Smash Wii U Wii U is hackable - Will there be mods again?

[Mccdbz5]

Ew, no! Please, Nintendo, take all necessary measures to ensure Smash4 stays Smash4 forever! Make piracy blocks harder to bypass, brick the consoles of hackers, do anything to avoid repeating history!

I really can't even begin to understand why people are so adamant against the idea of having another Project: M type mod. Just because a mod exists does not mean any of you have to play it. To me, this type of mentality is the equivalent of being in a grade school PE class and saying, "I don't wanna play basketball, so don't let anyone else play basketball while we play football!" Other people taking part in another activity, such as a potential mod for this game, has no bearing on what you do whatsoever. If a mod for this game were to come into existence, for every 10 people playing it, there would 1,000 people playing the original version. The only thing you're getting with mods is more options. I love Project: M, because Melee is my favorite game of all time, while I don't care for projects such as Brawl Minus. Does that mean I have a problem with Brawl Minus and other various projects existing? Absolutely not. Just because I don't like it and don't want to play it doesn't mean that I think it shouldn't exist. No body is pointing a gun to your head and forcing any of you to play these projects, but in the event that you want to, you have the option to do so. Now what on Earth is wrong with that?

 

[QuickRat]

The best way to be sure that nobody will start a Project M 2 is making a good game and a satisfactory experience. Brawl wasn't, so it was modded.

 

[chrisall76]

They figured out how to Mod MK, but at the same time the people who did that are not going to be giving out info on everything on how to do it for any game. Even then there is nothing on the subject really on the internet, so most people won't bother. Plus now hackers online can get banned, so that's even better.

 

[Saito]

The best way to be sure that nobody will start a Project M 2 is making a good game and a satisfactory experience. Brawl wasn't, so it was modded.

That's just not true.

Brawl was a good game, it just had problems that made it bad for a competitive melee like experience.

 

[ScottyWK]

That's just not true.

Brawl was a good game, it just had problems that made it bad for a competitive melee like experience.

Brawl wasn't a good game to a large group of the Smash community.

The thing I don't understand from "casuals" is the thought that Melee or Project M isn't fun for them. Ok, I see Project M, because they made almost all the stages lose their "gimmicks." But the characters? Project M fixed so much. Wario, for example, is the Wario moveset that I had always imagined. They added Mewtwo. They made slight adjustments to Pit, Rob, Mario, etc to make everything more pertinent to their actual characters.

When I first got Melee, I didn't all of a sudden want to burst into the competitive scene. In fact, me and my friends would have FFA Jigglypuff matches on Temple just for kicks and giggles and just rollout the entire time. And it was fun. Extreme example, but yes, Melee can be fun for casuals too.

Point being: what's wrong with taking Smash 4 (if the physics are too much like Brawl and don't appeal to competitives) and making it fun for both? It's like a square-rectangle. Brawl is the rectangle by only fitting one set of criteria (casual). Melee / Project M caters to both criteria.

 

[Saito]

Brawl wasn't a good game to a large group of the Smash community.

The thing I don't understand from "casuals" is the thought that Melee or Project M isn't fun for them. Ok, I see Project M, because they made almost all the stages lose their "gimmicks." But the characters? Project M fixed so much. Wario, for example, is the Wario moveset that I had always imagined. They added Mewtwo. They made slight adjustments to Pit, Rob, Mario, etc to make everything more pertinent to their actual characters.

When I first got Melee, I didn't all of a sudden want to burst into the competitive scene. In fact, me and my friends would have FFA Jigglypuff matches on Temple just for kicks and giggles and just rollout the entire time. And it was fun. Extreme example, but yes, Melee can be fun for casuals too.

Point being: what's wrong with taking Smash 4 (if the physics are too much like Brawl and don't appeal to competitives) and making it fun for both? It's like a square-rectangle. Brawl is the rectangle by only fitting one set of criteria (casual). Melee / Project M caters to both criteria.

People having differing opinions doesn't mean the game isn't good overall though.

Melee has less characters and people think they are above melee players for being able to move along. This statement does not apply to everyone.

Project M is scary yo.
When I found out about it, it took me two weeks of contemplation to even consider it.
This is because it's a mod. Mods scare people. This doesn't apply to everyone.

