Which Smash Bros is your favorite?

[RespawningJesus]

Link to original post: [drupal=4903]Which Smash Bros is your favorite?[/drupal]



Hello everybody. DAK075 here, just to give you my two cents as to what Smash Bros was my favorite.

I personally believe that Brawl is my favorite by far. Here is my logic behind this statement:


Anyways, bash me as you will, but I thought Brawl was the more solid experience. I didn't play much of Smash 64, so I really can't say much of it, and as such I
cannot list it as my favorite. But at least Smash 64 got me introduced to Smash Bros.


Melee, however, I played the crap out of. I got my GC for Christmas in 2003, along with Melee. I have had it until 2008, where I traded it with a friend for MGS3. (Brawl was going to come out soon anyways) We were gonna trade back, but we never got around to it.

Anyways, I remember playing that game for ages. I was terrible at first, but as soon as I figured out how to dodge, I started getting better and better. I wasn't the best Melee player, but I wasn't the worst. Anyways, what made me want a break from the game that it eventually bored me by how much I was playing it.

And here was why I got bored: I didn't get many opportunities to play against friends, and the lack of characters (clones, clones, and more clones make for similar approaches when using characters or fighting against them, which in turn leads to a boring fighting game) made everything dull. I wanted some variety of characters. Which was why I traded games with my friend. I needed a break from Melee, and I was very much interested in the MGS series at the time, with MGS3 being my first MGS game.


Finally, I have Brawl. At first, I thought that the game was fun as hell, but it wasn't Melee, so I didn't like it too much because of that. I had too many memories in Melee, so I never really got around to seeing what Brawl really had to offer until 2010. When I finally saw it, I felt stupid for not realizing it earlier, and letting my fan boyism of Melee get in the way.

Brawl was a better experience. You had more characters, and they each had a distinct fighting style, since they were very much different from one another. You had a couple clones, but you still had variety of characters, which added to the crazy fighting action that we all know and love about the game. Which is very important in a game like Smash Bros.

Yes, I will admit it, Melee did take more skill than Brawl, but I liked that. Brawl was easier, which made more people become good at the game. I want a challenge, and I also want the chance to learn from my opponents. You really can't learn much if your opponent was just screaming bloody murder and tossing you around like a ragdoll. With the gap closing between good and great players, things got more interesting. (Newer players cannot really compete against good or great opponents. They can, however, learn much faster to get up to speed with better players, which is another reason why Brawl is great.)

Plus, everything felt more smoother and natural in Brawl. It felt as if it had that greater polish, a greater shine to it than previous Smash games. I can't fully explain that, but I can just feel it in the game.


So there you have it: Brawl is my favorite. Now, let me ask all of you a question: which Smash game is your favorite and why? Also, feel free to critique my reasoning.

Also, sorry for this being so long, but that is my style. If I'm gonna write a blog, it is going to have some substance to it. I tried to break up the paragraphs, so that you won't be viewing a large body of text, since it makes it harder for people to read.

 

[Spyro]

*reads title* Oh no here we go again, I guarantied this will spark another melee vs brawl argument >.>

But whatever, Melee is my favorite.

 

[RespawningJesus]

*reads title* Oh no here we go again, I guarantied this will spark another melee vs brawl argument >.>

But whatever, Melee is my favorite.

Hmmm, well no matter what I name the title, people will still argue due to the contents of the blog.

Could never really understand why people get some worked up over something so trivial. People need to calm down and respect one another's opinions.

 

[Jet300]

Brawl. I can tell that a Melee vs brawl argument is going to happen.

 

[Wizzrobe]

I like all three of the games because there all special in there own way

 

[Spyro]

Hmmm, well no matter what I name the title, people will still argue due to the contents of the blog.

I said *reads title* cause as soon as I did I knew what the blog would be about, I know that any kind of blog like this that has anything to do with melee (maybe a brawl blog?) will start a melee vs brawl argument.

Could never really understand why people get some worked up over something so trivial. People need to calm down and respect one another's opinions.

I don’t understand it either but I totally agree with you there.

 

[Zzuxon]

Brawl, it's floatiness best fits my style. Also, it has more stuff.

