Support NeoGAF

[Revven]

It all boils down to an issue of quality over quantity.

That's my problem with Brawl in general. People swoon over the amount of content in the game but the quality of everything is a mixed bag. Some things are fine for what they are but the other things just fall flat on their face because they don't reach the potential that is in your mind when you first think of it (i.e Stage Builder, total squandered opportunity)

If Melee is thin on content then Brawl is bloated.

 

[Parallax]

Brawl's soundtrack suffered from way too many amateur-hour arrangements that sounded like something straight out of OC Remix circa 2004. And the soundtrack itself is best appreciated by listening to the tracks on their own and culling a good 40% of the songs, because when you're playing the game proper you're bombarded with three hundred thousand arrangements of the main theme song. We get it, Sakurai, you got Nobuo Uematsu to compose a song for you. You don't need to remind us every fifteen seconds.

Melee was far less of a clusterfuck. Less songs overall, but what was there was much better. Nothing on Brawl touches Fountain of Dreams, Venom, Corneria, or Pokemon Stadium. It all boils down to an issue of quality over quantity.

this is the argument me and a good friend use to describe brawls soundtrack to a tee. there are a huge amount of tracks, and some talented composers, but it doesnt feel like they put their heart into it. it extremely obvious when you look at sonics selection and the mp3 rips they use for most of his stages music. there are a handful of songs that i like to listen to of all of the brawl soundtrack( x theme, and ground theme) but the rest are completely forgettable.

 

[PezDispenser]

Playing Saria's Song on Pokemon Stadium just wouldn't make sense.

The whole idea of the game is this awkward and silly clashing of franchises; it makes perfect sense.

 

[Village]

That's my problem with Brawl in general. People swoon over the amount of content in the game but the quality of everything is a mixed bag. Some things are fine for what they are but the other things just fall flat on their face because they don't reach the potential that is in your mind when you first think of it (i.e Stage Builder, total squandered opportunity)

If Melee is thin on content then Brawl is bloated.

Because its good and in a large amount.

I would guess that is the reason.

 

[mnemovore]

Yes, it happens sometimes but not all the time. The past 3 Majors in the last couple of months didn't have any Fox dittos in Top 8, much less on Final Destination. There's a variety of characters used in tournaments in general. You're nuts if you think all anyone uses is Fox to win.

You're acting like there's no good reason for having items off when the most obvious blemish of Melee's item switch is the lack of being able to turn off containers. Items on wouldn't make Melee any better, it'd be a ton worse simply because of the random chance of a container spawning and it's one that can explode (and you can't even tell if it's an exploding container or not!) One item on allows containers to spawn in Melee. People tend to miss this point when making a jab at Melee's competitive rules.

The prevalence of Fox, the restriction of stages, and the banning of items are emblematic of a large number of fans of a game standardizing a specific set of options rather than play the game the creators made.

It's not a problem that people make up their own ways to play a game, it's a problem that any organized effort will inevitably abandon the variety of possible gameplay for a sanitized, predictable ruleset better served in other games. The random elements of stage hazards and item drops is what makes the Smash series great. It's am exciting, dynamic type of game you couldn't find anywhere else until Playstation All-Stars.

Turning off items as a matter of course completely misses the point of the game and does a disservice to all the work that went into making the items so much fun. People who play Smash games without items aren't fans of Smash games, they're a fan of a game manufactured by players for which Smash games happen to act as a vehicle.

I can't find the matchups, but out of the 23 uploaded matches, there were 11 foxes, so 11/46= 24%. That's really far from your no items, Fox only, Final Destination claim.

I don't know why you would want items in a tournament. I want to see how skilled the players are, not how lucky they are.

Here you can see that out of ~65 participants, 28 played as Fox, and seven out of the top ten doubles teams had Fox.

I think a player who can account for random elements is more skilled than a player who can't. The idea that skill goes out the window when random elements are introduced is very naive.

 

[Revven]

Because its good and in a large amount.

I would guess that is the reason.

What's good? Multiplayer? Sure. But is the stage builder good? No, it's bad. Is SSE good? No, it's mediocre. Is the mini-game to get trophies good? No, it's bad, it's not fun. Is Break the Targets good? Not really, pales in comparison to previous titles, so pretty mediocre. Is Events Mode good? It's there, I guess it's a box checked off, but it's not very memorable and you don't unlock anything for doing it so... what's the fun again in that mode without any incentive to play it especially when the Events themselves aren't very creative?

