Will the SSB4 air dodge allow wavedashing?

[G3TL05T]

And what about hitstun?

 

[0RLY]

No brawl dodge. Hitstun cannot be verified because the demos showcase are not likely to have the characters react as quickly as possible. This is the closest thing you can get to a match so you can use this to judge hit stun. There was not a single combo used in this video, if that means anything. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqxDPJmO6f8

 

[IsmaR]

I think it's too early to tell anything. They were most likely running off a modified Brawl build for demonstration purposes.

 

[DakotaBonez]

It doesn't appear so, not that I'd care either way.

 

[G3TL05T]

No brawl dodge. Hitstun cannot be verified because the demos showcase are not likely to have the characters react as quickly as possible. This is the closest thing you can get to a match so you can use this to judge hit stun. There was not a single combo used in this video, if that means anything. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqxDPJmO6f8

If only they were good enough to combo...

 

[Kel]

Brawl air dodge has been used so far in the demonstrations. Mario's animation is exactly the same.

Seems most things are ported from Brawl.

 

[SmashGuy]

Yeah. In the Character Demonstration on the 3DS in the video, Bowser jumped and airdogded like Brawl airdogding. I don't know if they just put that there because they're just sample-ing or what.

 

[LaniusShrike]

I mean... Wavedashing wasn't a technique that was programmed in, it was a glitch. So, no, the programmers will do whatever they can to prevent glitches. Even if airdodging was directional again, I'm certain they would make sure that the glitch was no longer present.

 

[Ghostbone]

I mean... Wavedashing wasn't a technique that was programmed in, it was a glitch. So, no, the programmers will do whatever they can to prevent glitches. Even if airdodging was directional again, I'm certain they would make sure that the glitch was no longer present.

Rofl
And misinformation continues to be spread.

 

[LaniusShrike]

Rofl
And misinformation continues to be spread.

Glitch, exploit, whatever you call it, it was not intended to be used like it was.

 

[Fire Blazer]

I mean... Wavedashing wasn't a technique that was programmed in, it was a glitch. So, no, the programmers will do whatever they can to prevent glitches. Even if airdodging was directional again, I'm certain they would make sure that the glitch was no longer present.

This

being a game developer myself even if exploits make the game a lot more fun they're still a no-no

 

[Mr.Jackpot]

Glitch, exploit, whatever you call it, it was not intended to be used like it was.

It was intentionally done so that you could slide when you hit the ground with horizontal momentum. Sakurai said that being able to do so from an air dodge, or "wavedash", was intentional. How are people still on this 12 years later?

@OP:The E3 demo uses the Brawl air dodge, so no, but none of the Smash 4 mechanics are finalized yet so we may still have horizontal momentum from landing.

 

[Fire Blazer]

Above post, source please?

 

[Ghostbone]

Glitch, exploit, whatever you call it, it was not intended to be used like it was.

Who the **** are you to determine how a developer intended something to be used?

Did he intend for kirby to suck? I doubt it. Is kirby somehow a glitch because he's worse than intended? What kind of logic even is that.

There's no exploit, you're designed (intended, even) to slide when you land, air-dodging gives you momentum, you can air dodge in the air.
They knew you could air-dodge into the ground in testing and get a lot of momentum, yes that's right they knew wavedashing existed, and no I'm not going to waste time finding that source (honestly can't remember the article name, you could probably gooogle wavedash sakurai or something idk) if you can't find a source where Sakurai says that wavedashing was a glitch mechanic (hint, he never did, because while it wasn't "intended", it's a combination of mechanics working perfectly, that they already knew about)
It's unlikely Sakurai thought it would be an integral movement option the same way running is, and more of just an extra landing option during a jump ("wavelanding"), but that doesn't make it a glitch, the same way melee edge-hogging isn't a glitch (even if it's weird seeing bowser clearly on stage, while still hogging the ledge...)