It's also an opinion as well in regards to them making the characters better. Some people have it in their head that any of the changes were blasphemous to the original design. They enjoyed the brawl movesets and want it to be that way. This doesn't apply to everyone.

I won't lie, I was pretty negative towards Project M when I first heard about it because it was a Mod.
Glad I decided to give it a shot though.


In regards to that last statement though.
People feel like if they mod the game, people will flock to the mod more and not appreciate the original game as much.
This statement doesn't apply to everyone.

 

[QuickRat]

That's just not true.

Brawl was a good game, it just had problems that made it bad for a competitive melee like experience.

The "it's not Melee, you don't like it because it's not Melee" is a veeeeery bad arguement. I don't mind if it's Melee or Pelee, what I want is a balanced, fast-paced game in which I can make combos and advanced techniques. Brawl was everything except that. Melee was just ugly in terms of balance. Project M tries to get the best of both games and balance the roster. Which is what more or less Sora and Namco are doing with SSB4. So, as I said before: Sakurai become mad... or Project M corrected Brawl.

 

[Saito]

The "it's not Melee, you don't like it because it's not Melee" is a veeeeery bad arguement. I don't mind if it's Melee or Pelee, what I want is a balanced, fast-paced game in which I can make combos and advanced techniques. Brawl was everything except that. Melee was just ugly in terms of balance. Project M tries to get the best of both games and balance the roster. Which is what more or less Sora and Namco are doing with SSB4. So, as I said before: Sakurai become mad... or Project M corrected Brawl.

Since you referenced project M, it was a fair assumption that you wanted something similar to a competitive melee experience.

But even without that argument, I haven't seen any real good evidence that leads me to believe that brawl was a bad game anyway. Believe me, brawl has faults, but a game having faults does not immediately make it a bad game.

 

[JamesDNaux]

I don't care whether there's a Project U or not.



But I do want HD nude mods a Project DREAM... As in someone finally making a decent Banjo-Kazooie mod.


Playable Rayman using his trophy would also be good if we can't get him as DLC.

 

[QuickRat]

Since you referenced project M, it was a fair assumption that you wanted something similar to a competitive melee experience.

But even without that argument, I haven't seen any real good evidence that leads me to believe that brawl was a bad game anyway. Believe me, brawl has faults, but a game having faults does not immediately make it a bad game.

Random tripping, infinite chaingrabs, simplified airdodges and lots of other faults made Brawl a bad game in terms of competitivity. Unbalanced roster made Melee a bad one too. If you analyze both and take de pros and try to solve the cons, you'll realize that Project M is a pretty good option. We can discuss for ages if they should have made a more vertical and floaty gameplay, like Brawl, instead of a horizontal quick one. We can discuss if Falco's moveset, the way you grab objects in the air or make some characters exactly as they were is good, but I think that Brawl needed a fix. The proof is the community abandoned Brawl but not Melee when PM was launched and PMBR and Masahiro came up to the same conclusions in some aspects of the gameplay.

 

[Saito]

The proof is the community abandoned Brawl but not Melee when PM was launched and PMBR and Masahiro came up to the same conclusions in some aspects of the gameplay.

The competitive community is not the only one that matters. There are plenty of people that love brawl even though it might not be the best competitive game. That number probably still outdoes project M and Melee by a long shot since most of those people are competitive players, while a slew of people who play casually love the current iteration of smash. That isn't to say that there aren't casual players that don't enjoy other iterations of smash brothers more either.

A game having some game play issues doesn't make it a bad game either. It depends on how big the issues are, and how much they affect the level of enjoyment received from the game. Brawl's issues are not significant enough to consider it a bad game. It's successes make up for those failures easily.

Now you can have the opinion that the game is bad, but that's just that. Your opinion.

Before you try to turn that statement on me, consider the fact that almost every brawl review has received favorable ratings, along with the positive feedback about the game from many players.

Everyone notes the issue of tripping as a bad thing but even then players are still willing to look past that because the game was that good. The general consensus is that brawl is a good game. It doesn't have everything that appeals to the competitive crowd and like I said earlier, it has it's own set of flaws too, but it's still a very good game.

The main source of disdain for this game comes from competitive players of different iterations of smash brothers; along with people who don't like smash brothers in general.

