Event - MLG Anaheim 2014 Thinking of joining the Pro Tour

[-Ran]

Why doesn't the community embrace the unique aspect of Smash Bros.; i.e., its diversity? Why must there be only one metagame standard? In a game that gives the player complete control over the rules, it's a shame to see one of the many possible rulesets asserted as superior to all others.

The community speaks for itself. There were movements such as the Item Standard Play, even similar things during Melee. The community has a whole wants to play Smash with No items, and on stages that augment match ups, but don't change the game play drastically due to something over-centralizing within them. The single unifying feature of our community, is that we follow a rule set that makes it easy for someone to travel across the nation and find a smash tournament that will more or less play out the exact same way as it would from coast to coast.

I'll be honest, even as a complete n00b back when 64 first came out, the very first thing my friends and I did was remove items. In most competitions, players want to feel that it is them that is winning the match, and in Smash the options to remove items and stages allowed the community to achieve this. This is spurned from the individual level of expectations for gameplay, mostly taught to players from other fighting games or contests of skill.

 

[chaosmaster1991]

In most competitions, players want to feel that it is them that is winning the match, and in Smash the options to remove items and stages allowed the community to achieve this.

Question regarding this bit, why do a decent number of items fall under that category? The items doesn't do anything by itself, it has to be picked up and used correctly in order to have an effect, so it's the player's skill. Sure, there are items that randomly explode etc., but luckily we got the option to turn on only a limited number. What's wrong with the beam sword for example?

 

[Blacknight99923]

Ok, you're all missing the bigger picture.

Regardless of whether this is the real Daigo or not, we, as a community, DO IN FACT ban more things than any other competitive fighter. We can go on all day about how "this isn't SFIV", but the fact stands that we attempt to follow most of the conventions of contemporary fighters, except for the part about banning things. The question about WHY this is the case is a legitimate one, and it's one we should be able to answer cleanly and honestly.

After all, this is a defining characteristic about our community.

Regardless of whether we're being trolled or not, this is something we should be able to discuss about ourselves.

I can't think of anyone who would rather pay 5$ tournament fee and have items on and can objectively state they aren't for preference. When I listened to the Podcast that you (briefly) were in with OS omni (I can't remember one persons name) and later adumbrodues, they specifically mentioned they tested items. They also mentioned that a major reason that items were banned in melee was because of crate/capsule spawning and someone lost a match because a capsule exploded when he hit it.

they also specifically mentioned that because capsules could be turned off in brawl people were considering using that function in tournament gameplay. However after testing the fact that
1. items appear closer to the loser in general which punishes you for winning with certain items (ex smash ball)
2. items spawn randomly unlike in melee where they appeared at set times.

No one wants to lose to random chance period, and even less people want to lose to random chance when they have paid a tournament fee

 

[Rain(ame)]

We, as a community ban more things because the game was not INTENDED to be a competitive game. Therefore, we have more things to consider. As far as techniques are concerned....let it go.

Stages, on the other hand....well some of those stages have factors that detract from the legitimacy of the match. I for one, would be pissed off if I lost to a stage, rather than the person. (in a literal sense) I think anybody in general would.

As far as the items are concerned....let's be honest....I turned them off before I knew what "competitive" Melee as we know it, was. I personally didn't like them, as most of my friends didn't, either. Also...the point was already brought up...if you can turn the items off...then obviously the developers realized that not EVERYONE wants items on. Especially ALL the time. That or people may just enjoy ONE item, or something to that effect.

When playing for money...most people would rather not have their chances taken away by a random factor, and play by skill with character alone. Bans on stages and items do that.

As far as techniques are concerned....I could care less. In Melee...it didn't matter unless people were trying to time someone out. In Brawl....I'd say legit banning on things that time out. (D3 was pretty broken in the beginning, lol)

Also....Japan kind of shuns MvC2. Plus, they ban more in Melee than we do. I think Brawl is the same case. At any rate....treat the troll with kindness and they'll go away.

 

[Blacknight99923]

Also....Japan kind of shuns MvC2. Plus, they ban more in Melee than we do. I think Brawl is the same case. At any rate....treat the troll with kindness and they'll go away.

Yes, they as well as us play without items and on an even MORE conservative stage list.

I could be wrong but(only really watched Kansai region rulesets) they only start out on final destination in brawl and have a few counterpicks (I believe BF SV Halberd YI (brawl) and PS1.


and in melee I only EVER see them play on final destination

 

[Djent]

Because nationals exist.