 

[LaniusShrike]

Yes, I was wrong to call it a "glitch", but it's undeniably a physics exploit. Even if they knew about it before releasing the game, it's still considered an exploit.
"while it wasn't "intended", it's a combination of mechanics working perfectly"
That is almost literally the definition of an exploit.

@Fire Blazer, the interview question is:
Go to page 62 of your new May issue of Nintendo Power and read the second paragraph, which says...

Nintendo Power: This is one that a lot of hardcore Smash Bros. fans have long wondered about. Was the ablility to "Wavedash" in Melee intentional or a glitch?

Sakurai: Of course, we noticed that you could do that during the development period. With Super Smash Bros. Brawl, it wasn't a matter of, "OK, do we leave it in or do we take it out?"
We really just wanted this game, again, to appeal to and be played by gamers of all different levels. We felt that there was a growing gap between beginners and advanced players, and taking that out helps to level the playing field. It wasn't a big priority or anything, but when we were building the game around the idea of making it fair for everybody, it just made sense to take it out. And it also goes back to wanting to make something different from Melee and giving players the opportunity to find new things to enjoy.

In any case, I didn't come here to argue. Sakurai doesn't like wavedashing, it won't be in the next game.

 

[Doctor X]

This

being a game developer myself even if exploits make the game a lot more fun they're still a no-no

Okay so like... what is your purpose as a game developer? If it's anything besides making the game fun, you're doing it wrong.

 

[[TSON]]

Making an educated guess from the videos, hitstun cannot be cancelled with airdodges/aerials anymore as CPUs do not interrupt until they're in tumble. Also, the airdodges are Brawl-based.

 

[Fire Blazer]

@qdMbp thanks for the info/enlightening me and not spazzing out like Ghostbone lol.

@Doctor X generally speaking exploits tend to cause imbalances in the game. In 1-player games, say an RPG, an exploit might be simply using your resources very well in a way that the developers didn't think of to create a character that is "broken", i.e. highly overpowered such that it ruins the delicate balance of the game. Of course, it's great when players can think of ways to make the game easier or use legitimate strategy to do so, but at some point that might go overboard and the game might lose its purpose; after all, in 1-player games, there generally needs to be some sort of challenge offered by the artifical intelligence.

In a multiplayer game like Brawl, a mechanic that wasn't intended to be in the game when balance was being coordinated/worked on can make certain characters more or less viable in competitive play. Of course, Brawl itself isn't really balanced to start with, but hypothetically let's say it was super balanced, and AFTERWARDS things like Snakes/Shiek's/Warrior's sliding up-smashes were discovered. This would break the balance the developers created, and while it might make the game more fun, the overall effect is generally considered negative.

So, to answer your question and respond to your statement,

what is your purpose as a game developer? If it's anything besides making the game fun, you're doing it wrong.

"Fun" is objective; a lot of people don't find imbalanced games fun. Glitches and exploits tend to ruin balance, and as you can see from all the Brawl hacks and people simply not playing Brawl, an imbalanced game loses its appeal, even if it might be, in some regards, more fun than a balanced one. I mean, crapping on people with MK can be fun, but getting crapped on by an MK isn't really fun, and I think most people would prefer a more stable version of "fun".

For instance, some people find using cheat codes a LOT of fun. They get to destroy the enemy Pokemon with their level 100 dragon type pokemon or maybe catch the opponent's pokemon and act like they're Team Plasma. But this isn't the kind of fun game developers ever STRIVE to go for. Maybe they'll add in a bonus or two if you've already beaten the game--something like the Tales of series' "New Game+", which lets you carry over levels, weapons, money, etc. from a completed playthrough, and makes the game a lot easier--but the player shouldn't have access to something that can break the balance of the game at the start.

In Melee, last I checked wavedashing is easier or more effective with certain characters over others, which again alters the balance in a way the director's didn't intend. Good game developers won't intend something that would break the balance, because if they did, that means that they didn't truly balance the game. And an imbalanced game leads to tons of issues that any avid game player should be aware of--bosses that are way too easy or hard compared to others (the anticlimactic final boss always pains me and the early game boss that forces me to grind is worthy of me putting my game down), characters that are pointless to use, etc.

