"Why is Smash Bros the laughing stock of fighters?"

[Kei_Takaro]

Now before you say anything like "WTF are you saying OP ur a ***** troll get banned mofo etc.."

I do not mean to offend anyone, as this is not really something I've thought about, but I found the "Smashboards" name under a Mugen Community.

I don't understand. It seems to be competitive enough, after seeing places like
SmashBoards...

I would really just like to bring this up to smashboards since I feel bit F'd up from the following thread as I can't really defend myself that much over there.

Original Thread:
http://mugenguild.com/forumx/index.php?topic=111188.0

I <3 Smash, and I just brought that thread here okay? Maybe some of us would like to discuss
our basis on the Fighter Genre here, possibly invade there? lol inb4ufail

 

[Apollo$]

Smash is a non traditional fighter and the community made it competitive, of course other fighting game communities don't see things the same way.

inb4 possible lock

 

[Sephiroths Masamune]

right like Disssidia people in that forum hate smash boards to.

http://dissidiaforums.com/showthread.php?t=1306

 

[Kei_Takaro]

I believe this won't get locked, since It's not really a rant, but more of a discussion of Smash being whether a Fighter or not. Which I feel is fallible in the eyes of many.
Of course, there is that satisfying need to correct them (which I'm doing on the other side of things)

Oh and If you look at the thread, there are some lmao statements like "I won by mashing A which makes..without looking at any movelist at all...flailing the wiimote + A..." lol

 

[Nelo Vergil]

The hugest thing, especially regarding Brawl, but even Melee and 64, is people view them as party games....I mean, thats essentially what they are, or atleast what they were intended to be. Even Melee, with all its glitches which makes things alot more complex and faster, creating a game that some people can respect, most see it as a joke, a very shallow gameplay mechanic that cant hold its own to other fighters.

Its a shame they're so looked down on, but as intense as they can be, its true that they are just party games, and its doubtful they will ever hold the respect of the entire fighting game community.

 

[Kei_Takaro]

On the Dissidia side, I can easily notice the dedication they put into something, which is totally indifferent from the Smash side. I scrolled down the pages to see how much they put into it, that shows a side which I haven't seen before.
Dissidia would also be the unconventinal fighter game, but it is essentially the same as Smash
So I guess Dissidia players are blind, they can't see that they are the same as us lol

 

[Prawn]

LOL at that "ecthelionv2@hotmail.com"

"I pressed A to inhalez and beat a prooooooooo YEAH DOG" loooooooool

 

[Nova9000]

Because people are opinionated and think whatever they play is the best and have lackluster arguments to support this. And in reality, if you look at everything like you're correct, then you live in a very small world.

In other words, the people that feel that way...

 

[Kei_Takaro]

^lol, called it right XD

I really do admit that that is true, *bows down
Anyway, I'm liking the Dissidia piplz as we go, It's pretty much tight there if only they would see that Smash is in the same position as Dissidia only that Smash has kiddie and wacky feel to it


EDIT: I also have some beef with them concerning the title, since It's says that Smash Bros, being the laughing stock of the fighters (as stated) . Making their interpretation that it is a FACT? wtf man

Also the thread title here, is just to reflect the one in the mugen forum.

 

[Gerudo Warrior]

i guess because the console we play on, or maybe the amount of children that play games belong to the mario franchise.

 

[AlphaZealot]

They hate us more then other fighters because we hold 600+ Brawl tournaments in a year and have hundreds of thousands of dollars in prize money and are the most popular and best selling fighting game.

So, we are the biggest target, which is why we get the most ****.

 

[Big-Cat]

@Alpha
I highly doubt that's the case. I don't think they're jealous of how many Smash tournaments there are.

As someone who went from Smash to Street Fighter and BlazBlue, I'll toss in my guesses. (not necessarily my views)

1. The roster is freakishly unbalanced.
I shouldn't have to go into this all that much. The quality differences between Meta Knight and Ganondorf should be enough evidence.

2. The series is made by anti-competitive man.
Read up the interviews with Sakurai. He's like that because he wants it to be super easy for beginners. That's fine in itself, a good thing actually, but the lack of stuff you can do in these games outside of physics exploit and some glitches is rather limiting which brings me to the next one. Not to mention that this is what prevented from us having leaderboards.

3. The movesets are totally minimalist.
Look at how other fighting games handle movesets. For example, in Street Fighter, there is a template for normal moves that everyone shares. Then you have your unique normals (ie overhead) and your specials. Someone like Cammy has no "unique attacks" and has about technically five specials. Guile has more "unique attacks" and only two specials. Super Smash Bros. forces every character to have no different kinds of A attacks outside of the template and every character must have four and only four specials. For characters like Link and Samus, this is very limiting considering the number of tools they have in their games. On the other hand, the Ice Climbers had to have stuff made up for them.