And it continues that same trend for everything else. It goes from "it's fine" to "bad" to "mediocre" to "oh this is here to check a box" to "why is this here? it's wasting space" (Masterpieces). I don't know why you, with your "subjectivity" argument fails to see how everything in the game is subjective in the same way and not everything, just because it's there, "is good".

Do you like boxes being checked off? Because that's what Brawl's content is, a bunch of checked boxes. If you like that, I guess then it satisfies you despite the quality of everything being pretty all over the place.

 

[PezDispenser]

Apex 2012 Melee singles had the vast majority of players as Fox

You are like the Michele Bachmann of smash brothers; totally uninformed and nonsensically babbling.

The grand finals were young link vs jigglypuff!

 

[mnemovore]

You are like the Michele Bachmann of smash brothers; totally uninformed and nonsensically babbling.

The grand finals were young link vs jigglypuff!

Part of my argument is that Fox is used disproportionately. What you said is a non sequitor.

 

[PezDispenser]

Part of my argument is that Fox is used disproportionately. What you said is a non sequitor.

Who cares? You'll see the same thing in any fighting game (and incidentally, to a much higher degree with metaknight in Brawl).

 

[Richie]

You echoed my thoughts perfectly. I often criticized Brawl's choice of Trophies, but I didn't know how to explain it quite as well as you did here. I normally hate using words like "soul" and "charm" to convey that I didn't like some aspect about a game, but those words really are the only ones that I feel are applicable.

The Brawl main theme was amazing, but I quickly grew tired of it after hearing so many variations.

Even the Pokemon selection lacked something special, and I honestly can't explain what it is. Maybe nostalgia is clouding my perception, but I was always really excited to throw a Pokeball and see what came out. I wasn't as excited in Brawl for some (probably unjustifiable) reason.

Thanks, Silent! Brawl's main theme is a perfectly good theme by its own merit...

I like the Trophy Theme in Brawl better. Very chill.

... and so are most of the variations when taken on their own. But as you say, using it as a basis for the vast majority of original music in the game didn't do it any favors. On the Pokémon subject, I can't put my finger on it either, but I think the way the pokéballs are programmed may be unbalanced...

Am I the only one who noticed that the "random" in Brawl was screwed up, in terms of items, pokeballs and assist trophies?

This. Many a time the same Pokémon come out in a row, and at least in my personal case, Munchlax and Gardevoir appear with alarming frequency.

Well said.

One of the best things that differentiated Melee from its predecessor, and made it appear as something more than just a quick cash-in sequel, was that it was essentially a Nintendo history museum on a disc. I absolutely loved that aspect of the game.

It would be pretty awesome if for SSB4 we had trophies or whatever where you get little known info about past Nintendo games. Kinda like a little developer's diary.

Thanks, man! Gotta agree with you there, and yeah, that'd be a kickass idea. You see how as you progressed in Brawl, the Chronicles section would get bigger? It'd be ace to see a Trivia section of sorts appear, where the more you accomplish in the game, the more tidbits from several franchises pop up.

Thank you. Thank you so much. This is basically exactly how I feel about Melee vs. Brawl.

It's not about balance, it's not about tripping. It's certainly not about wavedashing. It's about one game that absolutely trumps the other in everything except character number.

Melee was a joy to play in basically every way. To this day I can have a good amount of fun going through All-Star or Adventure mode with a character or two. Brawl is... still good, mind you, but much less so. All of its single player modes (literally ALL of them) are repetitive and uninspired, which is unacceptable coming after Melee's good balance between multiplayer and single player.

This post moved me. Richie, you are the man and you are so goddamn right on the money.

Thank you for reading it, mates! C. Olimar, you opine that Brawl, albeit good, compares unfavorably to Melee, and I can't help but agree. That's the key; good, but less so than Melee.
From that I segue into...

You have fun with that.

You mean like in brawl.

Or are we pretending brawl did everything wrong ever. what that guy even suggest is silly especially something so subjective i don't even think i can be held against the game

Brawl haters secretly love Brawl because it gives them an excuse to make long-winded posts about the depth and complexity of Melee on the internet.

Brawl was a disappointment in several aspects, but now to claim that it's fucking soulless and Melee's soundtrack was better? You cannot be serious.

Gonna be great when Brawl is lionized and everyone who hated Brawl hates the new Smash.

I think this is a good moment as any to clarify something. I'm not a Brawl hater. Just last night, my bros and I spent about two hours and a half duking it out in SSBB, and having a pretty great time doing so (bros, pizza, beer, junk food and Smash, some of the most fun one can have without ladies involved!).