Hopefully that explains the difference between the types of "fun" a game developer can strive for.

As for why they don't include wavedashing in future games and just balance it around it? Honestly, I think they should, so if you think the same, we'd hardly have any contention here. The main issue is that it's difficult to do for people and creates a much larger gap in skill levels, but it's up to game developers to be smart and think of a way to not just give up and say "we won't include it" when they know it's something that would please so many fans and create a whole new dynamic to the game. Perhaps having a "competitive" mode with slightly redesigned physics resembling Melee's more? That leads into an issue of people switching between the two, but competitive players should be good enough to handle their own in a casual match even if they're not used to it, and casual players should stick to casual unless they're ready to make the step-up... It'd be more complicated than what I'm suggesting here, but my point is that it might be worth a shot to actually please more than just the "general" gaming audience, since it's the competitive audience that really spurs on games like these, Starcraft II, etc.

 

[LaniusShrike]

Wonderfully written all around.

 

[Krynxe]

Some game developers embrace exploits and allow their game to evolve around it - so long as its not game breaking. It's also understandable that they would see the fans enjoy whatever it is they have, and would not want to disappoint them by removing it.

An example of this is walljumping in Transformice.

(this is just objective information, don't assume this info is relevant to my own point of view on the subject)

 

[Grim Tuesday]

I don't see why everyone makes such a big deal about wavedashing when dash-dancing is a more important technique that was removed during the transition to Brawl.

 

[Strong Badam]

they have well over a year to modify the mechanics. any speculation from the videos is useless. for example, e3 brawl was much closer to melee and it didn't end up that way.

fwiw grim tuesday, dding is imo a really poor mechanic that allows players to position w/o actually commiting to anything. while on the surface it appears to allow "fast, technical gameplay" it really just facilitates an extremely potent bait & punish (AKA "defensive") playstyle that all characters need to be designed around or are doomed to fail. on the flip side, i quite like wavedashing.

 

[Demna]

Anything is possible since we know nothing of the exact gameplay.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

fwiw grim tuesday, dding is imo a really poor mechanic that allows players to position w/o actually commiting to anything. while on the surface it appears to allow "fast, technical gameplay" it really just facilitates an extremely potent bait & punish (AKA "defensive") playstyle that all characters need to be designed around or are doomed to fail. on the flip side, i quite like wavedashing.

Which part of that is negative?

Melee without dash-dancing would be far dumber imo, it'd just be Sheik and Fox walking around spamming their safety, Marth trying to do the same thing but being less succesful, and Falco playing a super campy laser game because he's too slow to do anything else without DD.

 

[gnosis]

they have well over a year to modify the mechanics. any speculation from the videos is useless. for example, e3 brawl was much closer to melee and it didn't end up that way.

fwiw grim tuesday, dding is imo a really poor mechanic that allows players to position w/o actually commiting to anything. while on the surface it appears to allow "fast, technical gameplay" it really just facilitates an extremely potent bait & punish (AKA "defensive") playstyle that all characters need to be designed around or are doomed to fail. on the flip side, i quite like wavedashing.

I'd say dashdancing walks a strange line between offense and defense. Because you can move so freely, so non-commital, you can play a sort of 'aggresively defensive' game. You get up in their face and threaten attack, while always retaining the option to fall back and retreat if they overextend. Who's to say the game would be any more aggressive if you lost that option, i.e., if approaching become more of an investment, more risky, but at the same time the opponent's movement was more predictably approachable, would it really be more offensive or more defensive?

Hard for me to guess at. I never paid attention to Brawl, but I know there's more changes than just that so I don't know if looking at how that game turned out would give an answer. I do know that dash-dancing feels amazing from a kinaesthetic point of view.

 

[Fire Blazer]

Some game developers embrace exploits and allow their game to evolve around it - so long as its not game breaking. It's also understandable that they would see the fans enjoy whatever it is they have, and would not want to disappoint them by removing it.

