shield... you still can't catch me, let alone win with one stock down
WITCH TIME (Is that still in Ultimate?)
Witch Time only triggers if you dodge something, and if I'm doing nothing, all you got are bullet arts, and that requires you leaving that safe zone behind you
This is a possibility, not a guarantee. Just because you can doesn't mean you should, and about that tree, just use an Up-B through it.
by the same token, "just because you can, doesn't mean you should". you
can win on any other stage instead of duck hunt if you're good enough, but when you got stuff on the line, just because you
can play on any other stage doesn't mean you
should if you want the best chances. face any AI with your best fighter, and sit on that tree when they're at high percent. they come after you, there's 15 seconds left on the hypothetical clock, what's the first thing you do to deal with them?
Luck. The main driving force of the Smash Bros. series that separates it from the likes of Street Fighter and Mortal Kombat. The reason why I've grown so attached to this series and the reason why Brawl is still my favorite game of all time. Remember, real men use items and Sakurai's luck is why the first game even got created. Taking the luck out of Smash is like taking the multiplayer out of Call of Duty. Sure, you have the base game, but nothing from that base game that people remember it for. Removing the parts of Smash that are currently "illegal" and unviable would leave you with nothing but five characters and fifteen stages, where all levels are one foot long and have nothing inside them but a few platforms (if that).
if I recall, the "Real Men use Items" line was a joke by the translators to intentionally push the buttons of the less tolerant maniacs...Sakurai himself said something else (don't remember what it was, though). the analogy you used wasn't a very strong one, by the way. taking out items doesn't do anything to the characters or the ability to play multiplayer in the first place...
a better comparison using Call of Duty would be to remove add-ons to your guns or character, like perks, better aiming sights, or the "noobtoob", among a few others. the better player still wins, but a more casual player will get bored of the repetition.
of course... Call of Duty was never really about variety when it truly came down to it, anyways, unlike games like Quake or Unreal Tournament... but I'm casual on FPS games, so games like CSGO or Rainbow Six: Siege wouldn't be my first choice right off the bat.
I also feel it's a bit exaggerated, while stages are debatable, I've yet to see anyone
definitively and unanimously ban a character... and I stress the latter term because not every TO supported the ban on Meta Knight, and despite the Backroom group's decision, it was STILL hotly debated.
Name one difference between Wily Castle Omega and Wily Castle (No Hazards).
I'll nitpick this cause I find it funny how not everyone has an eye for detail. Hazardless Wily's Castle is the same as the omega form was
in Smash 4, where it had
walls that reached the bottom. Omega Wily's Castle in
Ultimate does not have those walls anymore
But I get the idea. Everyone enjoys Smash in their own way. Turning off items, while shutting down a major aspect of the game, does allow for more hype battles. Bigger stages can lead to hour-long matches where nobody does anything except for running. However, there is no excuse for not researching lower-tier characters to see if they have more potential.
I will agree with that last sentence without a shadow of a doubt. plus, it makes the accomplishment of destroying big contenders with someone nobody thought was good that much sweeter. look no further than with Salem's ZSS VS Mew2King's Meta Knight back in Apex
2014, [oops, 2013] in Brawl
[...] there doesn't seem to be a tournament where every stage is allowed and all items are on. The existence of that would make even more people (including ESPECIALLY me) join the competitive scene instantly. (And by tournament, I mean those big annual tournaments like Super Smash Con and EVO, not some one-off thing at some kid's birthday party.)
the primary reason that players are so bent on removing as much luck as possible is because there's usually money on the line for winning... if there was a tournament with everything turned on (hazards, items, etc.) and nothing on the line, I don't see a reason not to hold one on the side
Bear in mind, the main appeal with competition is that it's a test of skill to see who's better at the game.
Core-A Gaming did a video analysis on the consequences of reducing the skill gap. as FloE says at the end of the video, "[spectators] don't care about who's the best anymore, they just want something to talk [trash] about"