It's a game that's given me many a good moment in multiplayer, and I'm not ignoring everything it did do right; my complaints in the music department were aimed at the original tunes Brawl came up with, but I certainly recognize the colossal effort that went into the soundtrack as a whole, even if it's nowhere as cohesive as Melee's, how about those inspired choices? (Like X's Tunnel's Theme or Shin Onigashima). There's still creativity and enthusiasm reflected in parts of the game, be it with the stages (Warioware's, Pictochat, the amazing detail of K.K. playing on Saturday nights in Smashville) in the items (allowing one to move while holding the likes of a Fire Flower is much appreciated, as is the addition of Rocket Launcher, Gooey Bomb and plenty of others, Assist Trophies highlighted) roster selection (Pokémon Trainer made me explode with hype when it was unveiled and it's one of the most inspired choices for a character in the series, whereas Snake and Sonic are both welcome additions, and they cared enough to give Ma Man Wario his original clothes!)...and many other new features I'm thankful for (To mention some, Challenges is a great idea, having Snapshots available at all times ROCKS, Replays and Stage Builder, limited as they were, allowed for plenty of hilarity, and sending a new snapshot/video/stage daily was mindblowing for me at the time).

As you can see from the preceding wall o' text, I still like Brawl enough to replay it frequently from time to time; if that's not a sign that I recognize the game's virtues, what is?

Then comes the comparisons with Melee. I cant' be entirely objective about this, obviously, and no one should expect me to; it's a matter of opinions, and I can only speak from where I stand. But if I had to summarize my thoughts (and may as well do, since this post has ran long enough) is that Melee did more with less. Its scope was nowhere near as ambitious as its successor's, but I firmly believe it managed to take full advantage of its potential, all circumstances considered, in a far greater way than Brawl managed.

 

[Village]

What's good? Multiplayer? Sure. But is the stage builder good? No, it's bad. Is SSE good? No, it's mediocre. Is the mini-game to get trophies good? No, it's bad, it's not fun. Is Break the Targets good? Not really, pales in comparison to previous titles, so pretty mediocre. Is Events Mode good? It's there, I guess it's a box checked off, but it's not very memorable and you don't unlock anything for doing it so... what's the fun again in that mode without any incentive to play it especially when the Events themselves aren't very creative?

And it continues that same trend for everything else. It goes from "it's fine" to "bad" to "mediocre" to "oh this is here to check a box" to "why is this here? it's wasting space" (Masterpieces). I don't know why you, with your "subjectivity" argument fails to see how everything in the game is subjective in the same way and not everything, just because it's there, "is good".

Do you like boxes being checked off? Because that's what Brawl's content is, a bunch of checked boxes. If you like that, I guess then it satisfies you despite the quality of everything being pretty all over the place.

I like content that was good. I enjoy it, but from what I can tell from your response, you do not seem to have any valid reasoning, to why you think its bad, you give no explaination. Just melee is better, if you want to have that argument, I haven't been 12 for quite a long time. However I can tell you why brawl is superior if you wish. Just could you give me a in depth explanation why first besides "its bad"

Also in melee to brawls case, something is better than nothing.

Melee is like mahvel 2.< That is an insult.

 

[Revven]

Turning off items as a matter of course completely misses the point of the game and does a disservice to all the work that went into making the items so much fun. People who play Smash games without items aren't fans of Smash games, they're a fan of a game manufactured by players for which Smash games happen to act as a vehicle.

I'm going to ignore half of your post because I've heard the argument "not playing the game the creators intended" a thousand times and I'm not going to sit here and argue with "uh if the creators intended you to play with items on why did they allow you to turn them off" like I have before.

With that out of the way, the simple fact you think these players didn't start playing the game the same way you did and only started playing them for competitive reasons is asinine. They started playing it the same way you did, loving the Nintendo characters and playing their favorite ones with items on and all your hazardous stages. However, the difference is, they found something deeper with the game and found a way to take their enjoyment further to play the game for even longer than anyone probably would. These are people who love the games for the same reasons you do, they just play it a different way.

Competitive players don't just play games to push an agenda: they play games they love and have a huge passion for. I'm sorry the competitive scene for Smash doesn't match your vision for what it should be, but that doesn't make what it is wrong or make these players "terrible" for playing the game in a way you don't like.

