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!
I honestly will not hold my breath for anything other than a "ok' game, with brawl what they were trying to do was cater to the new audience of gamers that the Wii brought in. Whether people want to admit it or not, Wii was a very casual system and they didn't want pros scaring people away. Not only this but they had to make the game easier to accommodate the new input choices of the WiiMote+nunchuck or Wiimote sideways. I hold only a little hope for smash 4 because the Wiimote has been phased out in favor of the WiiU being a more core console. With the WiiU pro controller on the scene we might get a more solid game ala 64, we definitely wont see Melee ever again because sakurai felt the game "created a distance between players". But could it be better than brawl? Absolutely!
jigglypuff's Dair in 64 already does this lol. So yes it does have situational uses and can be useful.
Not quite. If you define depth the way I do, giving the player multiple decsions that have both meaning and distinct outcomes, l cancelling does indeed add depth. It's true that you always want to time your cancel properly, but the depth added is based on WHEN to time your input not IF should or shouldn't. That is still your decision to make.
Powershielding is different because there's a risk/reward dynamic. Do I shield early and know I'll block, but also give my opponent a better situation? Or do I delay my shield in the hopes of powershielding and possibly get hit? With L-canceling, there is no such consideration; you must do it every time, period.
As players become accustom to the game and their rate of success goes up, that risk factor heavily shrinks. It's a similar situation with guard impact in Soul Calibur II. The technique itself, when successful or not, needs to be better balanced in with the rest of the game.
Also wanted to point out that this logic is awful if you're trying to defend L cancelling. Dashing, running, jumping (or double jumping for that matter), and DI are all optional and modifiable in the way they must be executed. Whether you use your double jump or not depends on whether the situation asks for it or not, whether that's following up with another attack or recovering. It isn't OBLIGATORY to double jump every time you jump, and you're not punished or called technical if you jump or not. There's a trade off. If you jump in a bad situation and your opponent calls it, you're screwed.
It's the sad truth that every time you get knocked of the stage, hit, or thrown, you have to Directional Influence or you get punished. EVERY SINGLE TIME.
Not really. You could choose not to DI at all depending on the context.
Difference being that L canceling could virtually be made automatic by a handful of ways (universal low landing lag, low lag if you hit a move, etc) and the 4/1000 situations where it mattered to be manual could theoretically be ironed out or match-up quirks. As for DI, not DIing is actually an option seeing as the attacker could predict you to DI only for you to throw them off by not doing so.
Last I checked, no fighting game requires you to press a certain button or do some action every time you do something as trivial as jumping. Fighting games already have punishment tools, they're called reversals, combos, etc. If you need terrible game design like L-Canceling to serve as a punishment tool, then I don't know what to think. Name me one game that would benefit from a mechanic like L-Canceling.L canceling adds so much depth and it punishes those who forget to do it thats what makes melee so deep as a fighting game. Like any fighting game there needs to be some sort of punishment for not knowing what to do. If L canceling doesn't come back fine but don't bash on it, cause in Melee's defense it adds so much to the game and makes it a real treat to get decent at.
Anything could be virtually made automatic in any game. Different game mechanics that must be mastered equals more options, more options equals deeper game play. Not DI'ing is still choosing a Directional Influence within the games physics. You have three general choices: Left, Neutral, Right. A decision that must be made, which is exactly what Lcanceling is and your argument against it.
I read your post, you just don't understand your fallacy. See, "hit, throw, and applying direction influence depend on what happens in the match." Lcanceling depends entirely on whether or not you want to aerial. If you want to aerial efficiently then you must first efficiently learn how to use Lcanceling. Every single game mechanic in every single game ever made could be argued whether there's actually a point of being in the game in the first place. That's a terrible outlook to have.
Coincidentally, not DI'ing is STILL Directionally Influence within the games physics. Not going left or right is still choosing a direction, a decision that must be made.
There is no fallacy in what I'm saying. You still don't get the concept that we're trying to get across. Yes L cancelling depends entirely if I want to landing lag... and that's it There are no more variables. L cancelling is the only mechanic that could be argued that there's no point in it being in the game, UNLESS choosing not to L cancel had more effects other that landing lag. For example, ssb64 Kirby has a knockback attack on her dair when not Z canceled. If every character had that, you could choose whether it's a better idea to L cancel or to let the other character get knocked back, say if you're nearby the ledge, which would cause your opponent to be knocked off the stage.
It can be, yes. But there then raises the issue of what you lose or gain from it being made automatic: would Mario be as good if you always ran and thus slid and messed up precise jumps constantly?
*Left, Right, Up, Down, NE, NW, SE, SW, Neutral(noDI).
Clearly all moves must require additional input to be faster, it'll only increase the depth and you should know how to do it if you want to attack, let alone dedicate time to a jump then attack.
And? Half of the **** in every competitive game requires no thought, these things are just simply the most efficient game mechanic. Hence, why it's called mechanical skill.
So you want to punish competitive players, why? Casuals will never have to worry about the ramifications of whether or not to Lcancel. And competitive players want game mechanics that require practice and dedication to use properly.
That's so utterly wrong it's ridiculous.
Mind games do not define your success. Being a good player defines success. That requires mental and physical prowess.
Best joke of the day.
Yes, more buttons makes it more technical, but doesn't make the gameplay or competition any deeper. It's ok for a game to require physical prowess, but not by itself. Your hands can be trained to do anything, but I don't understand how you can't see that L cancelling, because it doesn't force you to think, aggravates the metagame. If a technical aspect of the game isn't backed up by a conscious decision to be or not be performed during a specific situation, then it's not a deep mechanic.
Was referring to required mechanical skill mastered by muscle memory. Which is 100% identical to Lcanceling. Get some reading comprehension.
Not trolling. Master troll, no longer.
Just because something isn't very deep or doesn't add a myriad of potential options doesn't take away the fact it adds an aspect towards game play that requires practice to achieve efficiently. Definitely not an excuse to remove something, at the very least. Something that competitive players should be happy to have in their game, when done in a manageable fashion.
rofl
Not entirely, things you memorize in other games still have pros and cons to executing them as to where and when to apply. L cancel just has: ****ing do it or get smashed.
Except that muscle memory only means so much. As you said, mental prowess is important, but you're talking as if physical prowess is as demanding as any athelete's.