 

[Cleod]

Melee, I have grown a sense of passion to it's quick and competitive play

 

[Mr.Jackpot]

With the gap closing between good and great players, things got more interesting.

Only interesting if you're the worse player.

 

[RespawningJesus]

I said *reads title* cause as soon as I did I knew what the blog would be about, I know that any kind of blog like this that has anything to do with melee (maybe a brawl blog?) will start a melee vs brawl argument.

More or less, this is a Brawl blog, but it isn't exclusive to just that, as people have different tastes on which game they prefer.

Only interesting if you're the worse player.

True, but that is what is so great. The worse player won't feel as discouraged as they did in Melee. They get some sort of fighting chance, and even if they lose, they will have at least gotten the chance to learn something from their lost. If not, then they are just a poor sport.

 

[Shorts]

Melee, then 64, then Brawl.

I like them all though. Just the first two much more than the third.

 

[Spyro]

Melee, then 64, then Brawl.

I like them all though. Just the first two much more than the third.

This is exactly how I feel about it.

 

[link2702]

melee.

least link ganon mario c.falcon, and several others weren't absolute lost causes like they are in brawl.

 

[Cleod]

Forgot to mention most of my top characters in melee were severely nerfed such as C. Falcon and Link

 

[Teran]

It's hard to say really, I like them all a great amount for unique reasons.

Smash 64 started it all, and the concept was just mind blowing at the time. Nintendo all stars and the way the fights were carried out. The whole % damage thing was genius. The items were pretty epic as well, I don't care it was fun landing a perfect bob-omb throw on some poor sap to get a KO. In a way I suppose it's my favourite since I think it's the game I spent the most time playing. Funny how we originally bought it because Pikachu was in it, the TV adverts had us all at that!

Melee was INCREDIBLE. Forget all the competitive stuff, I'm talking about the presentation. Smash 64 was cool, but it was kinda ghettoish and not taken too seriously, which was fair enough since it wasn't expected to be popular and was simply going to be a Japan only novelty release. Melee had massive amounts of effort put into it, and it showed. The opening sequence is one of the coolest CGI sequences, and considering this was 2001, it blew everyone away seeing their favourite Nintendo characters rendered with in such beautiful detail. There were all these new modes, great gameplay mechanic tweaks, it felt like Nintendo had taken EVERYTHING in the game to the next level. You felt like even if you loved Smash 64 for nostalgic reasons, Melee was just the far superior game in every way. Oh I forgot the music and stuff, suppose that needs no explanation.
Sometimes I feel Melee is my favourite, God knows how many hours I spent playing it, that feeling of amazement I got when I popped it in the GC the first time. It just felt incredible going from the graphics of the N64 of such smooth and detailed models. It was the one game that lasted the entire life of the GC, and the GC had some stellar releases, so that pretty much sums Melee up, the game had infinite replay value, or rather, has, I still play it and so do a lot of people on here, obviously.

Brawl was an interesting case. I have to admit the whole renaming from Revolution to Wii was looking kinda :/, and I suppose we were right to be :/
Although tbh I don't thinkt he Wii was bad, tbh, but that's a different debate. Still, in any case this was before the damn thing was coming out, I imagine, or perhaps it had just come out I hardly remember, but I do remember it was 2006, and I was watching TGS I think it was... anyway.

Link, Kirby, Pikachu, and Mario run into the fray in their Melee incarnations, although at first I don't really catch on with just Mario and Link, suddenly seeing the group togehter my eyes bug out a bit thinking NO WAY and *whoosh* they transform into their wonderfully detailed Brawl models (well Kirby and Pikachu essentially look the same lol).

Then of course, the theme hit, and the game was unravlled in all its chaotic glory. One by one newcomers were introduced which made me go WAT. It's ironic really how hyped I was when Metak Knight was announced, I think everyone was. I was actually planning to main him, and I did try using him but he felt odd, then of course the whole debacle of his legality began. The end of the trailer with Snake was priceless, Nintendo were on a roll at that time, and that trailer was the epitome of hype and doing it right. People may be disillusioned with Brawl's competitive aspect, but that's a shame because they put SO MUCH effort into making it a Nintendo fan service package.