Every smash brothers game suffers from actual issues, and issues that are formed from opinions. That goes for Project M too.
Even then I can look at every Super smash brothers game, including project M and say without a doubt in my mind that all of them are very good games.

 

[ScottyWK]

The competitive community is not the only one that matters. There are plenty of people that love brawl even though it might not be the best competitive game. That number probably still outdoes project M and Melee by a long shot since most of those people are competitive players, while a slew of people who play casually love the current iteration of smash. That isn't to say that there aren't casual players that don't enjoy other iterations of smash brothers more either.

A game having some game play issues doesn't make it a bad game either. It depends on how big the issues are, and how much they affect the level of enjoyment received from the game. Brawl's issues are not significant enough to consider it a bad game. It's successes make up for those failures easily.

Now you can have the opinion that the game is bad, but that's just that. Your opinion.

Before you try to turn that statement on me, consider the fact that almost every brawl review has received favorable ratings, along with the positive feedback about the game from many players.

Everyone notes the issue of tripping as a bad thing but even then players are still willing to look past that because the game was that good. The general consensus is that brawl is a good game. It doesn't have everything that appeals to the competitive crowd and like I said earlier, it has it's own set of flaws too, but it's still a very good game.

The main source of disdain for this game comes from competitive players of different iterations of smash brothers; along with people who don't like smash brothers in general.

Every smash brothers game suffers from actual issues, and issues that are formed from opinions. That goes for Project M too.
Even then I can look at every Super smash brothers game, including project M and say without a doubt in my mind that all of them are very good games.

If you're one of those who love Brawl, that's fine. But let me ask you this - why do you love Brawl more than Melee? If it's because of the stages, characters, features, etc, then that makes my point. Project M takes all of the good parts of Brawl and adds the good parts of Melee to it, combining them into a better game. The only thing Project M does poorly for casuals, IMO, is make some of the stages "less engaging."

 

[Saito]

If you're one of those who love Brawl, that's fine. But let me ask you this - why do you love Brawl more than Melee? If it's because of the stages, characters, features, etc, then that makes my point. Project M takes all of the good parts of Brawl and adds the good parts of Melee to it, combining them into a better game. The only thing Project M does poorly for casuals, IMO, is make some of the stages "less engaging."

Actually, I'm just defending that brawl is a good game.

No one ever asked me what my favorite smash game was.

Mine is Project M.

 

[QuickRat]

The competitive community is not the only one that matters. There are plenty of people that love brawl even though it might not be the best competitive game. That number probably still outdoes project M and Melee by a long shot since most of those people are competitive players, while a slew of people who play casually love the current iteration of smash. That isn't to say that there aren't casual players that don't enjoy other iterations of smash brothers more either.

People not interested in competitive games aren't representative, so I don't care (if we're talking of the competitive side). The fact is most of people who are actually interested in competitive games don't see Brawl as a good game in that terms but they do when they're talking about Project M. I think this is not an argument, I'm sorry. I know the majority of non-interested people are not interested. That's obviously obvious.

But you are saying I'm right in this statement. People not interested think Brawl is awesome and people who are interested think Brawl had to be corrected. So... where's the problem?

A game having some game play issues doesn't make it a bad game either. It depends on how big the issues are, and how much they affect the level of enjoyment received from the game. Brawl's issues are not significant enough to consider it a bad game. It's successes make up for those failures easily.

I agree until the last two sentences. Why aren't they big? Victories depending on the character you choose are "not significant"? What about random tripping? Is it "not significant" too? Because in my opinion, that kills the competitive game, which is pretty important considering it's a fighting game.

Now you can have the opinion that the game is bad, but that's just that. Your opinion.

True. My opinion is unbalanced gameplay is bad gameplay. And random tripping is bad gameplay. Do you think I'm wrong? Why?

Before you try to turn that statement on me, consider the fact that almost every brawl review has received favorable ratings, along with the positive feedback about the game from many players.

Really? Video game press reviews? Do you know most of gaming journalists doesn't know anything about video games? And do you know most of the magazines cannot give a bad score to any AAA?

Everyone notes the issue of tripping as a bad thing but even then players are still willing to look past that because the game was that good. The general consensus is that brawl is a good game. It doesn't have everything that appeals to the competitive crowd and like I said earlier, it has it's own set of flaws too, but it's still a very good game.

