Support NeoGAF

[SpacePirate Ridley]

Yes, but he needs a coodirector for the bigger and easier details he seems to forget in the process of over thinking other things.
He is also a man that usually changes its mind each gen, so Im waiting a glorious return of adventure mode in the next one. He thinks smash 4 is perfect know, but he is the type of creative man that will not think the same when some years pass.

I'm pretty sure he said he doubted he'd head it again. Unless he pulls a Kojima.

He says the same everytime, so he is going to pull a Kojima. He also says in that same interview he is the only one that sees directing his baby, so yeah...

 

[Shamrock7r]

I hope the next Smash has 20 second hit stun for all moves

 

[wsoxfan1214]

Not if they want it to be a successful competitive game

do people really think this is Nintendo's aim with Smash?

why does every fighting game need to be compeitively focused?

 

[Karsticles]

I hope the next Smash has 20 second hit stun for all moves

Especially for PK Fire.

do people really think this is Nintendo's aim with Smash?

why does every fighting game need to be compeitively focused?

The basis of a fighting game is competition. Competitively focused generally just means the gameplay is better.

 

[Rentahamster]

The basis of a fighting game is competition. Competitively focused generally just means the gameplay is better.

Seriously. That's one of the key features of a fighting game.

 

[chaosblade]

I'm disappointed this topic is still stuck on the whole competitive thing when honestly that is one of Sakurai's smaller failures with the series. But I guess it was the natural conclusion.

 

[efyu_lemonardo]

Sakurai deserves a long and peaceful vacation.

After that I would love to see him make an original game of his liking.

 

[Comfort Jones]

why does every fighting game need to be compeitively focused?

"Why does every fighting game need to actually have thought put in its design?"

And honestly I don't even like Smash 4 from a casual perspective. I really want a new director, someone directly from Nintendo.

 

[diaspora]

Sakurai deserves a long and peaceful vacation.

After that I would love to see him make an original game of his liking.

This. He made the GOAT Smash game, he doesn't need to work on the series anymore.

 

[Spinosaurus]

What's not competitive about Smash 4?

 

[SpacePirate Ridley]

Sakurai deserves a long and peaceful vacation.

After that I would love to see him make an original game of his liking.

He did that after brawl. Wouldn't surprise him doing the same thing this gen.

 

[BGBW]

I really want a new director, someone directly from Nintendo.

Yeah, Sakamoto.

 

[diaspora]

What's not competitive about Smash 4?

Nothing

 

[A Link to the Past]

Nothing

This isn't exactly true. What about My Music?

 

[Metal B]

2. Nintendo didn't make Metroid Prime, they hired people to make it. Miyamoto helping to guide the design of the game was useful, but that was less important than having designers who understand the genre. In fact, citing Metroid Prime justifies what everyone's been saying: hire people who know how to make games in the genre, don't do it yourself. You'll have a better game.

You seriously underestimate the influence of Nintendo on all of there projects. It is mention in countless interviews, that Miyamoto had a very heavy influence on the Metroid Prime development and the complete studio. Retro Studio was a complete mess until this point. They didn't had any game released yet, there prototypes went nowhere and there was no structure in the development team. Miyamoto pretty much cleaned up the place, guided the production and many developers of Retro respect him, because of his work on the project and what he made out of the studio. A similar thing happened to Rare in the 90s, especially with Goldeneye. Again a First-Person-Shooter.

This is what makes a directer and producer great. Not only seeing the talent in those people, but also support and guide them to there ultimate goal of one of the best games of the era.

The only reason i see, Nintendo hiring some PM developers, is more marketing reasons only by the way.

Yeah, I think people don't realize that PM has been massively successful at bringing new blood to the scene.

New Mexico Smash scene plays PM more than Melee and many people in the scene wouldn't be play Smash at all if it wasn't for PM.

This claims are basically meaningless. How can PM bring new blood in the scene? For someone to get into PM, he first need Brawl, has an understanding of the community and a big desire to play Smash competitive. PM always looked like an combining of the Melee and Brawl community, which doesn't really bring new blood in the scene.

It is actually SSB4, that will bring new players into the community. You know the heavily advertise and new game with an actually working Online-Mode and the support of a big company.

What's not competitive about Smash 4?

Nothing. Some people just want it to be more competitive aka complex.

There is also a giant misunderstanding of Casual Gamers, what already pledged the Wii era last gen. Many people believing that developing for a casual audience doesn't need planing, changing and sacrificing some game-elements. Either some think they are too stupid, just press any button or don't need to understand all elements of a game. That's bullshit, which either Ubisoft, EA or other developers were understanding at the time.
There is a reason, why Nintendo is the king of games for everybody.