The music is top notch, lots of characters, all those trophies and stickers. Plenty of stages. They really tried to squeeze ever last MB out of that disk. Good ****, it was and is a great game imo, and it consistently reminded me of what the Wii could accomplish with a bit of ****ing effort put in. Sadly while it was great, it didn't capture my mind like the other two. Maybe it's because the basic gameplay mechanics were unchanged from Melee (control wise yes, we're not talking details here we're talkin absolute basics). The fighting is totally different, but when I first got my hands on it, it felt like I was playing Melee in slow mo, which was... interesting.

Maybe I was too old by then, I was 17 when Brawl was released. Perhaps my mind couldn't be captivated like it was by the Smash games in my childhood. In any case, I felt for all its great aspacts which I do and did appreciate, I don't get that same feeling of almost having a tear jerk just by firing up the game. Perhaps I might when the next Smash comes out but I doubt it, I feel Melee and 64 are just games in a league of their own, so I suppose they;re tied for their own reasons.

We're talking favourites not "best" so really there is nothing here that should be contentious.

I wrote too much it's morning I should be asleep.

 

[ciaza]

64 easily. i play a lot of melee too which is ridiculously fun in its own way, but the punishment and combo game in 64 grips me more. getting hit once against a player that can combo will see to it that you will get demolished, often ending in death or a gimp situation. this makes the spacing battle between you and your opponent so much more exciting as you're both doing whatever it takes to get that all important first hit.

the balance in the game is also what i like, it's not uncommon to see a good samus - the worst character in the game - to beat any other character. in fact a player named jousuke won a huge japanese tournament using only samus. so much hype.

but of course, ssb64 is the combo game and the combos are mine and probably everyone's favourite part. nothing more satisfying than hitting a falcon reverse fair to tippered uair, a fox laser combo, any number of amazing yoshi combos, a falcon tent combo with reverse weak utilts and ftilts, i could go on. watching any ricky combo vid almost makes me shed a tear of manliness.

should also mention the techskill. while certainly a lot of the stuff is not as hard to do as things in melee, stuff like drop cancelling, perfect shines, rising/falling platform shenanigans are all very hard but fun to learn. other than that i dunno, there's just something fulfilling about doing stuff like isai's ledge-cancel dair > ff uair > z-cancel on a platform to me. hard to explain.

as for brawl: i've played a bit of it, and i don't understand the appeal of it over melee tbh. felt like melee but with moon gravity on. i can't exactly critique though as i've barely played it. i'd sooner take up cartoon network punchtime explosion regardless.

 

[Metal Overlord]

Smash 64 was the best, in my opinion

It was the game that helped mold me the gamer that I am today, and it made the concept of Nintendo's All-Stars comin' together to brawl way more awesome than its successors, plus I enjoyed its more light-hearted tone, charm and simplicity

Melee is a very close second, though, that game just never gets old to me, plus it had Mewtwo in it

 

[RespawningJesus]

Nice, keep it up everybody.

I just played the demo version of Project M, and I enjoyed myself greatly. Maybe I did have a reason to have loved Melee so much . . . but then again, I enjoyed Brawl's cast of characters way more than Melee's, but both aren't bad at all.

I think the mix of both was a master stroke, so whoever is working on Project M, good job. I am enjoying Smash Bros. even more now.

 

[Life]

Melee has better physics; Brawl has more content. It's kind of a matter of what people value more. Melee is generally more popular in the tournament scene; Brawl wins all the "best Smash game" polls among the general public. I personally play both games and don't prefer either over the other (although I'm only doing Brawl tournaments for now).

(64 has the advantage of being the original [the RBY effect, if you will] but I never played it enough to really appreciate the game.)

 

[BlackDr.Mario]

My Name Should Say It All....

As for me.... I prefer Melee 24/7, 365 (and on Leap Years!)

Its faster, its a game that takes more than a little skill to play; like knowledge. You have to know what SDI is and how to wave dash and realize there's basic game play and advanced game play. More competitive and even though Smash 64 came first, it marked a new level of Smash that even Brawl can't compete with.

Don't get me wrong, I play both and I'm starting to get back to Smash 64 again, but lets face it... Melee is better, end of story.

 

[SamusPoop]

I respect all games unless somewhere along the lines it proves brawl's skill limits are horriblely limited (I highly doubt).