So... if the general consensus is the Earth is flat, I can't say it's actually a sphere? Majority's opinion is rarely an argument. If you were talking about a small group of people who know what they are talking about, such as geologists, I could give you an "OK"... but in a "general consensus" you're putting 8 year-old kids, video game journalists (which usually don't know anything) and a huge mass of people that only like the game "'cause you can take Link and kill Mario!!". So... let me say this is not an argument. If you want to give me an argument, demonstrate that Brawl is actually a good competitive game.

The main source of disdain for this game comes from competitive players of different iterations of smash brothers; along with people who don't like smash brothers in general.

So... competitive players think Brawl is not a good competitive game. What's the problem with that? Maybe they know what they say or maybe not... but it's true that they give reasons (as I'm doing right now) to cover their opinions. Which are the reasons given to say Brawl is a "very good game" in terms of competitivity?

Every smash brothers game suffers from actual issues, and issues that are formed from opinions. That goes for Project M too.
Even then I can look at every Super smash brothers game, including project M and say without a doubt in my mind that all of them are very good games.

That depends on what do you call "very good games". Maybe someone considers being fast is bad for a game, so Melee is awful. Or they don't like Mewtwo so Project M is bad but Brawl is perfect. As I said, it depends on your consideration.

In my personal consideration, a good fighting game should have a balanced roster, a gameplay that awards ability and intelligence and some advanced techniques among many other things. Brawl could have been a pretty good game for my personal consideration, but it wasn't. I found my opinion is kind of common between people that know way far more than me about cempititive gameplay, and those people are the ones who tried to fix Brawl.

 

[Booster]

Yes, it helped to fix Brawl, those enhancements can help this new Smash Bros should it have any flaws

 

[Niala]

Oh God I hope not. In my mind, absolutely nothing good came out of Project M. I hope it rots in a cesspool of forgotten games within the next couple years.

 

[Saito]

People not interested in competitive games aren't representative, so I don't care (if we're talking of the competitive side). The fact is most of people who are actually interested in competitive games don't see Brawl as a good game in that terms but they do when they're talking about Project M. I think this is not an argument, I'm sorry. I know the majority of non-interested people are not interested. That's obviously obvious.

But you are saying I'm right in this statement. People not interested think Brawl is awesome and people who are interested think Brawl had to be corrected. So... where's the problem?

If we are talking competitively, there is no problem from what I can see. Brawl has issues competitively.
If we are talking about the game in general, then it's a fine game.

I agree until the last two sentences. Why aren't they big? Victories depending on the character you choose are "not significant"? What about random tripping? Is it "not significant" too? Because in my opinion, that kills the competitive game, which is pretty important considering it's a fighting game.

The issues are not significant enough in determining whether brawl was a good game or not.

Maybe if Smash brothers was solely a fighter and not a fighter/party experience meshed into one I would give that argument much more significant weight.

True. My opinion is unbalanced gameplay is bad gameplay. And random tripping is bad gameplay. Do you think I'm wrong? Why?

A bad gameplay mechanic it was indeed.

I think you're wrong because you're saying the entire game is bad because of a few muck ups with a game mechanic and some character balance.

Really? Video game press reviews? Do you know most of gaming journalists doesn't know anything about video games? And do you know most of the magazines cannot give a bad score to any AAA?

You can ask a vast majority of people who played brawl and they will say they enjoyed it greatly.

It doesn't just have to come from reviews, people in general just liked the game,
It was fun to play, it was fun to watch, it was fun overall.

So... if the general consensus is the Earth is flat, I can't say it's actually a sphere? Majority's opinion is rarely an argument. If you were talking about a small group of people who know what they are talking about, such as geologists, I could give you an "OK"... but in a "general consensus" you're putting 8 year-old kids, video game journalists (which usually don't know anything) and a huge mass of people that only like the game "'cause you can take Link and kill Mario!!". So... let me say this is not an argument. If you want to give me an argument, demonstrate that Brawl is actually a good competitive game.

Your allusion is flawed. The statement you gave can be proven wrong with facts.
The general consensus on a game can be reached because there is no facts, only opinions.

Regardless, you take the opinions of people who you consider aren't "fit" to judge the game and say they are worthless.

