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!
"X isn't very good!"
Lowkey starting the game with the original 8 I literally was like "this is enough characters".
The game literally could've just been a Smash 64 remake with normal online segregation ("you want For Glory? click this button; you want 4-player items? here"); the fact it's improved gameplay with the best portable experience yet is enough to carry it. Throw in a super secret character/stage or something and release it on the 20th anniversary.
Dude, people paid for the game. And you are telling me people shouldn't complain about the things they deem to be wrong? No offense, but good luck trying to convince all Smash players in the world to play with those rules, just to try to fix a bad designed system, something users shouldn't have to do. I love your positivity and I agree with the "spread the word and lets see if he can all set this rules" because is everything players can do appart from complain, but It simply won't work because 1) this community and probably any competitive community is not even 1% of the total playerbase and 2) no matter what, people will want to play with different rules if you have that option.
I hear that creating a public arena with a maximum of 2 players gives you something very similar to the old For Glory. You can even change characters freely here since doing that in an arena only moves you to the back of the queue... which doesn't change anything when it's only the two of you playing. And you can keep doing this until one gets tired.
I don't see any reason to end this thread though just because of a bad history with online threads. The person who made those spam threads hasn't replied here (yet), and the arguments that founded this topic are much stronger than saying "You think online will improve?" over and over again.
This can be fixed by mandating that all users playing online for the first time set their default rules. Everyone will know a lot of options are available, and we will see less FFAs (hopefully).
Did I ever say I was upset that this person was enjoying the game? All we're doing is asking them to bring back FG so we don't have to go through some convoluted process to play it, which was pretty much the basis for this thread.
People here are just being hit with the hard truth that their numbers are vastly inferior to the many young players who enjoy the chaos of free-for-alls and items, and/or offended that nothing directly caters to their tastes in online battling, instead having to set it up themselves. But that's too much work for a lot of us here apparently.
You are aware they can change that, right?
The problems with that being a single toggle is that
Exactly. Once the tourney folks find that ideal ruleset, and if it's deemed necessary, the devs can add a mode catering specifically to that preference. But right now there's just no way for anyone to know what that is yet.
No, you just gave me an image with no context and left me to fill the blanks.
We're probably gonna have to wait until well after Christmas (which will undoubtedly lead to another surge of casuals) before we get a steady picture of online.
Regardless of stocks or time (which could honestly be 2-3 stocks and any time), any guaranteed 1v1 matchup without having to jump through hoops is better than nothing, and the context of the image is the person saying online is a success while 95% of the internet is saying it's a disaster; you don't have to agree with everything you know.
Usually people don't want to fight people of higher skill. When you're facing either scrubs or masters, it's probably not enjoyable for the other party. A system was needed to keep things in check.
They don't even exist; as far as I'm aware, there's no stat-keeping for online.
That's an impossibility with how many types of matches can be set up, you'd be saddled with huge wait times instead for all but defaults. Also you're contradicting yourself, arenas do in fact let you play with the rules you want 100% of the time if you set it up.
A system that doesn't work unfortunately.
For Glory had those restrictions but at least it worked. This doesn't, it's just a mess and basically a lotto of what kind of match you are going to get. This current system does not work. You want to play competitively? At least they gave you the option of joining competitive matches with For Glory. Now it's all based on how lucky you get with the matchmaking system.
I kind of explained it already: you'd just wind up playing the same opponent multiple times as matches start and end at different intervals unless you elect not to, at which point you're in the situation you tried to avoid with this solution, waiting for others to finish.
Alternatively; every match starts at the same time, thus they will end at the same time and the opponents can be rotated adequately.
Or there are people in the arena who just want to spectate and not fight, thus leaving one fighter out to dry in even-numbered arenas.
There are simple solutions for that, the game could just have some default rule-sets for each type of game mode (time, stock, stamina) AND the search the game has avaiable today. It's not that hard, it would just be something like the WiiU matchmaking improved with the custom rule set if you want to be specific or dont care about which kind of mode you will join. But force people to play what they dont want, this is wrong, you can't force people to have fun with what they dont want to play, this do the opposite of giving fun to them, I can get pretty stressed by that. I can easily wait a bit more but be sure that eventually someone will get in my game, than be forced to play a mode I dont want.
meleebrawler
Jesus Christ dude; Nintendo can do no wrong, can they?