But to be fair melee's clones are pretty different if You play one enough. Also You can watch all the high level samus and ice climbers and notice they play totally different. Its a very flexible game.

I enjoy melee's movement speed.

Wish I cpuld enjoy brawl more

 

[-ShadowPhoenix-]

Yes, I will admit it, Melee did take more skill than Brawl, but I liked that. Brawl was easier, which made more people become good at the game.

Agreed.

Melee 4 Life

 

[Wave-Guiding Hero]

I like the Brawl, then Melee, then 64.

IMO, 64 is completely outclassed by the other games in every conceivable way, unfortunately. However, it is easily the best when it comes to items. Whereas in Melee and Brawl the items can be overly random and unfair at times, 64 always felt perfect to me with items on. It's a little too dull with them off Also, the ridiculous hitstun can be fun at times too.

Melee is the game of my childhood, lol. I got it along with my Gamecube for Christmas and played the crap out of it. I was, of course, a scrub, but even still I really liked the fast paced gameplay. I didn't have many friends I could play with, so I mostly played the single player modes. I got to the point where I could clear Adventure mode one-handed. In hindsight, the game definitely had its flaws (clones, relatively unforgiving gameplay wise), but the game still holds ridiculous amounts of nostalgia for me, the Entei trophy event battle and the character demo video in the options menu in particular (I used to watch that video all the time).

Brawl, however, is easily my favorite for a multitude of reasons. For one thing, Brawl's one-player mode completely blows Melee's out of the water (I'll take a fanservice and cutscene-packed, 12-hour long epic over a 10 minute watered-down variant of Classic mode any day), which was the main draw for me before I became a competitive player. Secondly, the cast was much larger and overall better than Melee's, helped by the decloning of my favorite clone characters and the removal of the ones I didn't like. The soundtrack is also easily the best in the series and arguably one of the best in video game history. Most importantly, the gameplay is the best for me. I became a competitive player earlier this year, and after trying all three games extensively to see which one I'd like the most to play seriously, Brawl clicked the most with me. I prefer the slower, more strategic combat of Brawl to the fast paced, tactical gameplay of Melee (also, and I'll admit it, Melee was too hard for me. I'll ALWAYS prefer game that favors thought and strategy over the game that favors reflexes and techskill). Finally, Brawl is simply the best game in the series overall, as exemplified by its higher review scores than Melee and 64. While Brawl may not have gameplay that caters as much to the competitive crowd, as an overall game and package it leaves both Melee and 64 in the dust.

Series Breakdown (once again, my opinion):
Gameplay: Brawl > Melee > 64
Characters: Brawl > Melee > 64
Stages: Melee > Brawl > 64
Items: 64 > Brawl > Melee
Graphics: Brawl > Melee > 64
Soundtrack: Brawl > Melee > 64
Singleplayer: Brawl > Melee > 64
Multiplayer: Brawl > Melee > 64
Enjoyment: Brawl > Melee > 64

Yeah, I think we have a clear winner.

 

[Spelt]

If Lucario isn't in smash 4 then I pick that one.

 

[P-99]

Yes, I will admit it, Melee did take more skill than Brawl, but I liked that. Brawl was easier, which made more people become good at the game. I want a challenge, and I also want the chance to learn from my opponents. You really can't learn much if your opponent was just screaming bloody murder and tossing you around like a ragdoll. With the gap closing between good and great players, things got more interesting. (Newer players cannot really compete against good or great opponents. They can, however, learn much faster to get up to speed with better players, which is another reason why Brawl is great.)

This is the reason why I put melee way above brawl because so much more skill is involved and I love competition - the harder, the better. Actually in most cases you can tell how competetive a game is by how hard a newer player gets destroyed by a pro.
Also once you got the techskill and everything down it comes down to strategy again.
And if you can't learn by getting ***** you are probably just a bad player.

The only logical reason to me to put brawl over melee is the variety.