It doesn't matter whether or not it has link, or mario in it, if the gameplay is actually bad, people won't enjoy it.

Why do you think everyone, both the 8 year olds, the journalists, the "nintendo all star" player, the people who love brawl, and the melee players hate tripping? It was a bad mechanic and finding anyone who thinks otherwise is once in a blue moon.

Even people who just enjoy the game casually can see how imbalanced meta knight is. Yet their opinions don't matter?
That's not right to just throw those opinions under the bus.

So... let me say this is not an argument. If you want to give me an argument, demonstrate that Brawl is actually a good competitive game.

Like I said in my earlier posts, brawl is not a very good game competitively.

But why does that make it a bad game overall?
A game that is designed with more than just a 1v1 in mind can't be solely judged by the 1v1 fights.

You should rate everything overall, and while I think the competitive potential for brawl is lacking, it still doesn't stop it from being a good game. It's not the greatest thing, but it's definitely still a good game overall.

So... competitive players think Brawl is not a good competitive game. What's the problem with that? Maybe they know what they say or maybe not... but it's true that they give reasons (as I'm doing right now) to cover their opinions. Which are the reasons given to say Brawl is a "very good game" in terms of competitivity?

Refer to the above.

That depends on what do you call "very good games". Maybe someone considers being fast is bad for a game, so Melee is awful. Or they don't like Mewtwo so Project M is bad but Brawl is perfect. As I said, it depends on your consideration.

I think Melee is an amazing game. It's got the flexibility of being competitive and casual. It can cater to everyone and that makes it astounding. It has some balance issues but it's still really amazing.

I think Brawl is a very good game. It's got everything for the casual side in spades and it's really fun to play too. It lacks in the competitive department because of its existing flaws, but that doesn't stop it from being an enjoyable experience.

You should be able to judge how I consider whether or not a game is good.

In my personal consideration, a good fighting game should have a balanced roster, a gameplay that awards ability and intelligence and some advanced techniques among many other things. Brawl could have been a pretty good game for my personal consideration, but it wasn't. I found my opinion is kind of common between people that know way far more than me about competitive gameplay, and those people are the ones who tried to fix Brawl.

I agree.

But smash is not only a fighting game.
Understand this when you consider everything I've said in this post.

--------------------------

Oh God I hope not. In my mind, absolutely nothing good came out of Project M. I hope it rots in a cesspool of forgotten games within the next couple years.

What makes you say that nothing good came out of project M?

 

[Niala]

What makes you say that nothing good came out of project M?

Because I'm entirely biased against it in that I don't like it. It plays like they tried to recreate the slightly more gimmicky control style of Melee (as opposed to the smoothness I feel in Brawl) and then just made it worse. There's something about it that's just unresponsive, the game doesn't actually want to perform the actions I input. Whether the reason for that is shortened input buffering or whatever the case may be, I really really hate it.

But that didn't stop literally everybody and their dog where I live from starting to play it, and completely ignoring the games of the franchise that I enjoy playing, thus completely segregating me from the community.

It's the backwards love-child of two games I actually enjoy that has caused me nothing but grief and desolation. I don't feel blaming it's existence is unwarranted, and I really don't like the thought it bastardizing Smash4 as it has Brawl.

So, I guess the answer to your question is that nothing good came out of Project M for me.

 

[Reader]

Whatever happens with smash 4, someone will be unhappy. Maybe it isn't fast enough or lacks wanted/cut characters. At some point someone will make a mod and share it. Whether it gains popularity depends on how well smash 4 will be received.

 

[Saito]

So, I guess the answer to your question is that nothing good came out of Project M for me.

That's fair enough.

My condolences.

 

[The Real Gamer]

I know this is a double post and forgive me for this mods, but I really don't want this to get mixed up with the other post.

I understand not wanting to get things mixed up but rules are still rules. I merged your posts together but next time just continue using the multi-quote function.

 

[Ingulit]

Because I'm entirely biased against it in that I don't like it. It plays like they tried to recreate the slightly more gimmicky control style of Melee (as opposed to the smoothness I feel in Brawl) and then just made it worse. There's something about it that's just unresponsive, the game doesn't actually want to perform the actions I input. Whether the reason for that is shortened input buffering or whatever the case may be, I really really hate it.