And what would prevent these nationals from holding several different events as per ruleset preference? Is it strictly a time/venue constraint (that's what I'd assume)?

 

[Djent]

The community speaks for itself. There were movements such as the Item Standard Play, even similar things during Melee. The community has a whole wants to play Smash with No items, and on stages that augment match ups, but don't change the game play drastically due to something over-centralizing within them. The single unifying feature of our community, is that we follow a rule set that makes it easy for someone to travel across the nation and find a smash tournament that will more or less play out the exact same way as it would from coast to coast.

I'll be honest, even as a complete n00b back when 64 first came out, the very first thing my friends and I did was remove items. In most competitions, players want to feel that it is them that is winning the match, and in Smash the options to remove items and stages allowed the community to achieve this. This is spurned from the individual level of expectations for gameplay, mostly taught to players from other fighting games or contests of skill.

I bolded the part of your argument I found particularly convincing. I suppose it might be hard to maintain this feature of unity if there were more rulesets floating around. I don't agree completely about all items removing the importance of player skills, however. Certain explosive items can **** you over without warning, and thus I understand why they would be banned. However, other items require that the player actually do something in order to succeed with them. I guess you could also make a case for banning the ones that pretty much equal a stock (hammers/golden hammers, fans, etc.) or have an instant healing effect that you can't do **** about. However, I still feel like other items (shells, banana peels, etc.) are completely counterable. Granted, they still give a large advantage to whomever picks them up, but I wouldn't say they even come close to "breaking the game." I don't expect you or anyone else to put much stock in my opinion until I'm more active here and in the community, but that's how I feel so far.

 

[Jack Kieser]

I can't think of anyone who would rather pay 5$ tournament fee and have items on and can objectively state they aren't for preference.

And I can't think of anyone who would rather pay 5$ tournament fee and have items off and can objectively state that it isn't for preference.

Because the choice of "Items on or off" is a PREFERENCE BASED choice. It always was.

When I listened to the Podcast that you (briefly) were in with OS omni (I can't remember one persons name) and later adumbrodues, they specifically mentioned they tested items.

Hey, you remember that! Yeah, I wanted to speak more, but my mic died mid-recording; I figured it out after the podcast was done, so good job there. <_<

Either way, I have much respect for OS, but he still admitted that the testing was only done behind closed doors with (essentially) a group of elite players who already had a stigma against items, anyway. I'm sure the smarter guys, like OS, really tried to be objective, but it was still a majority vote, and we all know how majority votes can be decided; just look at our stage list, FULL of bans for no other reason than top players "didn't like playing there".

Nintendo did PLENTY of playtesting to rid Brawl of as many bugs as possible, and we STILL got a bug-infested piece of software. Every game works that way, and do you know why? Because MILLIONS of real-world matches will ALWAYS have more variables than THOUSANDS of carefully controlled tests. Having less than 100 top players have a few friendlies is a good start, but NOTHING will compare to having a full year's worth of ACTUAL TOURNAMENT DATA, something which was denied to us by a ban-happy community.

They also mentioned that a major reason that items were banned in melee was because of crate/capsule spawning and someone lost a match because a capsule exploded when he hit it.

Correct, something that was changed in Brawl: you can TURN OFF all containers, specifically. No exploding ANYTHING.

they also specifically mentioned that because capsules could be turned off in brawl people were considering using that function in tournament gameplay. However after testing the fact that
1. items appear closer to the loser in general which punishes you for winning with certain items (ex smash ball)

Something without real support, only anecdotal evidence. Even the ISP thread couldn't figure out how the game calculates spawn points. Something ELSE we needed a LARGE SAMPLE SIZE to figure out.

2. items spawn randomly unlike in melee where they appeared at set times.

Something ELSE the ISP thread kinda, sorta figured out. On low (IIRC), items spawn roughly every 30 seconds (anywhere between 25-45 seconds in many tests).

No one wants to lose to random chance period, and even less people want to lose to random chance when they have paid a tournament fee

Well, better hope you don't lose to a 9 hammer. Or any of Olimar's Pikmin. Or a Stitchface. Or a Gordo. Or a trip. Or any of the OTHER random factors in Brawl.

...I'm REALLY tired of hearing people be under- or mis-informed about items. I mean, I'm tired of misinformation in GENERAL (especially about our ban tendencies; really, people. THE SBR HAS AN UNDER 50% VOTE RATE FOR STAGE BANS. LESS BBR MEMBERS VOTE ON STAGES THAN AMERICANS VOTE IN THE GENERAL ELECTION).