With my logic based on level of difficulty and skill involved the list goes like this:

Melee > Brawl
(I don't take SSB64 into account because in my opinion it's just the not fully developed version of Melee with the lack of defensive options (read: DI, walltechs, etc.), the slower speed and so on and also I can't tell if there really is more skill involved than in Brawl)

With that said:

Melee is a man's game - just grow up

 

[ciaza]

(I don't take SSB64 into account because in my opinion it's just the not fully developed version of Melee with the lack of defensive options (read: DI, walltechs, etc.), the slower speed and so on and also I can't tell if there really is more skill involved than in Brawl)

i should probably point out that 64 has directional influence as well.

with that said it's interesting to see the varying opinions on 64. it seems most people don't care or know enough about to really say what they think, they don't mind it casually, or they outright dislike it. seeing it as an underdeveloped melee is a new one too. i don't mind at all, it's just that most aussies i meet at tourney's fall into the 'i like it but i just like melee/brawl a lot better' category, so it's interesting to learn that some people feel this way.

i'll have to type out a blog methinks

i think a friend of mine is already planning to actually, with the objective to clear up a lot of misconceptions that a some people have about the game (as demonstrated in the 64 section recently >_>).

 

[P-99]

i should probably point out that 64 has directional influence as well.

Yes, you are right. But compare it to the DI in melee or it's defensive options overall. SSB64 is much more about getting that one hit and then make a huge combo out of it (this was mentioned in the thread before i think).

I see it something like this:

SSB64 was the first game and is the base of the whole smash thing. With the great amount of hitstun the game evolved around the whole "Don't get hit" thing (thank you Isai) and it's so much more important to get that first hit than in the other two games.

Then Melee came along and added a bunch of new things, many AT's, "optimized" / changed the physics and equaled offensive and defensive options more out (for example you can CC grab / shine or SDI out of many combos). It is also the fastest game of all three and the game with most skill involved, making it egligible for competetive play.

With Brawl then a lot of things (AT's) were taken out again and with the low amount of hitstun it became more a hit-by-hit game (inb4buttherearechaingrabs!=&/!"$). Being slower and characters being floatier, having tripping, auto-ledgegrab and other things in it, it decreased the amount of skill needed and is also less competetive.


Ultimately it comes down to what one likes most. For the simple reason that i like challenges and competetion I'm sticking with Melee because I think it suits that attributes the most (being the most competetive and challenging game of all three)

 

[Holder of the Heel]

I am one of the few people who like Brawl better than Melee because I do indeed like content most of all. Online (not great but better than nothing), characters, lack of complete clone characters, those things were important to me. The skill thing is important to me as well, I think that even though it is easier to be good in, I still say a true player with more true skill will be able to beat anyone with less skill.

The kicker for me is that this game is one that puts together all of our favorite Nintendo characters that we know and love, keeping their charm and abilities to the battlefield, meeting each other for the first time and showing who has the best of the best. Watching competitive Melee players... it does not look like Nintendo characters naturally going about showing what they have as their characters. It seems like their being and naturalness are lost in the way it is played, but with Brawl you watch pros play and it actually appears like you are watching the real Sonic and Mario battling with what they have, appearing entirely as they are.

That may sound strange, I do understand it is a personal thing. In defense of the Melee game, I probably played that more, at least initially.

 

[RespawningJesus]

Melee is a man's game - just grow up

I hate comments such as this, but that is to be expected.

Just grow up and accept each game for what it is.

No need to say that one game is better than the other at competitive or casual play. They are all completely different, and as such, you have to play each game differently.

The purpose of this thread is to say which Smash game you like and why, so please keep all of your cheap cracks at bashing every game out of it.

 

[-ShadowPhoenix-]

I hate comments such as this, but that is to be expected.

Just grow up and accept each game for what it is.

No need to say that one game is better than the other at competitive or casual play. They are all completely different, and as such, you have to play each game differently.

The purpose of this thread is to say which Smash game you like and why, so please keep all of your cheap cracks at bashing every game out of it.

It isnt a cheap crack.
That man speaks the truth

 

[RespawningJesus]

It isnt a cheap crack.
That man speaks the truth

Yes, his logic was sound, but his last sentence claimed that Melee is a "man's" version of Smash Bros, while the others are not.

Aka, a cheap crack.

I still respect his opinion, as he does explain his logic behind his decision.

 

[ciaza]

Yes, you are right. But compare it to the DI in melee or it's defensive options overall. SSB64 is much more about getting that one hit and then make a huge combo out of it (this was mentioned in the thread before i think).