I like content that was good. I enjoy it, but from what I can tell from your response, you do not seem to have any valid reasoning, to why you think its bad, you give no explaination. Just melee is better, if you want to have that argument, I haven't been 12 for quite a long time. However I can tell you why brawl is superior if you wish. Just could you give me a in depth explanation why first besides "its bad"

Also in melee to brawls case, something is better than nothing.

Melee is like mahvel 2.< That is an insult

Do I need to go into detail? Isn't it obvious why these things are bad or mediocre?

I'll give an example of what I mean I guess.

I'll go back to stage builder. Stage builder is bad because of the limited options it gives you. They could easily have allowed you to have more choices in the aesthetic appearance of your stages. Instead, they decided to limit you to three soulless themes; there's little reason to play on the stages you create with the stage builder because they lack the charm or good looks the regular stages have in the game.

Then they limited you in the size you could make the individual pieces. There's also the limitation of how you can create certain angles with the pieces they give you. There's even parts that you can't even recreate that are in the regular stage selection. You can't create your own moving platforms, you're limited to vertical and horizontal; you aren't able to create your own path for them. There's even limitations on what you can do with individual pieces! You can't change the direction spikes are facing, for example.

The potential in the stage builder is squandered by how much they limit you. That's why it's bad. It doesn't live up to what it should have been. It loses its appeal very quickly as well as what you can create. Wanna create boxed stages? Cool, have fun. Wanna create unique stages that don't exist in the regular stage selection? Good luck with that with your limited tools; your stage will only be as fun as what the stage builder allows.

 

[Spinluck]

What's good? Multiplayer? Sure. But is the stage builder good? No, it's bad. Is SSE good? No, it's mediocre. Is the mini-game to get trophies good? No, it's bad, it's not fun. Is Break the Targets good? Not really, pales in comparison to previous titles, so pretty mediocre. Is Events Mode good? It's there, I guess it's a box checked off, but it's not very memorable and you don't unlock anything for doing it so... what's the fun again in that mode without any incentive to play it especially when the Events themselves aren't very creative?

And it continues that same trend for everything else. It goes from "it's fine" to "bad" to "mediocre" to "oh this is here to check a box" to "why is this here? it's wasting space" (Masterpieces). I don't know why you, with your "subjectivity" argument fails to see how everything in the game is subjective in the same way and not everything, just because it's there, "is good".

Do you like boxes being checked off? Because that's what Brawl's content is, a bunch of checked boxes. If you like that, I guess then it satisfies you despite the quality of everything being pretty all over the place.

Lol omg.

 

[also]

The prevalence of Fox, the restriction of stages, and the banning of items are emblematic of a large number of fans of a game standardizing a specific set of options rather than play the game the creators made.

It's not a problem that people make up their own ways to play a game, it's a problem that any organized effort will inevitably abandon the variety of possible gameplay for a sanitized, predictable ruleset better served in other games. The random elements of stage hazards and item drops is what makes the Smash series great. It's am exciting, dynamic type of game you couldn't find anywhere else until Playstation All-Stars.

Turning off items as a matter of course completely misses the point of the game and does a disservice to all the work that went into making the items so much fun. People who play Smash games without items aren't fans of Smash games, they're a fan of a game manufactured by players for which Smash games happen to act as a vehicle.



Here you can see that out of ~65 participants, 28 played as Fox, and seven out of the top ten doubles teams had Fox.

I think a player who can account for random elements is more skilled than a player who can't. The idea that skill goes out the window when random elements are introduced is very naive.

Um, the item switch wasn't hacked it, it was intentionally put there to accommodate different styles of game play. If you turn items off, you are playing the way the creators wanted you to play, your own way. Sorry, but you come off as extremely narrow minded and worse than any of hardcore tournament players.

That's still not even half. Where's the ''vast majority'' that you mentioned?
The idea of luck=skill is what is naive. How can you account for a Bom-omb spawning just as you execute your attack? By not attacking? The vast majority of competitive matches are super entertaining; players blazing across the stage, playing mind games, edge guarding.... I don't want randomness ruining that.

 

[Deleted member 13876]

Lol omg.

Great counterargument.

 

[Oblivion]

Do I need to go into detail? Isn't it obvious why these things are bad or mediocre?

I'll give an example of what I mean I guess.

I'll go back to stage builder. Stage builder is bad because of the limited options it gives you. They could easily have allowed you to have more choices in the aesthetic appearance of your stages. Instead, they decided to limit you to three soulless themes; there's little reason to play on the stages you create with the stage builder because they lack the charm or good looks the regular stages have in the game.