The motions in other fighters remove this constraint. The directions in Smash keep them, in. For those you wondering, tradtional motions aren't to hard. The hardest you might have to deal with is the 360 motion and maybe the charge motions (at first). QCF and such are all rather easy, IMO.

For normal attacks, you have A and only A. Most fighters have at least three different types of attack buttons and they're usually Weak, Medium, Strong you may have more in others (like six in SF, 4 in BB). Smash keeps it at just one which is a mixed blessing. Heavy characters can't really have quick weak attacks, and the opposite applies (within balance) as well.

4. The alternate playstyle.
I don't think this is as strong as the others, but this is what turns some people off. Nonetheless, Smash brought about a new genre of fighting games. I suppose though, if you wanted to satisfy traditionalists, you could go the Soul Caliber route which does traditional K.O.s and Ring-Outs, but then comes the question of whether or not the settings reset each round or not.

EDIT: Just to clarify, I'm not against the playstyle actually. I think it's a nice take on the genre.

5. The tournament attitude
I've never really heard a lot of good things regarding the Smash community. I've heard it being called immature and ban happy. One thing I don't care for is that I always hear about money being involved.

To be honest, I think there's a lot that can be done in SSB4 to fix a lot of the flaws up without losing its platform fighter aspect and DI.

 

[Revan Skywalker]

I think the main reason is that Smash is considered as an party game and especially as a kiddie game. It's a colorful game with Nintendo characters like Mario or Yoshi who usually take place in games for "kids". It's not true, but they think it. Especially Sony lovers tend to say that, or those lovely sixteen year olds who say "grow up and play Halo".
They just don't realize it doesn't matter who you play as. They see the game as the game it's supposed to be, and not in a competitive way.

But the truth is that Melee needs a high level of skill to be played professional and has a lot of aspects like technical skill, momentum changes and spacing. I bet most of the people who call Smash not a true fighter never really played Smash seriously.
But they need to find arguments to call it bad. Like the life bar thing. Come on, why the heck is it bad that there's no life bar? Actually, in my point of view, that's the best thing that could happen to Smash. It forces you to always pay attention and never lose the focus, or you're gonna die quickly. You never can rest, and it allows really exciting matches with awesome comebacks. For me, life bars are lame, and so are Street Fighter matches.
Apart from that you don't call Modern Warfare not a real shooter, just because it doesn't have a life bar. All classic shooters had one. But games are developing, and just because it's different, it doesn't mean it's not a shooter or in this case a fighter. And i mean, even a blind person could tell those characters are actually fighting.

All in all i would say Smash is cursed by some really bad stereotypes. It has this Kiddie game image, and as long this won't change, other community's won't accept Smash as a "true" fighter. But hey, we have a large community that develops the metagame, we have our tournaments, we can't complain at all. Let's play our game

 

[Seikishidan Soru]

1) Too much emphasis on the alleged "way it's meant to be played" when it's actually irrelevant
2) Different control scheme and fighting system
3) Obnoxious community, depending on where you live

 

[E-Jolteon]

Smash is a non traditional fighter and the community made it competitive, of course other fighting game communities don't see things the same way.

inb4 possible lock

This is true, 100%, and should have been </thread>. We as a whole make it more competitive than I'd like, but it's still in basics not a serious fighting game.

I wouldn't feel bad though. Mugen actually sucks aside from being modifiable. Way worse than ANY Smash bros. game.

Edit: Also:

or those lovely sixteen year olds who say "grow up and play Halo".

Six. You mean six-year-olds.

 

[Seikishidan Soru]

I bet most of the people who call Smash not a true fighter never really played Smash seriously.
But they need to find arguments to call it bad. Like the life bar thing. Come on, why the heck is it bad that there's no life bar? Actually, in my point of view, that's the best thing that could happen to Smash. It forces you to always pay attention and never lose the focus, or you're gonna die quickly. You never can rest, and it allows really exciting matches with awesome comebacks. For me, life bars are lame, and so are Street Fighter matches.

You're deluded if you really believe that life bar-based fighting games don't allow for comebacks and let players who have a lead rest and lose their focus.

It ain't over till it's over.