 

[clowsui]

I believe Overswarm has actual reasoning as to why items should be banned beyond "random spawn".

 

[-Ran]

Question regarding this bit, why do a decent number of items fall under that category? The items doesn't do anything by itself, it has to be picked up and used correctly in order to have an effect, so it's the player's skill. Sure, there are items that randomly explode etc., but luckily we got the option to turn on only a limited number. What's wrong with the beam sword for example?

I'll be honest, most items are going to be used as projectiles just because they are capable of doing damage, or killing at a range. A beam sword wouldn't be used as a weapon, but rather be used to throw at your opponent. Many items such as Pokeballs, Assist Trophies, bumpers, and so on provide lingering hitboxes that exist on the stage that detract from we have a community consider to be a competitive environment. There are also incredibly broken things that you can do with other items, such as Turtle shells and springs, which actually allow many characters to more or less fly due to Dairing them while regrabbing the item. Then there are further options that open up for various characters due to the existence of items which allow for glide-tosses in match ups they usually wouldn't have the ability to do so.

I would further like to stipulate that Brawl is already a defensive base game. With the inclusion of items, players would be encouraged to camp until an item drop would occur that would give them a better chance against their opponent.

As mentioned before, there was a sub-community that created a rule set for item play. It never really caught on outside of the outliers. Due to tournament time constraints, a typical regional will have 1vs1, Teams, and then a side event. Usually that side-event is going to be Low Tiers teams/singles, and some areas have been doing Mid-tier events as well. Adding yet another event would make tournaments an even larger logistical nightmare that they are currently. Almost every tournament has to be completed the day that it starts, and almost every one is begging the venue for more time to finish their event.

In my state for example, I'm running: Brawl Singles + Doubles, Melee Singles+Doubles, and a Brawl amateur bracket. There is simply no way to attempt to fit yet another event into the already limited amount of set ups that I have. Furthermore, with the spill-over of players for events, it causes schedule's matches to be a time sink in itself. People are obviously able to host Item tournaments if they want, but the draw for them will be incredibly low.

Also, explaining to someone the current rule set for Smash is easy, while describing a rule-set for using Items certainly isn't. It's easy to convince someone that No items, stock battle is the legitimate way to play. It's another to tell them that certain items are viable, and others aren't.

 

[clowsui]

@Ran:

What is the problem with a defensive/campy game?

 

[Blacknight99923]

I believe Overswarm has actual reasoning as to why items should be banned beyond "random spawn".

I have a hard time believe OS would be support of banning anything without proof it shouldn't be played on.

 

[-Ran]

@Ran:

What is the problem with a defensive/campy game?

Nothing, since it's a matter of different strokes for different folks. Most folks prefer no items, and thus that's where the tournament scene will always be.

 

[Jim Morrison]

This thread will end nice.

 

[Pyronic_Star]

I like how everyone is ignoring the fact that we are banning things that other competitive fighters have eliminated by game design... items, stages that affect gameplay or favor one character or another. the banning of ddd's infinite is really the only thing you can fault the community for since the banning of everything else is an attempt to make smash like other fighters

 

[chaosmaster1991]

I'll be honest, most items are going to be used as projectiles just because they are capable of doing damage, or killing at a range. A beam sword wouldn't be used as a weapon, but rather be used to throw at your opponent. Many items such as Pokeballs, Assist Trophies, bumpers, and so on provide lingering hitboxes that exist on the stage that detract from we have a community consider to be a competitive environment. There are also incredibly broken things that you can do with other items, such as Turtle shells and springs, which actually allow many characters to more or less fly due to Dairing them while regrabbing the item. Then there are further options that open up for various characters due to the existence of items which allow for glide-tosses in match ups they usually wouldn't have the ability to do so.

If I remember correctly, the thread you were refering to had items divided into starter, counterpick and banned, just like stages. I assume that the broken stuff is eliminated with that for the most part.
Apart from that, sure all items can and will eventually be thrown, but in theory, wouldn't it be smarter to use items that cover a character's weakness at least for a bit? Characters without projectile would actually have an answer for camping, beam sword would help to reduce the impact of regular sword users and their range. I fail to see why one would immnediately throw every item to be honest.
Regarding the new options for characters, are they new options or old ones that were taken away from them before? (more of a philosophical question I suppose)

I would further like to stipulate that Brawl is already a defensive base game. With the inclusion of items, players would be encouraged to camp until an item drop would occur that would give them a better chance against their opponent.