Yup, and it'd be nice if the SSB4 development team managed to do that; people will get over the character choices in due time if they don't like them (I've seen mixed reactions about Wii Fit Trainer...), but the mechanics/gameplay are what TRULY make the game. If they can make a game fun to play on multiple levels, they will have appealed to most everyone right there.

Also, I think there's a certain degree of legitimacy in people's worries, i.e. it's more likely for the game physics etc. (e.g. directional air dodges) to not change dramatically than the opposite, but that doesn't mean anything is set in stone. As gamers, we do what we can to voice our opinions and leave the rest in the hands of developer's, hoping that they don't let us down. Aside from showing our support after the fact, there's not much else we can do, right? =P

 

[황미영]

This

being a game developer myself even if exploits make the game a lot more fun they're still a no-no

Are you aware that combos in SF2 when it first came out was a glitch, and left there on purpose. Glitch or no glitch if they end up making a game evolve why take it out?

 

[Doctor X]

@Doctor X generally speaking exploits tend to cause imbalances in the game.

Maybe they tend to, but tendency does not imply universality. Sometimes, strangely, an exploit can have the opposite effect. I'm sure you already know this because we're currently in a thread that discusses a perfect example.

This would break the balance the developers created, and while it might make the game more fun, the overall effect is generally considered negative.

Generally considered negative by whom? Definitely not the players, since they're having more fun, aren't they?

I mean, that's really the bit I don't understand... Why should we value the "balance the developers created" so much? Developers cannot possibly foresee the long-term consequences of every single decision they make. Creative and committed players, especially when given years to study game properties and refine their skills, routinely dash developer expectations to pieces. This is why you see open betas and repeated patching in media that allow for them-- Developers know that nothing works out exactly as planned, and they want to leave themselves the opportunity to make corrections.

Unless you can imagine a game made by team of omniscient gurus that exist outside of time, you must concede that there will always be imbalances that the developer won't foresee. No matter what they do, no matter how hard they work, no matter how much data they gather, they will never be able to hold the sum and total of their title's entire competitive metagame, from release all the way up until the point where people stop playing entirely. It is just not possible.

The "balance the developers created" is doomed to be a stunted creation. Why should we necessarily value it over emergent properties, even if those emergent properties happen to correct problems that the developer had not addressed?

"Fun" is objective

I can only assume you meant to use the word "subjective" here. You've got them backwards. No matter though...

"Fun" on an individual basis is certainly subjective. Two people might have vastly different opinions on the matter. If your community of players, however, comes to a consensus that something is fun? That is not subjective anymore. If you remove it, less fun will be had.

You began with the caveat "even if exploits make the game a lot more fun." In this case it is unclear whether you're talking about the subjective fun of the individual, or the collective fun of the community. If there is only one person in the world who thinks an exploit makes the game more fun, then I can understand your argument. If an entire community of players would be alienated by the removal of an exploit, though? "Exploits are a no-no" is no longer a good enough reason.

As for why they don't include wavedashing in future games and just balance it around it? Honestly, I think they should, so if you think the same, we'd hardly have any contention here.

Then why did you post what you posted? Wavedashing is an exploit. Isn't that a no-no by definition? I mean, if you agree with me, that's great, but you must realize... you're conceding the point you made in your earlier post.

The main issue is that it's difficult to do for people and creates a much larger gap in skill levels

Gaps in skill levels are not some kind of design issue that needs be solved. They are an inevitable consequence of competitive gameplay.

Whether or not you have a particular tool available to hardcore players, the hardcore players still have the advantage of being hardcore players. They're going to win because they try harder to win. The only way to "level the playing field" is to create a game where victory rate is not in any way proportional to effort.

Does this seem like a good way to make a game with any lasting appeal whatsoever? >.>

 

[himynameisruss]

I don't see why everyone makes such a big deal about wavedashing when dash-dancing is a more important technique that was removed during the transition to Brawl.

this.

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

Oh, Fire Blazer, words cannot express how wrong you are. You are wrong-wrong-wrong-McWrongerton-KingWrongy-wrong WRONG.