I see it something like this:

SSB64 was the first game and is the base of the whole smash thing. With the great amount of hitstun the game evolved around the whole "Don't get hit" thing (thank you Isai) and it's so much more important to get that first hit than in the other two games.

Then Melee came along and added a bunch of new things, many AT's, "optimized" / changed the physics and equaled offensive and defensive options more out (for example you can CC grab / shine or SDI out of many combos). It is also the fastest game of all three and the game with most skill involved, making it egligible for competetive play.

With Brawl then a lot of things (AT's) were taken out again and with the low amount of hitstun it became more a hit-by-hit game (inb4buttherearechaingrabs!=&/!"$). Being slower and characters being floatier, having tripping, auto-ledgegrab and other things in it, it decreased the amount of skill needed and is also less competetive.


Ultimately it comes down to what one likes most. For the simple reason that i like challenges and competetion I'm sticking with Melee because I think it suits that attributes the most (being the most competetive and challenging game of all three)

i guess what i don't understand then is how the speed of a game, or how much skill it requires to play makes it more eligible for competitive play. rock paper scissors is vastly competitive, yet it doesn't require tech skill at all. if the speed of the game makes something more competitive, shouldn't people be playing lightning melee instead? i'm not trying to be hostile, i'm just trying to clarify.

another point i don't understand is what makes something 'challenging'. does being challenging entail learning hard AT's, outspacing a good opponent, or something else?

finally, i also don't understand how one game can optimise the physics over another (and i imagine this is why the word 'optimize' was in apostrophes). as far as i see it, this comes down to your final point - the one i agree with the most - about it being subjective, unless i'm mistaken and a game's physics can be measured by objective criteria.

 

[RespawningJesus]

i guess what i don't understand then is how the speed of a game, or how much skill it requires to play makes it more eligible for competitive play. rock paper scissors is vastly competitive, yet it doesn't require tech skill at all. if the speed of the game makes something more competitive, shouldn't people be playing lightning melee instead? i'm not trying to be hostile, i'm just trying to clarify.

another point i don't understand is what makes something 'challenging'. does being challenging entail learning hard AT's, outspacing a good opponent, or something else?

finally, i also don't understand how one game can optimise the physics over another (and i imagine this is why the word 'optimize' was in apostrophes). as far as i see it, this comes down to your final point - the one i agree with the most - about it being subjective, unless i'm mistaken and a game's physics can be measured by objective criteria.

Nice one.

The ATs of the Melee were a must for competitive play. All of those techniques are pretty difficult to master, which leads people to think it is more competitive than Brawl or any Smash game. However, these ATs were exploits of the game's mechanics. Whoever came up with them in the first place had too much time on their hands.
Anyways, back to the point I was making, once you have mastered these ATs, the game pretty much plays the same as any other Smash games. Finally, Melee was based more off of the combos that you would try to pull off against one another, which adds another point to the "skill" factor of the game. The speed will therefore increase this "skill" level, or so people would like to believe.
These are usually the reasons that any Melee player will say when trying to make the point of Melee being more competitive than any other Smash game.

What people fail to realize is that each Smash game is competitive in their own regards due to how different each and every game was. You simply have to master a different set of skills for each game to be good at it.

 

[P-99]

i guess what i don't understand then is how the speed of a game, or how much skill it requires to play makes it more eligible for competitive play. rock paper scissors is vastly competitive, yet it doesn't require tech skill at all. if the speed of the game makes something more competitive, shouldn't people be playing lightning melee instead? i'm not trying to be hostile, i'm just trying to clarify.

another point i don't understand is what makes something 'challenging'. does being challenging entail learning hard AT's, outspacing a good opponent, or something else?

finally, i also don't understand how one game can optimise the physics over another (and i imagine this is why the word 'optimize' was in apostrophes). as far as i see it, this comes down to your final point - the one i agree with the most - about it being subjective, unless i'm mistaken and a game's physics can be measured by objective criteria.

You made a good point with lightning melee and I agree with you. For the lols, I really played lightning melee to make me faster yesterday before I read your post =D And it lagged :/ That may be one reason but I think the main reason is that people are not used to it and of course in normal melee alone there is too much **** going on in a short amount of time for people to handle it. I guess that is already enough for most people.