Possibly. On the other hand, wouldn't the leading player be encouraged to be more aggressive due to the fact that items have a higher probability to spawn near the losing player?

As mentioned before, there was a sub-community that created a rule set for item play. It never really caught on outside of the outliers. Due to tournament time constraints, a typical regional will have 1vs1, Teams, and then a side event. Usually that side-event is going to be Low Tiers teams/singles, and some areas have been doing Mid-tier events as well. Adding yet another event would make tournaments an even larger logistical nightmare that they are currently. Almost every tournament has to be completed the day that it starts, and almost every one is begging the venue for more time to finish their event.

In my state for example, I'm running: Brawl Singles + Doubles, Melee Singles+Doubles, and a Brawl amateur bracket. There is simply no way to attempt to fit yet another event into the already limited amount of set ups that I have. Furthermore, with the spill-over of players for events, it causes schedule's matches to be a time sink in itself. People are obviously able to host Item tournaments if they want, but the draw for them will be incredibly low.

Also, explaining to someone the current rule set for Smash is easy, while describing a rule-set for using Items certainly isn't. It's easy to convince someone that No items, stock battle is the legitimate way to play. It's another to tell them that certain items are viable, and others aren't.

I remember the group and I see why running item tournaments is a problem. I suppose I'm just generally interested in the possibility.

 

[Black Mantis]

I just want someone to prove if that's the real Daigo or not.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

And what would prevent these nationals from holding several different events as per ruleset preference? Is it strictly a time/venue constraint (that's what I'd assume)?

Yeah, pretty much. And that most people aren't up for more than one tournament.

I have a hard time believe OS would be support of banning anything without proof it shouldn't be played on.

Yeah, see, that's actually a good quality.

I like how everyone is ignoring the fact that we are banning things that other competitive fighters have eliminated by game design... items, stages that affect gameplay or favor one character or another. the banning of ddd's infinite is really the only thing you can fault the community for since the banning of everything else is an attempt to make smash like other fighters

Um... You do realize that in saying something like that, you are assuming that smash is like other fighters. If you're going to be like that, then maybe you should pick up this wisdom from them: "Only ban what you absolutely have to". We ban so many things to be like a "real fighting game" that we forget this critical principle. And quite frankly, have we shown that brawl is a better competitive game with items off, or that it isn't better to play in coin mode, or that banning stages X, Y, and Z is a good idea? NO! NO WE HAVEN'T! WE ARE A COMMUNITY OF SCRUBS!

 

[humble]

In a competitive scenario, the objective is to enter into competition with your opponent and emerge victorious. When its a sporting competition like video games, its meant to see whether you or your opponent is the more capable competitor. As such, you want to reduce the scenario to become an equal playing field for competition. When you enter into competition, you want to reduce the element of chance as much as possible so that you are the one affecting the outcome of the match, and not a random variable. Thus you attempt to remove these outside factors in order to be sure that this competition is begun on a level playing field, with the winner being ascertained by skill alone.

This, is the viewpoint I take in regards to the situation. Of course there is a certain amount of preference to the choice of how we play- however, the vast majority are all of the same opinion in regards to it, and the opposing opinion is equally a matter of preference. As I stated above, the reason for the removal of items and certain stages, is that they factor into the outcome of the match, and often become the deciding factor. However for the majority of people who enter into competition, when they win/lose, they want to be able to know that it was because they were the superior/inferior player, and not because a random uncontrollable anomaly arose in their match, and they lost due to chance not being in their favor. People prefer to know it was skill, not luck, that wins them a match.

 

[Apollo$]

Troll topic so cool beans

 

[Pyronic_Star]

@budget

stop being so biased and maybe you wouldn't view it as a scrub mentality...

with items and stages that dictate the outcome of matches, we are not like other competitive fighters

by banning these things that make us different, (you claim) we are not like other fighters...

what do you want us to do?

and can you truly say that they would not ban items or stages that affect gameplay? no, you can't because their community has never had to desk with such obstacles

 

[humble]

Troll topic so cool beans

When a topic is made, irregardless of intent, you should still regard the topic at hand- yes, they may be trolling you, but only if you let them. Intelligent debate can arise from a troll topic, and an intelligent topic can fall to trolling. It's all a matter of how you react to it, whether you want to give them the rise they are trying to get out of you, or whether you will be above that. Don't sink to a troll's level, and don't ignore any points- address the validity of each post on its own merits, not what you think of the thread as a whole or the poster.

 

[Jack Kieser]

If I remember correctly, the thread you were refering to had items divided into starter, counterpick and banned, just like stages. I assume that the broken stuff is eliminated with that for the most part.