Then they limited you in the size you could make the individual pieces. There's also the limitation of how you can create certain angles with the pieces they give you. There's even parts that you can't even recreate that are in the regular stage selection. You can't create your own moving platforms, you're limited to vertical and horizontal; you aren't able to create your own path for them. There's even limitations on what you can do with individual pieces! You can't change the direction spikes are facing, for example.

The potential in the stage builder is squandered by how much they limit you. That's why it's bad. It doesn't live up to what it should have been. It loses its appeal very quickly as well as what you can create. Wanna create boxed stages? Cool, have fun. Wanna create unique stages that don't exist in the regular stage selection? Good luck with that with your limited tools; your stage will only be as fun as what the stage builder allows.

Yeah, the stage builder was a tremendously wasted opportunity. I hope for SSB4, Sakurai creates a more robust level editor that can actually mimic how the real stages look.

 

[Village]

Do I need to go into detail? Isn't it obvious why these things are bad or mediocre?

I'll give an example of what I mean I guess.

I'll go back to stage builder. Stage builder is bad because of the limited options it gives you. They could easily have allowed you to have more choices in the aesthetic appearance of your stages. Instead, they decided to limit you to three soulless themes; there's little reason to play on the stages you create with the stage builder because they lack the charm or good looks the regular stages have in the game.

Then they limited you in the size you could make the individual pieces. There's also the limitation of how you can create certain angles with the pieces they give you. There's even parts that you can't even recreate that are in the regular stage selection. You can't create your own moving platforms, you're limited to vertical and horizontal; you aren't able to create your own path for them. There's even limitations on what you can do with individual pieces! You can't change the direction spikes are facing, for example.

The potential in the stage builder is squandered by how much they limit you. That's why it's bad. It doesn't live up to what it should have been. It loses its appeal very quickly as well as what you can create. Wanna create boxed stages? Cool, have fun. Wanna create unique stages that don't exist in the regular stage selection? Good luck with that with your limited tools; your stage will only be as fun as what the stage builder allows.

Do you need to go in detail? Yes.

Is it obvious , to you sure why not.

To the paragraphs.
I enjoyed it, I found it to be fun for what it was, and I know many who did untill the stopped playing brawl.

and it was better than the nothing we got in melee, because in melee we got jack shit. It could have better I wont pretend otherwise, however as an interesting project it was fine, and I am sure it will be improved on in the future. And its most certainly better than nothing.

Great counterargument.

In comparison to overlysubjective hooplah stated, it kind of is.

 

[Revven]

Do you need to go in detail? Yes.

Is it obvious , to you sure why not.

To the paragraphs.
I enjoyed it, I found it to be fun for what it was, and I know many who did untill the stopped playing brawl.

and it was better than the nothing we got in melee, because in melee we got jack shit.

I'm not even comparing the stage builder to Melee so... lol. I'm judging it for what it is and it is a pretty mediocre addition to the game.

I didn't even say it wasn't fun, I said it quickly loses its appeal. You mess with it for fun for awhile and then realize, "wait... this is all I can do..." and stop bothering with it and play on the regular stages offered.

I'd have rather Sakurai had whoever spent time on the stage builder spent that time on something else that wound up being lackluster.

 

[Village]

I'm not even comparing the stage builder to Melee so... lol. I'm judging it for what it is and it is a pretty mediocre addition to the game.

I didn't even say it wasn't fun, I said it quickly loses its appeal. You mess with it for fun for awhile and then realize, "wait... this is all I can do..." and stop bothering with it and play on the regular stages offered.

Yes because you are the standard to which all brawl players hold themselves to.

 

[Deleted member 13876]

In comparison to overlysubjective hooplah stated, it kind of is.

You seem to have a hard-on for calling stuff you don't agree on subjective and stuff you do objective. I hope the Word Usage Police arrests you for this.

 

[Oblivion]

Yes because you are the standard to which all brawl players hold themselves to.

Oh come on. Even in pro-Brawl threads, I rarely see anyone singing the praises of the stage builder.

 

[Village]

You seem to have a hard-on for calling stuff you don't agree on subjective and stuff you do objective. I hope the Word Usage Police arrests you for this.

I have a hard on for calling a things with more arguably good things, and arguably better more fleshed out versions of things better than some thing with less arguably good things in it, yes.

Oh come on. Even in pro-Brawl threads, I rarely see anyone singing the praises of the stage builder.