But that didn't stop literally everybody and their dog where I live from starting to play it, and completely ignoring the games of the franchise that I enjoy playing, thus completely segregating me from the community.

It's the backwards love-child of two games I actually enjoy that has caused me nothing but grief and desolation. I don't feel blaming it's existence is unwarranted, and I really don't like the thought it *******izing Smash4 as it has Brawl.

So, I guess the answer to your question is that nothing good came out of Project M for me.

For the record you literally just detailed exactly how I feel about Project M, from the controls not being in any way smooth/responsive/intuitive compared to Brawl (making it incredibly difficult for me to do even basic things like jump and immediately use an aerial which comes so naturally in the actual games) to the utter isolation the mod has cause me since I don't enjoy playing it.

To keep this on topic I'll reiterate what other people have said in that I'm excited to hear about mods solely for the possibility of alternate costumes/music/non-gameplay-affecting modifications (stuff like removing the 3-minute limit on replays), but to be completely honest I mostly just wanted to say I'm glad I'm not the only one out there who has had this experience with Project: M.

I do hope the modding community figures out costume and stage hacks fairly quickly, since the artist in me is drooling over the Wii U's better specs when it comes to seeing what custom stage background designers can come up with.

 

[QuickRat]

But why does that make it a bad game overall?
A game that is designed with more than just a 1v1 in mind can't be solely judged by the 1v1 fights.

What exactly do you mean with "overall"? I don't mind soundtrack or graphic design. I think it has lots of content, that's true, but some of this content are pretty badly design. I'm talking about collecting all stickers, for example. No challenge, just kick sack's face until it drops 700 stickers. Or the story mode, for example. I love 2D beat'em ups, but I find Brawl gameplay wasn't design for that and that is something notorious in this game. And also, SSE level-design is near awful. Pretty boring because of repetitive and monotonous situations. If it were competitively speaking PERFECT but it had the same story mode, I'd still say it's rubbish.

 

[staindgrey]

The community should let the vanilla game evolve and grow naturally before they abandon it and alter its core attributes. That'll split the community and could ultimately kill it.

That said, if Smash 4 lets us down as a competitive fighter for a couple years, yeah, have at it.

 

[DakotaBonez]

Because I'm entirely biased against it in that I don't like it. It plays like they tried to recreate the slightly more gimmicky control style of Melee (as opposed to the smoothness I feel in Brawl) and then just made it worse. There's something about it that's just unresponsive, the game doesn't actually want to perform the actions I input. Whether the reason for that is shortened input buffering or whatever the case may be, I really really hate it.

Whenever I play Project M I always turn on input assistance in the settings, which adds a 3 frame buffer to attack input. I hated how I couldn't press the attack button immediately after I jump like in Brawl, it's not quite as good as the 10 frame buffer that Brawl had though. I never understood why people wouldn't want input assistance, that way the attacks are executed automatically on the first frame that they can be executed on, and you can input your next attack in advance. I guess they just wanna show off their frame perfect skillz.

When I first noticed the buffer difference, I went on these boards complaining about how Project M was unresponsive, of course all the melee players had no idea what I was talking about XD I just thought it was my sh#@$y classic controller. Glad that the project m team had enough farsight to include input assistance, just wish that it was back to Brawl status 10 frame buffer.

 

[StarshipGroove]

By the way, look at this.

Coincidence? I think not. Project M's blue eruption made it in. Coming up next, Charizard's seismic toss.

There's a lot of good ideas in Project M.

 

[Bladeviper]

By the way, look at this.

Coincidence? I think not. Project M's blue eruption made it in. Coming up next, Charizard's seismic toss.

There's a lot of good ideas in Project M.

or they just changed it since its his rd incarnation where the blue flames came from

 

[Farorae]

Smash 4 doesn't really seem like it needs a Project M as it looks great IMO (and Brawl didn't need it either). However, there will probably be one, or something similar made regardless of what people think.

 

[Saito]

What exactly do you mean with "overall"? I don't mind soundtrack or graphic design. I think it has lots of content, that's true, but some of this content are pretty badly design. I'm talking about collecting all stickers, for example. No challenge, just kick sack's face until it drops 700 stickers. Or the story mode, for example. I love 2D beat'em ups, but I find Brawl gameplay wasn't design for that and that is something notorious in this game. And also, SSE level-design is near awful. Pretty boring because of repetitive and monotonous situations. If it were competitively speaking PERFECT but it had the same story mode, I'd still say it's rubbish.