This is correct. At the 2v2 tournament in '09, we were running a full CP system (Neutral, CP, Banned) AND an item striking system (each player got a ban before match 1). Few players utilized either. Not to mention that for THAT tournament, we were using a particularly conservative list so that no one would be scared off.

Apart from that, sure all items can and will eventually be thrown, but in theory, wouldn't it be smarter to use items that cover a character's weakness at least for a bit? Characters without projectile would actually have an answer for camping, beam sword would help to reduce the impact of regular sword users and their range. I fail to see why one would immnediately throw every item to be honest.

Throwing items automatically is scrubby. Only SOME items have higher KB when thrown, but its more useful to use them for either glide tossing OR for their inherent properties... because it's SO EASY to catch any and ALL legal items ON REACTION unless you're in point blank range... in which case they are, more likely than not, powershielded anyway. Yeah, only ISP n00bs throw items regularly.

Possibly. On the other hand, wouldn't the leading player be encouraged to be more aggressive due to the fact that items have a higher probability to spawn near the losing player?

Well, it hasn't been PROVEN that items spawn closer to the loser. Not by a LONG shot. Even so, yes, it would make sense to keep your lead by use of stage control, because stage control becomes WAY more important in an item setting; after all, you don't WANT to give your opponent more possible spawn points, do you?

I remember the group and I see why running item tournaments is a problem. I suppose I'm just generally interested in the possibility.

It's really NOT hard. I personally ran a 70+ team ISP 2v2 NATIONAL tournament with only 2 tournaments worth of experience under my belt. And, I didn't even know I was going to do it until 30 minutes beforehand. Explaining that there are N/CP/B items is NO harder than explaining that there are N/CP/B stages. The CP system works the same way. The ban system works the same way. ISP was purposefully designed to work as similarly to vBrawl rules as possible.

The only reason TOs don't try it is because of stigma and/or laziness. And the only reason players don't play it is because of conservatism and misinformation. There is LITTLE TO NO actual tournament data to suggest that controlled item rulesets don't work on a national scale.

 

[Jim Morrison]

Hey, I'm competative Pokémon, I banned even more things that the Super Smash Series have! There are certain moves that can not be used, as well as limits on characters and no items btw!

Summary; Smash is like competative Pokémon, deal with it.

 

[chaosmaster1991]

@Jack
I see, thank you for elaborating that stuff.

One last thing, as item play was brought up in a number of threads again recently, would it make sense to have a seperate thread for the issue again? As far as I can see, the more liberal the stage lists become, the more it appears that a similar logic can be used in this issue.

 

[Apollo$]

When a topic is made, irregardless of intent, you should still regard the topic at hand- yes, they may be trolling you, but only if you let them. Intelligent debate can arise from a troll topic, and an intelligent topic can fall to trolling. It's all a matter of how you react to it, whether you want to give them the rise they are trying to get out of you, or whether you will be above that. Don't sink to a troll's level, and don't ignore any points- address the validity of each post on its own merits, not what you think of the thread as a whole or the poster.

The topic is still gonna go out like a powdered keg explosion

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

@budget

stop being so biased and maybe you wouldn't view it as a scrub mentality...

Scrub mentality being someone who limits himself through arbitrary rules. If we decide "nah, let's play the game on FD only with no items" when adding extra stages makes the game more competitive (it does!), how does this not make us scrubs? We're banning something... for no good reason in the game? Why are stages treated so shoddily, when they're essentially a whole different dimension to smash?

with items and stages that dictate the outcome of matches, we are not like other competitive fighters

by banning these things that make us different, (you claim) we are not like other fighters...
what do you want us to do?

Hmm. Actually, correction. It's not that we're not like other fighters. We're not like any well-designed game with a decent community.

Sirlin's philosophy applies to any competitive game. Street Fighter, Starcraft, Mario Kart, Super Smash Bros Brawl. If you don't have to ban something, don't.

(arguably) (most) Items? Yeah, they have to go. They are simply too random. You can't play the game competitively like that, or rather, it's more competitive if you don't. You don't get the most consistent results with them.
Some stages, such as temple/NPC/Spear Pillar? Yeah, they really had to go, otherwise the game degenerates into one broken tactic almost all the time, and makes the game less varied to the extent that, well, it's hardly even a game any more. It's "fire one lazer, run in circles". So that has to go.