Yes because everyone who plays brawl posts in brawl forums.

I gotta tell my brother post in brawl forums, he didn't know thems were the rules.

 

[qizah]

Wow so much hate for Brawl. I'll admit it wasn't as tight as Melee but it was fucking fun for years and I still play it.

I don't care if a new team is making Smash 4. That means new ideas can be presented which is welcomed.

 

[Deleted member 13876]

I have a hard on for calling a things with more arguably good things, and arguably better more fleshed out versions of things better than some thing with less arguably good things in it, yes.

I'm seeing the word arguably a bunch of times, but I'm not seeing an actual argument. On the other hand Revven did clearly outline why he thought a lot of the extra content in Brawl was subpar or mediocre apparently you find "lol omg" an equivalently reasoned response.

 

[Revven]

Wow so much hate for Brawl.

It's the game that divided the competitive community for a few years for a reason...

And on GAF it's looking like the most divisive sequel, too.

Everyone loves Smash 64 though so let's all go and talk about how wonderful that game is.

 

[Gattsu25]

I always felt that Melee was the Smash formula, perfected.

 

[Spinluck]

Great counterargument.

Glad you like it.

I don't need to argue shit with anyone, I love the entire Smash series, and definitely prefer Brawl over Melee. I'm not gonna type half a page explaining why, because I've done so in most Brawl or Smash threads in the past that almost-always gets derailed into this shit.

It is pointless, and no one is going to change their mind. There are literally some fans who cannot accept that there are some people who prefer Brawl. No point in discussing anything about the series with people who cannot respect others preferences. To those fans on both sides, I say get over it. It is totally understandable why people like Melee better, but Melee is not as untouchable as it's made to be, and Brawl is no where near as bad as the Internet forums make it to be.

My days of the back and forth Melee and Brawl crap is over, now, I'm just awaiting Smash 4 cause I have yet to be let down by the series.

 

[Village]

I'm seeing the word arguably a bunch of times, but I'm not seeing an actual argument. On the other hand Revven did clearly outline why he thought a lot of the extra content in Brawl was subpar or mediocre apparently you find "lol omg" an equivalently reasoned response.

You have completely missed the point, but lets just drop this.

Lets talk about the new random sneezing mechanic in smash 4.

 

[mooooose]

I really liked Brawl. It also had great art direction.

 

[Oblivion]

Yes because everyone who plays brawl posts in brawl forums.

I gotta tell my brother post in brawl forums, he didn't know thems were the rules.

I...wha?

 

[qq more]

Yes because everyone who plays brawl posts in brawl forums.

I gotta tell my brother post in brawl forums, he didn't know thems were the rules.

For fuck sakes, knock it off. No one is saying any of that.

 

[Village]

I...wha?

To gauge a game like brawl or melee even solely on forum reaction is silly, because this game does significantly better than other fighting games. And a large portion of that audience isn't posting on all is brawl, ehehe.

Can we drop this.

For fuck sakes, knock it off. No one is saying any of that.

well that person just did, we can pretend they didn't if that makes you feel better i suppose.

 

[Spinluck]

Just let it go Villager, just let it go.

 

[qq more]

Can we drop this.

I can honestly say the same thing to you multiple times in these threads...

 

[Village]

Just let it go Villager, just let it go.

They keep responding.

*shrugs*

 

[Oblivion]

To gauge a game like brawl or melee even solely on forum reaction is silly, because this game does significantly better than other fighting games. And a large portion of that audience isn't posting on all is brawl, ehehe.

Can we drop this.

well that person just did, we can pretend they didn't if that makes you feel better i suppose.

Huh? No seriously, what the hell are you talking about? I was referring to the Brawl threads here on gaf. I have no idea why you brought up Brawl forums.

 

[Anth0ny]

Makes sense to me

 

[mnemovore]

I'm going to ignore half of your post because I've heard the argument "not playing the game the creators intended" a thousand times and I'm not going to sit here and argue with "uh if the creators intended you to play with items on why did they allow you to turn them off" like I have before.

With that out of the way, the simple fact you think these players didn't start playing the game the same way you did and only started playing them for competitive reasons is asinine. They started playing it the same way you did, loving the Nintendo characters and playing their favorite ones with items on and all your hazardous stages. However, the difference is, they found something deeper with the game and found a way to take their enjoyment further to play the game for even longer than anyone probably would. These are people who love the games for the same reasons you do, they just play it a different way.