 

[Spellman]

Well, there is indeed more to it than than being jealous for sure, but I think that most of the reasons for hating Smash are shallow (including the reasons that you listed KumoOso). I mean, whatever the developers intent was for this game, was not how it turned out, and shouldn't even be relevant when evaluating this game as a competitive fighter. The Smash Bros. roster is indeed huge, but is tiered just like any other fighting game.

I can understand why the tournament attitude can be a turn-off, I mean, the Meta-Knight ban drama, wowee. Then again, to many of us, that's just business as usual, we roll with the punches, and we're just fighting to keep this game competitive.

I find pro matches to be entertaining to watch. I like to watch people take down the big-bad-invincible MK, haha. (Oh Ally!)

I think the fact that Smash is a Nintendo game is a big turn off for outsiders, honestly.

 

[professor mgw]

Smash has to be the most competitve fighting game and hardest fighting game to be good at ever. As mentioned before the type of character cast and its demenor is why its looked down upon is all.

 

[Revan Skywalker]

You're deluded if you really believe that life bar-based fighting games don't allow for comebacks and let players who have a lead rest and lose their focus.

It ain't over till it's over.

probly i didn't make it clear, sry - i never meant to say there are no comebacks in other fighting games, of course, there are. Momentum can turn around very quickly and that's how comebacks happen. That happens everywhere, good example is sports. - but what i mean is that in Smash you can comeback more surprisingly - like you know someone is totally ****** the other but then he doesn't pay attention for like 2 seconds and he gets Ken comboed and is dead. I think this may be more surprising, you know?

 

[Big-Cat]

Well, there is indeed more to it than than being jealous for sure, but I think that most of the reasons for hating Smash are shallow (including the reasons that you listed KumoOso). I mean, whatever the developers intent was for this game, was not how it turned out, and shouldn't even be relevant when evaluating this game as a competitive fighter. The Smash Bros. roster is indeed huge, but is tiered just like any other fighting game.

The developer's intent matters to a degree. You can see his intents being implemented thanks to random tripping. Thanks to that, we can easily see that he didn't want games won based off of skill and a little luck.

I'm aware that other fighters are tiered as well. I already mentioned that I play SF and BB after all. Tiers will exist. There's no preventing them. However, by balancing the game, you can shorten the distance between the top and bottom. Ideally, each character should have the same amount of good, bad, and average matchups in some form.

I find pro matches to be entertaining to watch. I like to watch people take down the big-bad-invincible MK, haha. (Oh Ally!)

I find Brawl+ matches more entertaining thanks to the faster speed and there being combos.

I think the fact that Smash is a Nintendo game is a big turn off for outsiders, honestly.

Not necessarily. For some, it gives the impression that it's a party game unless that's what you meant.

I'm surprised no one commented on what I said about the movesets.

probly i didn't make it clear, sry - i never meant to say there are no comebacks in other fighting games, of course, there are. Momentum can turn around very quickly and that's how comebacks happen. That happens everywhere, good example is sports. - but what i mean is that in Smash you can comeback more surprisingly - like you know someone is totally ****** the other but then he doesn't pay attention for like 2 seconds and he gets Ken comboed and is dead. I think this may be more surprising, you know?

The same thing happens in other fighting games.

 

[UltiMario]

Smash has to be the most competitve fighting game and hardest fighting game to be good at ever. As mentioned before the type of character cast and its demenor is why its looked down upon is all.

I was going to say this, but I was beaten to the punch.

Dang you mgw

Also....
Nobody likes when something is DIFFERENT, one something is different, everyone crowds around it then looks at it awesomely for a little while, then is is frowned upon after its 4 seconds of awe. Since Smash Bros isn't a traditional fighting game, therefore, everyone hates it.

Its human nature why people are stubborn and frown on things that are different than what they like. You can't convince them otherwise, because thats trying to change how people think after thousands of years of mental continuity.

 

[Spellman]

The developer's intent matters to a degree. You can see his intents being implemented thanks to random tripping. Thanks to that, we can easily see that he didn't want games won based off of skill and a little luck.

lol, tripping doesn't even make sense by non-competitive play standards. Party games don't have to be moronic (Mario Party 8 is a disaster!). Tripping is the freak accident of gaming in general, not just competitive games.

Anyways: standing by the developers intent not mattering. Melee was developed to be a party game and a staple title for the Gamecube, and you know what high regard that game is held at around here. (and yet was still criticized harshly by other communities.)

It's not what the developer is thinking. It's the end result that determines its worth. If someone finds newspaper to be a better alternative to toilet paper, than by all means...