First off, glad we clarified the terminology. Wavedashing was an exploit, not a glitch. A glitch would imply the software was doing something unnatural (buffer overflow, math error, etc.). Wavedashing was 100% natural. The creators gave us directional air-dodging. The creators gave us low friction. We, the players, just put them together. Gamers should never feel ashamed about the way they play the game. The game's rules are enforced by the software. We don't need an honor code on top of that to worry about while playing.

Second, glitches/exploits aside, why on earth would players act in accordance with the creator's wishes? The best players in any game are the ones who take the tools given them and make the most of them. It is a false hope to wait for an iteration of the game that is finally clean of "dirty tricks". Melee had wavedashing. Brawl had DACUS. I am most certain that Smash 4 will introduce some mechanic that will rub people the wrong way.

From there, what makes you think the creator of a game even has his head on straight? Have you seen Meta Knight at all? If that is the creator's intention, hoo boy, count me out. It is the creator's job to build the best game he can build, but he does not then get to dictate the experience had by the players. If you wanna do that, I recommend you get into cinema instead. There are no glitches or exploits there.

being a game developer myself even if exploits make the game a lot more fun they're still a no-no

This made me chuckle. I'm a game developer too. The sign of a good game is emergent behavior. When players do something you did not expect, that is a very good thing. Some games are wholly defined by this (like Minecraft). Obviously, you have to deal with game-breaking exploits (unlimited money, unfair advantages, etc.), but you very much want players to "exploit" every corner of your game.

 

[F. Blue]

This made me chuckle. I'm a game developer too. The sign of a good game is emergent behavior. When players do something you did not expect, that is a very good thing. Some games are wholly defined by this (like Minecraft). Obviously, you have to deal with game-breaking exploits (unlimited money, unfair advantages, etc.), but you very much want players to "exploit" every corner of your game.

Another good example of this is Super Meat Boy. During development, testers found some unconventional methods of beating the stages by jumping outside walls and stuff, and was able to get a much lower time than intended. They decided to look the other way because they felt it added another layer of strategy, and a high skill ceiling was what they wanted.

And the game became a mega hit. A high skill ceiling can only make your game better, but a high skill floor can turn players away. A reasonable approach to this would be restoring Melee's techniques, but making windows larger, adding buffer, automatic l-canceling maybe, adding a wavedash button, and just introducing characters like Sheik who can play competitively without strenuous techskill.

 

[Doctor X]

A reasonable approach to this would be restoring Melee's techniques, but making windows larger, adding buffer, automatic l-canceling maybe, adding a wavedash button, and just introducing characters like Sheik who can play competitively without strenuous techskill.

People are too quick to blame technical barriers and not quick enough to realize the real cause of skill gaps-- effort gaps.

A person who doesn't take the time to practice should not beat someone who does. With or without wavedashing and other tricks at their immediate disposal, a person who can't take the time to learn a simple 3-input sequence will not compete with the likes of M2K and PP.

Ask yourself, though... if they could compete, matching their minimal amount of effort with years of analysis and training, would Melee really be a good competitive game at all?

 

[F. Blue]

People are too quick to blame technical barriers and not quick enough to realize the real cause of skill gaps-- effort gaps.

A person who doesn't take the time to practice should not beat someone who does. With or without wavedashing and other tricks at their immediate disposal, a person who can't take the time to learn a simple 3-input sequence will not compete with the likes of M2K and PP.

Ask yourself, though... if they could compete, matching their minimal amount of effort with years of analysis and training, would Melee really be a good competitive game at all?

Chess is a pretty good competitive game that doesn't cramp up my wrists. Project M is slightly easier for newcomers (running into usmash, backwards ledgegrab at the apex of specials, visual indication of l-cancels,), and I believe it's a better game because of it. It also gets a lot of Brawl players into Melee, or at least comfortable in a Melee environment.