However, what else have we banned?
-YI(M), Green Greens, Luigi's Mansion, etc.: Why is the game better without these stages? Is it PROVEN that the game is better without them to the extent that banning them is justified?
-DDD's infinite: GTFO if you think the game is honestly so much better that banning this is justified
-Global planking ban, planking ban even on Norfair and Brinstar: MK is the only character remotely deserving a ban on planking-it is a completely unstoppable tactic. And even then, banning it on norfair and brinstar? Not necessary, the stage stops it.

and can you truly say that they would not ban items or stages that affect gameplay? no, you can't because their community has never had to desk with such obstacles

Well, to an extent. Some would argue that, according to sirlin, if you have to ban half the game to make the game competitive, the game is not a good competitive game and we should find another one. However, after we've done all the banning, what remains is an INCREDIBLE competitive game, and one that is very, very fun to play.

However, again, only ban what you absolutely have to!

Hey, I'm competative Pokémon, I banned even more things that the Super Smash Series have! There are certain moves that can not be used, as well as limits on characters and no items btw!

Summary; Smash is like competative Pokémon, deal with it.

Yes, they're both made by nintendo. However, have you ever banned anything that didn't clearly need to be banned?

 

[Supreme Dirt]

Yes, they're both made by nintendo. However, have you ever banned anything that didn't clearly need to be banned?

Actually, things are banned from the UU tier because, traditionally, Pokémon tiers are based on usage. For a while in our metagame, Umbreon usage in the OU ("Standard") tier spiked, in order to deal with the rising threat of Tyranitar and the nearly unstoppable threat of Salamence. Umbreon was thus banned from UU, not because it was too powerful - Umbreon is awful in UU - but simply because it was used too much.

We also had our own Meta Knight, a Pokémon some will remember known as Garchomp. After many a flame war and discussion, he eventually ended up banned because people didn't like how if he used substitute under a sandstorm, with a 100% accurate Ice Beam you had a 64% chance of stopping it.

tl;dr: Don't compare Smash and Pokémon. Pokémon competitive play is very usage based, and luck is far more a factor than Smash. See that Ike in the MLG placements? You wouldn't see the equivalent of that in Pokémon.

[/rant]

 

[vVv Rapture]

Above speaks the truth.

In terms of items, all of you get in a group, test some items and see if it works. I wouldn't be bothered by items as long as the ones allowed aren't broken. So, if someone wants to add in Mr. Saturn because he makes combos happen, let them. But if you tell me the Hammer is a legitimate competitive addition, I'll punch you so hard you'll digest my ring finger.

I suggest we just start all over from scratch and pretend like the past few years never happened and Brawl just came out a week ago.

 

[Damage Points]

Items are gay. That is all.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Items are gay. That is all.

And YOU'RE not helping. That is all.

 

[RATED]

that Daigo Umehara account IMO is troll.

 

[Apollo$]

Mods must be asleep....

 

[The_Guide]

Why does the thread need to be closed? Great, non-flamey debate is coming out of it.

 

[Daigo Umehara]

that Daigo Umehara account IMO is troll.

I honestly don't see why everyone on these forums think I'm a troll. Before EVO this year, I saw a few Americans, including Marn and Floe, two top Super Street Fighter IV players, playing Brawl. They invited me over, and talked to my translator and eventually talked me into playing, and I must say that it's not as bad as people say it is.

 

[Hylian]

I honestly don't see why everyone on these forums think I'm a troll. Before EVO this year, I saw a few Americans, including Marn and Floe, two top Super Street Fighter IV players, playing Brawl. They invited me over, and talked to my translator and eventually talked me into playing, and I must say that it's not as bad as people say it is.

Well for one I just looked up your IP and host and it's certainly american.

 

[Daigo Umehara]

Well for one I just looked up your IP and host and it's certainly american.

Smoke and mirrors, my friend.

 

[Hylian]

Not only that, you are the person who made the SF4 Dhalsim Player account which is currently banned.

 

[Kitamerby]

Exactly! Was Green Greens given a fair chance? Distant Planet? Luigi's Mansion? Skyworld? Yoshi's Island (melee)? NO!
Was item standard play ever given a fair chance as a competitive option, or perhaps even the most competitive option? NO!

EDIT: Daigo, ****+timestamp or gtfo

Distant Planet, Luigi's, Corneria, etc. WERE all given fair chances, especially on WC and in the Midwest, and we all realized they were freaking gay and were not good competitive stages. :x

 

[Black Mantis]

Not only that, you are the person who made the SF4 Dhalsim Player account which is currently banned.

So what your saying is that he's not the real deal?