 

[bobson]

Because it's different. People hate things that are different. You can see it in our own game: people who only play in tournaments with conservative stagelists think people who have stages like Green Greens and Distant Planet allowed are noobs. People who play with rules that ban planking and infinites and the like think people who don't play with those rules are noobs. People who only play in tournaments think people who don't use tournament rules are noobs. People who only play Melee think people who only play Brawl are noobs.

The community is full of ****heads, so that doesn't really help either.

 

[Big-Cat]

lol, tripping doesn't even make sense by non-competitive play standards. Party games don't have to be moronic (Mario Party 8 is a disaster!). Tripping is the freak accident of gaming in general, not just competitive games.

I'm not saying it made sense at the casual level. I'm just saying that it was his way of doing. I still think it's the dumbest mechanic ever conceived.

Anyways: standing by the developers intent not mattering. Melee was developed to be a party game and a staple title for the Gamecube, and you know what high regard that game is held at around here. (and yet was still criticized harshly by other communities.)

When I was referring to the developer's intention, I was referring to what was implemented and what they intended. However, we went beyond what he intended which was a smart idea overall for us. We chose to tap the potential instead of keeping the lid shut like he wanted.

Anyway, I see more respect for Melee than Brawl. Just saying.

 

[Spellman]

Anyway, I see more respect for Melee than Brawl. Just saying.

Indeed.

People who only play in tournaments think people who don't use tournament rules are noobs.

No, this is not— no. Well yeah, some people act like this (annoyingly stringent rules on friendlies), but no to this in general.

 

[Maximoff]

I think the main thing is that in order to play a Street Fighter or Tekken or King of Fighters, etc. tournaments you don't have to come up with a whole bunch of rules other than number of rounds (usually default), time limit (again by default), character selection (usually blind pick for the first round), and such...

You don't need to worry about banning characters (other than a few broken final bosses), or a specific special move, infinites, stages, and so on... With traditional fighters, what you see is what you get... and even though there are glitches, AT's, infinites, and whatever else, they usually become part of the game without being "broken"...

Usually, most matches are 5/5, some are 6/4, and very few are 7/3 or less... Even though there isn't a well balanced fighter, programmers work with balance in mind all the time, and perform beta tests with the community in order to have the game as balanced as it can be before it comes out the first time.

 

[bobson]

No, this is not— no. Well yeah, some people act like this (annoyingly stringent rules on friendlies), but no to this in general.

That's not what I said. I said people who play mainly with tournament rules will not take people who rarely do seriously. Non-tournament rules are deemed "non-competitive" as a whole because at a glance they look more flawed than what we've accepted, which is the same attitude people who play other fighters have when looking at Smash. Most people know how to have fun with them, but there's no way they'll give weight to the matches.

I challenge you to get one person to take a coin match seriously at the next tournament you go to.

 

[LooftWaffles]

Coin match money matches are where its at. Difference in coins is the amount paid. Camping ftw

 

[Zephil]

People saying that Smash is for kids because it has Mario and Yoshi in it is as stupid like saying Kingdom Hearts is for 10 year old kids because Mickey is in there... fail communities are big FAIL

 

[holypho]

i think the people mainly bashing ssb are the ones that yeah don't like experimenting with the new. Just like how ppl who play pro shooters hate fighters or what not because they don't like the transition so they stick to shooters.(halo, call of duty, CS are all sick games :D) Im guessing the ppl who ply the SF series are very good at sf and transitioning to other fighters are easier to adapt because of the slight shift. Its obvious ssb is very different, but iono why the forum ppl are saying there are too many rules and limited characters that you can actually play.

Street fighter 4 like most other fighting games are the same way, they have limited character selections. Like sagat, ryu and ummm i think bison. Having no items makes it more like a conventional fighter right?

 

[teh_spamerer]

but what i mean is that in Smash you can comeback more surprisingly - like you know someone is totally ****** the other but then he doesn't pay attention for like 2 seconds and he gets Ken comboed and is dead. I think this may be more surprising, you know?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KS7hkwbKmBM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNkUzy6MjcQ#t=2m46s

Its obvious ssb is very different, but iono why the forum ppl are saying there are too many rules and limited characters that you can actually play.

Look at the ruleset for almost any other competitive game. The rules tend to be significantly shorter.

Even though there isn't a well balanced fighter, programmers work with balance in mind all the time, and perform beta tests with the community in order to have the game as balanced as it can be before it comes out the first time.

There are plenty of well balanced fighters.

There seems to be an unnatural hatred to smash due to it having so many rules, some of which are unnecessary. The kiddy aspect is also another reason, though that's a really stupid reason not to like a game.