My eyes were opened the other day when I removed the springs from my controller. The timing of wavedashes was different, but I adjusted almost instantly because I was no longer fighting the controller to hit a small window. Then I realized all that time I spent learning to wavedash (years in my case) could have been better spent learning spacing, how to read, and matchups.

Edit: And no, just because the game is easy to play, doesn't mean anyone can compete. Divekick is probably the best example of this. Just like Melee/Brawl, the people who practice and study the game will be the most successful.

 

[Doctor X]

Your edit is exactly my point. The people who practice and study are the ones who will be most successful. Thus, as long as gaps in practice and study habits exist, so too will gaps in skill level.

Put another way... The ability to wavedash implies the advantage of caring enough to learn to wavedash. The inability to wavedash implies the disadvantage of not caring enough to learn to wavedash. It is this disparity in effort that creates skill gaps, not wavedashing itself. Removing the tech will not alter this. All it will do is leave the bads with one less thing to blame their badness on.

 

[nessokman]

wavedashing won't return. It was never intended as a "Oh, well let's add this to make it deeper" no, it wasn't intended to be there. IT will probably never appear in a smash again, which is good

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

wavedashing won't return. It was never intended as a "Oh, well let's add this to make it deeper" no, it wasn't intended to be there. IT will probably never appear in a smash again, which is good

Why is it good?

 

[goateeguy]

Came looking for a first-hand source that had playtested the game and could describe the mechanics. Got the same old debate about wavedashing as glitch vs. wavedashing as exploit. Staaaaaaaaaahp.

 

[lil T]

You do realize that wave dashing and L canceling made the game abit more balance right?
It effected everyone in nothing but good way's mewtwo is a pretty bad character but being able to wave dash and cancel the lag on his Ariel attacks, made him a better character
Now he's not as good as fox who can also Wave dash and L-cancel BUT it started to put the game to a point of where, it doesn't matter if fox is high tier
Due to the fact that every character had those similar tools it started to depends on how good with that character you are
Players like Taj,mofo,v3torman Proved this by playing Mewtwo,ness,and Yoshi against pro fox,falco and other player's and not only doing good but doing combos and winning

I just dont understand why you people are crying over wave dashing...It's even easy to do All you need to do is take the time to learn how to do it and practices on how to use it effectively...
It's not a game breaking Glitch that breaks the whole game making it unplayable...if anything it makes the game MORE playable, I swear some of you just find stuff to ***** about.
I take it that you people just dont want to take the time to learn out to play the game good...you just wanna grab the game and play like a pro..wanna be at M2K or PP level in Abbot a week....

I use to complain that nowadays games are getting kinda dull because The learning curve is not there anymore... Like back in the day there was games that didt really tell you ****
(megaman X) you just started off in the game and had to learn how to run,jump shoot ect after awhile you learn how to do stuff and got better at the game. Later on the years Games have gotten duller/ slower because people start complaining about how hard things are and the "Skill gap is to big" because they don't wanna take the time to learn anything.
lol I'm done with my rant. It just bothers me that besides just dealing with it and learning something you, cry over it making Future games bad...Then tell us to deal with it....

 

[BTmoney]

All these threads are buns and the short answer to the OP is no

 

[KrIsP!]

People are too quick to blame technical barriers and not quick enough to realize the real cause of skill gaps-- effort gaps.

I mean, it's actually kind of nice to have such a high learning curve, kind of weeds out the whiny annoying people But being serious, I agree with you. Wavedashing ended up being an amazing tool that increased the fluidity of the game. The only people who complained are the one's that didn't bother to learn, never had it happen in front of them and just heard of a glitch all the good players use and assumed it gave them an unfair advantage.

If you ask me, Sakurai should never have taken these things out intentionally to attract the Wii audience, which is what he admits he did. He should have helped people, make it an actual input and teach them it in the tutorial. He could have made it so you wouldn't accidentally air dodge if you messed up such a precise input and helped the game's community grow instead of splitting itself. He has some pretty bad logic when it comes to developing.

Seeing these discussions makes me wonder what would happen if we had to merge communities. At least high level brawl players are cool and know what's up.