. In a direct, under OTHER BOSS CHARACTERS WILL MAKE AN APPEARANCE, and Ridley's shadow is shown, CLEARLY hinting that HE is the boss character in which they are referencing. Sorry that I have basic logic in my brain. I'm not saying he's entirely impossible, but I think its absolute ignorance and stupidity to not see the logic in believing Ridley isn't playable. Stop covering your eyes and blinding yourself to the evidence of his non-playablity, and accept the fact that he most likely WON'T be, or atleast accept that it isn't "flawed and stupid" to believe so, and actually makes great sense. On top of that I don't think a downsized playable Ridley would be an accurate representation or portrayal of his character, is that flawed and stupid?
So Ridley is confirmed to be playable in Melee then? I mean if you don't believe that, then you're obviously blinding yourself to the evidence of his playability. I mean "over 20 unexpected characters" were explicitly mentioned with Ridley's appearance in official advertising, it pretty obviously hints at his playability.
Admittedly it's hard to top WFT, ZSS's fake-out, or even Trolltena. But if any character could top it, it'd be Ridley.
Generic Punch-Out stage. LITTLE MAC DISCONFIRMED.
Your logic is not flawed, per se. Albeit it is fallacious, you presume that we adhere to confirmation bias; however, you quite clearly indicate that we are not alone in this regard. If you cannot remain objective, it makes you appear completely and utterly incompetent.
Dark Pit at the end of Palutena's trailer. DARK PIT CONFIRMED /confirmation bias
While I agree with the first part that it's not really stupid to believe Ridley's a stage boss from the Direct, that last point is silly. Ridley isn't really all that big to begin with, so he wouldn't need to be changed any more than other charcters have, and that's without taking Olimar into consideration. I've pointed it out myself already, but a short while ago someone when and visualized what you and many others aren't thinking about: Ridley's posture. Keep in mind that Ridley doesn't stand upright like a human. Brawl Ridley, posed properly on the ground, would only need a slight resizing to work.
While I agree that when confronted with the reasons why we think he will still be playable, detractors use stupid logic, but I think what this guy is trying to say is that it's not stupid to look at that clip and think Ridley is disconfirmed, which is true. Not everyone researches this stuff and anylizes it like we do. The average gamer probably takes game devs at face value. I think it's stupid of us to look at the clip which is clearly meant to make us think that Ridley is a boss, Analyze it, find evidence that it was misdirection, and then call other people stupid for basicly thinking what Sakurai intended for us to think just because we found sufficiant evidence to the contrary. It's stupid when we show them our evidence and they just respond with insults, name calling, or flat out ignoring, but it is in no way stupid to take the devs at face value, which I think is what this guy is trying to say. That said I agree that he has presented himself poorly, and now probably most people won't take him seriously, and he has ruined what might have otherwise been an intellegent disscussion.
No. It is not "stupid" to evaluate the situation objectively with evidence and determine which perspective is more likely based on the preponderance of the evidence. I do agree with your sentiment to an extent, it is intelligent to remain impartial, but that is not our only option and it is most certainly not the best.
Toon Link is a background character, not a stage hazard, the Punch Out stage only did more to prove that little mac, was IN FACT, going to be in the game, I did not see a single person claiming the little mac stage to mean little mac deconfirmed lol, and Palutena, where? Regardless still a background character, not a stage hazard. I don't even think I have to respond to the final one, it was stupid to even mention.
EXACTLY, you hit the nail on the head. Maybe calling him ******** wasn't the best approach but I feel I did not present myself poorly, the insults in my logic were insulted beforehand, therefore justifying a return approach.
Do I even need to explain why this has absolutely NO relevance?
How hard is our evidence though? We have the size of a shadow from a light source we don't know how acts, not to mention we don't know how high up in the air Ridley is. That and we just assume Sakurai is a funny and good guy. I don't think that's hard enough evidence to call the other side stupid, in fact I think they have better evidence in their favor, having Ridley presented under the boss category in the Direct is one thing, but his absence from the Gematsu leak is also another heavy hitter. Basically any non-Gematsu character is hanging on the thin straw that is "He didn't mention Rosalina", which can easily be explained, and on top of that Ridley hangs on an even thinner straw.
Actually, a lot of people (including myself) thought that the fact that the boxing ring stage being a generic smash bros stage and not a punch out stage disconfirmed little mac because if he was playable then the boxing ring stage would be a punch out stage, and as we now know, I along with many others were pleasantly proven wrong. As far as the palutena one however, I agree with you. I don't know why people keep bringing that up. That post only hinted at a statue of palutena being part of a stage, and in no way could have been percieved the same way Ridley's supposed deconfirmation was. But why is the zss argument stupid?
The less it helps you, the less relevant it is. We know. We have literally heard everything you have to say before from people who can hold a conversation without calling everyone "stupid" or "********". I'm just letting you know.
I don't think its ******** to believe he will be playable, I do, in fact, believe its ******** if you refuse to see the logic in believing he is not playable.
Incorrect. If one objectively determines something to be fact based on the implications of a statement that does not even literally allude to Ridley, they are quite incompetent. It was an audio-clip over an edited game-play clip that uses the most common ambiguous symbolism known to man. If one cannot discern why the entire presentation was counter-intuitive... I pray for their souls. Most of the detractors even admit that it was counter-intuitive, they just disregard that notion. People act as though this is some conspiracy theory because they are inept at speculation.
I've only called a single person ********, but if I have to explain it. I will. Pikachu is clearly a confirmed character, unless you are completely blind and ignorant to everything smash bros. then you would not believe pikachu is the "boss character" in the shot and I can't even begin to comprehend how this could even be thrown into my face as something to argue. Yes, we see charizard alongside other Pokeball Pokemon, but wait, only to see him confirmed to be playable SECONDS later. Please, make better comparisons and not completely irrelevant and illogical ones. (Not sure if that was your post but js')