 

[Big-Cat]

i think the people mainly bashing ssb are the ones that yeah don't like experimenting with the new. Just like how ppl who play pro shooters hate fighters or what not because they don't like the transition so they stick to shooters.(halo, call of duty, CS are all sick games :D)

If only it were that simple. To be honest, you can say the Smash fanbase is just as guilty of this if not more so. I see more people here hating on other fighting games and it seems to be based off of ignorance.

Im guessing the ppl who ply the SF series are very good at sf and transitioning to other fighters are easier to adapt because of the slight shift. Its obvious ssb is very different, but iono why the forum ppl are saying there are too many rules and limited characters that you can actually play.

Slight shift? Look, even if the motions are the same in one fighting game and another, how the controls are used is entirely different thing. You can't go from Street Fighter to Guilty Gear and expect to have little to no transition. Despite similar controls, the games play very differently.

Street fighter 4 like most other fighting games are the same way, they have limited character selections. Like sagat, ryu and ummm i think bison. Having no items makes it more like a conventional fighter right?

Are you serious? Limited character selections? I could give that to you for series with smaller rosters like BlazBlue, but at least all those characters play completely different from each other. Even SFIV has 25, soon 35, characters, all of which play differently. Even the shotos all play differently. I don't care for playing as Ryu, Ken, or Akuma, but I prefer to play Sakura by far.

Seriously, I think you guys are giving out the wrong reasons for all this. It's not like there aren't flaws with the Smash games themselves, amirite?

 

[SuperScizor]

I think they're just jealous that Smash has real gameplay, and other fighting games involve two guys in opposite corners of the screen murdering each other with complex button combos that no one can remember.

 

[Apollo$]

The street fighter community or other fighting communities will never really approve smash as a fighting game to them, since it IS a party game after all. Or they just don't care and well it's best to just let them believe what they want. We can play our games the way we want and they can play theirs. To each his own.

 

[BlackLightning90]

Smash was intened to be a party game.
This community is what made smash so competitive.

 

[RDK]

It's not that hard guys.

Brawl sucks. Horribly. That's why people hate Smash.

 

[Fatmanonice]

It's not that hard guys.

Brawl sucks. Horribly. That's why people hate Smash.

People outside the Smash Bros community complained about Smash 64 and Melee too. Like other people have said, there were a lot of complaints about "how the competitive community changed how the game was intended to be played." If I remember right, wasn't this the reason why Melee wasn't allowed at EVO 06 and 07 because the community refused to play with items on? There are other things too but this seemed to be the biggest complaint from what I've seen in other forums.

 

[Big-Cat]

People outside the Smash Bros community complained about Smash 64 and Melee too. Like other people have said, there were a lot of complaints about "how the competitive community changed how the game was intended to be played." If I remember right, wasn't this the reason why Melee wasn't allowed at EVO 06 and 07 because the community refused to play with items on? There are other things too but this seemed to be the biggest complaint from what I've seen in other forums.

In that case, there's just a big misunderstanding about this game. As for changing the way it was intended to be played, like I said before, it's irrelevant for the most part. Once it's in the consumers' hands, the developer's intent goes out the window. I mean, look at Yu-Gi-Oh! It was never meant to have a card based plot, but it wound up that way because the fans liked the card games. The Smash community took SSB into a pure fighting game direction which some might say makes sense considering the inherent nature of the genre to begin with.

Although, one thing I read in that Mugen thread was how the controls were totally newbie friendly. Before anyone raises a fit about this, execution barriers aren't really keeping gamers away from fighting games(aside from some really weird ones), the lack of a social aspect is one of the big things involved. There's no working together to learn the game, playing the game together, or whatever these days. Online doesn't help since it's typically come and go against your opponent outside of player matches.

 

[metaXzero]

The main reason is that unlike other fighters, we had to make a bunch of changes to the "out-of-box" game before thinking it competitive. They actually care about developers intent and respecting it (meaning they would think we should've left Smash as the non-serious fighter it was intended to be). Basically in their eyes, some changes we make in the name of competitiveness they'll say is because we are too scrubby to handle and are just arbitrary.

They also have a tendency of running into the worst of our community. n00bs who think without touching any other fighter that Smash is the deepest, nost technical and balanced fighter wow criticizing things in traditional fighters

Also guys, define "party game" as a genre. Because if Smash's genre is a party game, Mario Party certainly isn't lol. I personally just think of it as games with good multiplayer.
EDIT: Whoops! Not done

 

[MarKO X]

Smash is the laughing stock of fighters... because

1) Smash64 and Melee are misunderstood.
2) Brawl is full of scrubs.