Competitive players don't just play games to push an agenda: they play games they love and have a huge passion for. I'm sorry the competitive scene for Smash doesn't match your vision for what it should be, but that doesn't make what it is wrong or make these players "terrible" for playing the game in a way you don't like.

"It's not possible to play a game in a way the creators didn't intend."

"Playing on a handful of stages with no items makes a deeper game."

Really? These are the sentiments you want to express?

There's nothing wrong with people playing the game differently. The problem is that competitive Smash players have an express desire for a game that doesn't exist. They want a game that is both similar to and different from the Smash games we have and are going to get. If I made a game, and the game's most diehard fans reject the base game for a manufactured permutation, I might be upset. I can totally see why tripping would be put into a sequel.

Um, the item switch wasn't hacked it, it was intentionally put there to accommodate different styles of game play. If you turn items off, you are playing the way the creators wanted you to play, your own way. Sorry, but you come off as extremely narrow minded and worse than any of hardcore tournament players.

That's still not even half. Where's the ''vast majority'' that you mentioned?
The idea of luck=skill is what is naive. How can you account for a Bom-omb spawning just as you execute your attack? By not attacking? The vast majority of competitive matches are super entertaining; players blazing across the stage, playing mind games, edge guarding.... I don't want randomness ruining that.

Widespread rules that eliminate a major component of the game, if not part of it's foundation, is totally different from using the item switch to customize matches to desired gameplay experiences.

Have you ever even played a Smash game with items on? It's not difficult at all to avoid obstacles. If you think the best Smash players in the world can't account for Bob-ombs spawning, that's an insult to them.

 

[also]

"It's not possible to play a game in a way the creators didn't intend."

"Playing on a handful of stages with no items makes a deeper game."

Really? These are the sentiments you want to express?

There's nothing wrong with people playing the game differently. The problem is that competitive Smash players have an express desire for a game that doesn't exist. They want a game that is both similar to and different from the Smash games we have and are going to get. If I made a game, and the game's most diehard fans reject the base game for a manufactured permutation, I might be upset. I can totally see why tripping would be put into a sequel.



Widespread rules that eliminate a major component of the game, if not part of it's foundation, is totally different from using the item switch to customize matches to desired gameplay experiences.

Have you ever even played a Smash game with items on? It's not difficult at all to avoid obstacles. If you think the best Smash players in the world can't account for Bob-ombs spawning, that's an insult to them.

How can they be playing a game that doesn't exist?
You have no idea what you are talking about. Sakurai intentionally aimed Melee at hardcore players, though he later regretted it.
''However, he has one particularly deep regret: the game's accessibility level. "I had created Smash Bros. to be my response to how hardcore-exclusive the fighting game genre had become over the years," Sakurai said. "But why did I target it so squarely toward people well-versed in videogames, then? That's why I tried to aim for more of a happy medium with Brawl's play balance. There are three Smash Bros. games out now, but even if I ever had a chance at another one, I doubt we'll ever see one that's as geared toward hardcore gamers as Melee was. Melee fans who played deep into the game without any problems might have trouble understanding this, but Melee was just too difficult." ''
Sakurai could have left the item switch out and he could have made stage selection random, but he didn't. Melee was made with hardcore players in mind. Deal with it!

Again, the options are there to be used. You can't say someone is wrong for using them.
I really don't know why you think that the tournament scene should conform to your narrow views. If you don't like the way things are run, you always have the option to start your own tourney, no one is forcing you to be part of something you don't like.

Yes, I have played plenty of matches with items on and they give unfair advantages all the time. That's fine when you are playing just for fun but for tournaments I want to see skill not dumb luck. And I would say the majority agrees because you really don't see much randomness in competitive events of any kind.

 

[EatinOlives]

They keep responding.

*shrugs*

Is this a game of "I want to have the last word, then I know I won the argument"? Because you effectively stopped saying anything of substance the past half page.

 

[Village]

Is this a game of "I want to have the last word, then I know I won the argument"? Because you effectively stopped saying anything of substance the past half page.

Its a game of I am responding to your posts, because I do not mind and maybe I can shed some clarity while I defend my point.

Just because you cant comprehend a thing doesn't make it lack substance, you cant comprehend it.