As for challenging I think that things that are hard to achieve are challenging. You can learn RPS in a few seconds and with randomized selection procedure you will win ~50% of the time. Then again (as you stated above) things like learning hard AT's and good spacing are very hard to learn and with more speed it's even harder which makes it more challenging. It will take time to perfect these things and the more time is needed to become good at something the more challenging it is.

And sure that was the reason why I put the apostrophes there and after the slash comes the actual non-biased definition =)

Yes, his logic was sound, but his last sentence claimed that Melee is a "man's" version of Smash Bros, while the others are not.

Aka, a cheap crack.

I still respect his opinion, as he does make valid points.

Since today's popular definition of manliness is being a winner and not being afraid of any competition or challenge (also being strong, etc.) Melee would be the best game for men.
You can call it a serious joke =D

 

[RespawningJesus]

Since today's popular definition of manliness is being a winner and not being afraid of any competition or challenge (also being strong, etc.) Melee would be the best game for men.
You can call it a serious joke =D

I may be just tired right now, but could you please explain that sentence, as I am not getting it.

 

[P-99]

I may be just tired right now, but could you please explain that sentence, as I am not getting it.

Explaining jokes makes them less funny

Not being afraid of anything and searching for the biggest challenge a man would choose Melee as his game.

 

[RespawningJesus]

Explaining jokes makes them less funny

Not being afraid of anything and searching for the biggest challenge a man would choose Melee as his game.

OK, I see now. I really need to head off to bed if I wasn't able to see that before. =P

 

[ciaza]

thank you both for answering in detail =). it's funny, rps is often quite more in-depth than people realise. the problem is human's absolutely suck at being random so often psychology comes into play. that's hardly relevant to this conversation however (i just like spreading love of the game =D).

What people fail to realize is that each Smash game is competitive in their own regards due to how different each and every game was. You simply have to master a different set of skills for each game to be good at it.

this is what i was, eventually, going to get at. the problem with what i saw was that the term 'competitive' is very fickle, and i'm not entirely convinced of what characteristics of something make it competitive.

on the topic of challenging, p-99, based on your definition i would claim that one could argue that both 64 and melee (wouldn't have a flying clue about brawl) are challenging in their own right. for instance it saddens me as i watch so many people come into the online server for 64, get jv 6 stocked by a veteran player, and then leave the server and never come back. this is because the punishment game in 64 is ridiculously high and it's preposterous the amount of work a new player has to put in in order to even challenge a veteran (it took me a good 2 years or so to even get to a level to challenge the best player in my server). my point is that based on your definition, i believe one could argue that one game cannot be claimed more challenging than the other, even with things like learning at's (i don't know of a single person who can do running short-hop double lasers as fox consistently in 64, for example). i do of course agree as both a 64 and melee player, that melee has a lot more depth in terms of at's of course.

 

[Melomaniacal]

I don't think I'll ever understand why people value quantity over quality when it comes to game content. Why should I care that Brawl has more characters if they're all boring to play due to the physics and mechanics of the game? Basically, gameplay is by a LARGE margin the most important thing in ANY game for me. I don't care if the graphics are crappy sprites if it feels fun to play.

With that said, I like Melee best, then 64, and I don't even like Brawl enough to consider it. I had my run with it, I gave it a shot, and if I never play it again I'll feel alright.

And just for the record, Melee vs. Brawl debates get so heated and personal due to the way Brawl has affected the competitive scene.

 

[Holder of the Heel]

I don't think I'll ever understand why people value quantity over quality when it comes to game content. Why should I care that Brawl has more characters if they're all boring to play due to the physics and mechanics of the game? Basically, gameplay is by a LARGE margin the most important thing in ANY game for me. I don't care if the graphics are crappy sprites if it feels fun to play.

Well the thing is, you're assuming the people who enjoy the content increase to also find the quality of the gameplay lowered. Not everyone has to think that, me for example.

And just for the record, Melee vs. Brawl debates get so heated and personal due to the way Brawl has affected the competitive scene.

Yeah, and those people are quite embarrassing. This is nothing to get "heated" over.