Just the overall game experience.

I'd agree with you that subspace was quite repetitive and boring in general. At least it provided a challenge on intense mode (although I believe that was because intense mode was janky and not legitimately challenging.)

The boss battles were nice though and relatively fair (fk you tabuu)

Sticker collectibles was good though. They essentially come down anytime, whether classic mode, subspace mode, or even vs mode. just playing the game would let you get stickers without really going out of your way. (Hell, I still get the stickers when I play with items on project M) I'd say that was intuitive.

The challenge boxes wasn't bad either as they gave an achievement type incentive. I think that was really well done.

Trophy collecting through subspace, boss battles, and the shooter mini-game was pretty good too.

But I'd say I enjoy brawl in hectic free for all matches second only to project M.
It's team battle experience is behind Melee, but it's still good fun.
1v1s are meh.
Coin battles are enjoyable (But hard to find people to do them with ;_
Timed matches just aren't worth doing in my opinion, regardless of game.

On paper It sounds like I'm not rating it that well, but the good experiences with the game were really fun and enjoyable enough to leave a lasting impression and I can still go back and enjoy it the same way I did in 2008.

back then I'd of gave the game an 11/10 though, but I'm not as biased anymore.

83/100
Issues exist and could of been done better, but i'd say the game was still good overall.

I might have a biased opinion though because I have a lot of people to play smash with.
Then again, a solo experience for every smash game is pretty lackluster...

 

[YoshiSonic]

I wouldn't want it at all. Nintendo is strict now and I know for a fact they wouldn't want confirm it for tourney's/why would they want their new console hacked and modded now? I feel that the Gaming companies became more protective of their products . Also there has been tons of time put into PM and I applaud them for their consistency, but why would they suddenly start from scratch all over again?

Also I think Mods are just a slap in Sakurai's face, "You didn't create the game right/to our liking, (when this time he is trying to add a competitive feel to the game) so we'll just do it for you, kthxbai". It happened once, don't like Smash 4? You have project M.

 

[Arturito_Burrito]

....

Quickrat is wrong in his views on this community. Unfortunately they are shared by large portions of the melee community, viewing the recent decline of brawl as proof of some cynical hate that they hold. They ignore the far more political reasons that determine if a smash game is successful. Smash bros is so popular that any game that shares its name will have a similar amount of success, no special seat can be held by any game. This 2 year trend that melee has had doesn't determine the future, of course with the support of Evo it could obtain the kind of turns outs it's had but for 5 years, every year, Brawl broke records in turns outs at apex. There are records that Alphazelaot posted on various occasions about how the only games to produce more money than brawl (maybe he counted melee in it as well and it was actually smash as a whole) was Halo and that we essentially had as much money flowing through our scene as SF4 did yearly. I think during 2012 we had even more money than SF4 thanks to MLG. Now more political change is coming to the smash community and it's again going to have a bigger impact than the way metagames are perceived.

 

[chrisall76]

I like brawl, but after trying melee again after years (like 3-4) I would say SSB4 definitely needs to improve and take ideas from both games which it seems like it's doing. Plus, with the WiiU the game can be updated meaning (hopefully) if characters end up not balanced or the community really hates something about the game it could be changed. So if that's the case, then a mod wouldn't really be needed.

 

[Doomstar]

Another PM mod? It depends. Would it play similarly to PM and Melee? Cause then no, I'l just play those.

 

[thatoneguy1]

to be honest it seems to early to judge since the final game isnt even out yet

 

[Reila]

I can only speak for myself, but I have no interest in mods, specially if said mods are meant to make the game more similar to Melee, which IMO is far from a good thing. No offense to modders or people who play mods intended, but at least to me, no mod was ever as good or topped the experience of the actual game developed by professional teams (of course, I am talking only about the ones I got to test). If you don't like how Smash 4 plays, then go play a previous game. Sakurai and his team have the right of making the game they way they envision it and you have the right to not play it, if it doesn't please you. For me, Smash 4 seems to be shaping up to be an amazing game and hopefully it will not disappoint me when it is released (and if it isn't as good as I hope it is, then I can go back and play Brawl or simply adjust... I had to adjust from 64 to Melee, after all).