 

[mnemovore]

How can they be playing a game that doesn't exist?
You have no idea what you are talking about. Sakurai intentionally aimed Melee at hardcore players, though he later regretted it.
''However, he has one particularly deep regret: the game's accessibility level. "I had created Smash Bros. to be my response to how hardcore-exclusive the fighting game genre had become over the years," Sakurai said. "But why did I target it so squarely toward people well-versed in videogames, then? That's why I tried to aim for more of a happy medium with Brawl's play balance. There are three Smash Bros. games out now, but even if I ever had a chance at another one, I doubt we'll ever see one that's as geared toward hardcore gamers as Melee was. Melee fans who played deep into the game without any problems might have trouble understanding this, but Melee was just too difficult." ''
Sakurai could have left the item switch out and he could have made stage selection random, but he didn't. Melee was made with hardcore players in mind. Deal with it!

Again, the options are there to be used. You can't say someone is wrong for using them.
I really don't know why you think that the tournament scene should conform to your narrow views. If you don't like the way things are run, you always have the option to start your own tourney, no one is forcing you to be part of something you don't like.

Yes, I have played plenty of matches with items on and they give unfair advantages all the time. That's fine when you are playing just for fun but for tournaments I want to see skill not dumb luck. And I would say the majority agrees because you really don't see much randomness in competitive events of any kind.

They're trying to play a game that doesn't exist. I hope someone makes the game they want.

You and Sakurai have a different definition of hardcore players then, because if your argument is true then items wouldn't have existed in Melee at all. There's a difference between using different options in a game and codifying a specific configuration of those options that excludes major parts of that game.

I don't know why the idea exists that random elements removes skill. I guess poker champions aren't skilled. I guess champions of any game that uses a die or requires shuffling cards aren't skilled. Why do you think so poorly of Smash Bros players? Oh no, someone got a fire flower, all my training went out the window!

 

[Jawmuncher]

Brawl was a better title than Melee in every regard. If you aren't good at melee. Which is the group is fall into.

 

[DICKS AHOY]

Brawl was a better title than Melee in every regard. If you aren't good at melee. Which is the group is fall into.

This more or less besides preferring the orchestral sound of Melee compared to Brawl's either direct rip of songs or midi-quality tracks, Stickerbush Symphony finally getting a remix post-DKC2 aside.

 

[EatinOlives]

Its a game of I am responding to your posts, because I do not mind and maybe I can shed some clarity while I defend my point.

Just because you cant comprehend a thing doesn't make it lack substance, you cant comprehend it.

What is there to "not comprehend"? You still didn't respond to the Stage Builder complaints with anything resembling logic. You simply handwaved the complaint.

 

[DICKS AHOY]

What is there to "not comprehend"? You still didn't respond to the Stage Builder complaints with anything resembling logic. You simply handwaved the complaint.

I wouldn't bother at this point. Village is either ESL or just not very good at articulating his point of view across over most subjective things.

 

[Unicorn]

They're trying to play a game that doesn't exist. I hope someone makes the game they want.

You and Sakurai have a different definition of hardcore players then, because if your argument is true then items wouldn't have existed in Melee at all. There's a difference between using different options in a game and codifying a specific configuration of those options that excludes major parts of that game.

I don't know why the idea exists that random elements removes skill. I guess poker champions aren't skilled. I guess champions of any game that uses a die or requires shuffling cards aren't skilled. Why do you think so poorly of Smash Bros players? Oh no, someone got a fire flower, all my training went out the window!

They are playing a game that exists. Otherwise... What would they be playing? Melee is exists and the fans love it.

Project M is an expansion of that game they love. And frankly, casual friends that have played it enjoy it more than they did in Brawl.

Seriously. If you guys liked Brawl at least give Project M a chance. You'll be surprised.

 

[EulaCapra]

This thread took a turn for the Melee.

 

[Valjean Lafitte]

Hm... no. The core team was GameArts, but they also outsourced parts of the game to various other companies, like SSE, which was described by Sakurai in an interview as a parallel development from the main game (and you can see it with the way it doesn't share assets with the multiplayer, aside from the Halberd which was one of the first things they had done for the game) and have mostly people from other companies listed in the credits.

Any idea who they outsourced SSE to? There were sections of it that I thought played a lot like Kirby Superstar, so I wondered if HAL had anything to do with that portion of the game.

today i learned that there was a super smash brothers for the n64

 

[Village]

What is there to "not comprehend"? You still didn't respond to the Stage Builder complaints with anything resembling logic. You simply handwaved the complaint.

I liked what he hated, I thought it was fine for what it was. And better than the nothing we got in melee. It wasn't a lot to add onto that conversation,.

Unless I did not write that then I am sorry.