Still, Wii U being hackable could be a good thing to some people, since the console is region locked (I think? At least the 3DS is). It is irrelevant to me since I have no interest in non-localized games.

 

[Doomstar]

to be honest it seems to early to judge since the final game isnt even out yet

Exactly, the Meta should have a little time to emerge and develop before we scrap it all for Melee mechanics again.

 

[thatoneguy1]

I can only speak for myself, but I have no interest in mods, specially if said mods are meant to make the game more similar to Melee, which IMO is far from a good thing. No offense to modders or people who play mods intended, but at least to me, no mod was ever as good or topped the experience of the actual game developed by professional teams (of course, I am talking only about the ones I got to test). If you don't like how Smash 4 plays, then go play a previous game.

But these mods make it seem like a whole new experience, playing the same game for years on end can get quite boring.

 

[Acadian Flycatcher]

The best way to be sure that nobody will start a Project M 2 is making a good game and a satisfactory experience. Brawl wasn't, so it was modded.

Brawl is no means a bad game, or a bad Smash Bros. game.

The issue is the competitive scene started to gain traction around Melee.
Pros were able to abuse certain techniques that many casuals are completely unfamiliar with, which gave them an unfair disadvantage.
Everyone grew accustom to the Melee engine, and once a new Smash Bros game was announced they all expected Melee 2.0 with more characters.

A lot of these players still haven't even played 64, so they are unaware of the fact that Smash changes every single game, the jump from 64 to Melee being the most drastic.
But they still expected Melee 2.0 anyways.

So when they finally got their hands on Brawl, the first thing any logical Smash Bros player does is not try and see if you can wavedash, yet here they were trying that.

Now once everyone learned that the techniques that they figured out for Melee were not implemented in Brawl, they got upset.
There was no longer that competitive edge. The couldn't grasp the idea that L-Cancelling was done, so you needed to start your aerial attack higher.

When spending more and more time with the game, they hated the changes. "Felt too floaty" "too slow". Every complaint they had about the game was a direct comparison to Melee. There was no 64 love in there, nor is there ever. They could not comprehend change to the perfect engine that they mastered.

So they complained about all the changes. Yet complain about franchises like Call of Duty for making the same exact game over and over but with new weapons and maps. This is exactly what competitive Melee fans wanted, but would criticize COD for doing the same thing. With Brawl they complained about levelling the playing field too much, when that is not the case at all. Just because tripping was added doesn't mean everyone is automatically at the same experience level.

Then started the whole Melee vs Brawl argument that ruined this forum.
Melee fans came off as smug and arrogant, making fun of everyone who loved Brawl and trying to take away their joyful experience because they couldn't have a similar one with the game.
And Brawl fans are usually fans of the whole series, they never hated Melee, they just hated the fans.

Then finally some people hated Brawl so much they decided to make a hack for it to make it more like Melee.

Now we are at the beginning of a very scary potential forum threat.
The inevitable Project M v Smash 4.
It's already starting with people questioning Sakurai's game making abilities and wishing the PM guys made Smash 4.
They criticize every update with Smash 4 comparing it to something in Project M.
"Project M did the Light Suit for Samus better because they actually changed the model"
"Link's new tunic swap is dumb because it doesn't look 100% like it does in Skyward Sword, PM already made a Link without a hat"
Of all the care and attention this made puts into his games is it really a big ****ing deal if Link is still wearing his hat?

Even if Sakurai does something good for the competitive community (Final Destination stages for most stages, For Glory Mode) they find something to complain about.

I'm not blaming all competitive Melee fans out there because I know some are great, but god damn all you guys seem to do is complain.

I can't stress this enough... if you are complaining that a game isn't Melee, just go ****ing play Melee.


So to answer your questions 100% someone will hate this game so much and try to make a hack to make it more like Melee.

 

[pizzapie7]

That is the longest, most misguided, saltiest thing I've read in a long time.

 

[D-idara]

But these mods make it seem like a whole new experience, playing the same game for years on end can get quite boring.

Yes.

That is the longest, most misguided, saltiest thing I've read in a long time.

Your posts seem to be the same, only shorter.