But of course, since you know some friends, who are totally Casual Players and still enjoy Melee or PM, you don't need to think about Casual Gamers at all, if you developing a game.

This isn't exactly true. What about My Music?

Yeah, what about My Music?

Sakurai deserves a long and peaceful vacation.
After that I would love to see him make an original game of his liking.

I guess, he has the same deal like Christopher Nolan. Sakruai works on Smash and in return Nintendo finance any kind of project, he wants to work after that.

 

[A Link to the Past]

A major problem with Retro was because it had poor management. What it didn't lack was great developers. You can only do so much with subpar devs, so no matter what, Miyamoto's contributions were related to ironing out the problems. MP would not have been to the standard of quality that it was at in the end if it didn't have ex-devs of one of the greatest shooter games ever made. Similarly, Nintendo isn't just going to shit out a top-tier serious competitive fighting game without anyone who knows how to do that. They could, in theory, but this is severely overestimating their abilities. They don't have the track record of perfection that would suggest that they would not make a mistake with going in without expertise.

 

[BGBW]

Retro is Nintendo by the way. Metroid Prime is considered Nintendo output. To say Retro does what Nintendon't makes no sense.

Honestly, this is the first time I've seen the suggestion that Nintendo isn't a competent games developer.

Nintendo didn't have a track record with fitness software and yet they made Wii Fit to great success.

 

[Metal B]

A major problem with Retro was because it had poor management. What it didn't lack was great developers. You can only do so much with subpar devs, so no matter what, Miyamoto's contributions were related to ironing out the problems. MP would not have been to the standard of quality that it was at in the end if it didn't have ex-devs of one of the greatest shooter games ever made. Similarly, Nintendo isn't just going to shit out a top-tier serious competitive fighting game without anyone who knows how to do that. They could, in theory, but this is severely overestimating their abilities. They don't have the track record of perfection that would suggest that they would not make a mistake with going in without expertise.

Knowing how to develop a great game (or project in general) is the skill. Nintendo isn't a guy or one studio. The company is a sum of many development teams, management divisions, and countless other professions. So if you say, Nintendo couldn't develop a top-tier serious competitive fighting game, who do you mean by that?
You don't think, the management divisions, can't hire the right people and chose a personal of there already assemble developers to create a team, which could create such a game? So it is Iwata's fault, that he didn't get the right people in charge, who know how to plan for a project and therefore don't hire the right employees, who have the skill to develop a fighting game?

And still: what about My Music?

 

[A Link to the Past]

Retro is Nintendo by the way. Metroid Prime is considered Nintendo output. To say Retro does what Nintendon't makes no sense.

Honestly, this is the first time I've seen the suggestion that Nintendo isn't a competent games developer.

Nintendo didn't have a track record with fitness software and yet they made Wii Fit to great success.

The subject is "Nintendo should hire Project M designers"/"Nintendo doesn't need to hire Project M designers". So yes, it does apply, because Nintendo bought a company and made it a division of itself, which then made a Nintendo game. It absolutely applies, and I recommend that you read the conversation that's happening before you interject.

Also, you literally called "Nintendo can't just automatically shit out a quality game in a genre they have no experience with" the equivalent of "Nintendo is not a competent game developer." Most developers, the vast majority, nearly every developer known to man, lacks the ability to do what people are saying that Nintendo can do.

EDIT: Further, if we're using Wii Fit as proof that Nintendo doesn't need to have expertise in a genre, what about Wii Music? It was made by someone with experience in music and it was still a huge bust. The fact remains that a serious competitive fighting game made without expertise is a worse idea than a serious competitive fighting game made with. I'm beyond confused why people are arguing to thecontrary.

 

[BGBW]

what about Wii Music? It was made by someone with experience in music and it was still a huge bust.

Was it? Most people who have cited they have a music background have said the game is good. It's usually those who go in thinking it's a rhythm game (not the same thing) that are negative about Wii Music. Technically it was a music toy, which actually goes in hand with what Nintendo is more traditionally known for, a toy company.

 

[A Link to the Past]

Was it? Most people who have cited they have a music background have said the game is good. It's usually those who go in thinking it's a rhythm game (not the same thing) that are negative about Wii Music. Technically it was a music toy, which actually goes in hand with what Nintendo is more traditionally known for, a toy company.

Reaching a niche does not change the fact that it was a bust. Reviewers disliked it, consumers disliked it. The flaws of Wii Music also went beyond the fact that it did not adhere to expectations - it also had a terrible song selection. I mean, Urban Champion had an interesting combat system, but the game is considered one of Nintendo's worst nonetheless. Ice Climber is an interesting game in a lot of different ways, but it has super sloppy controls. Steel Diver has tons of potential, but it was only like three hours long.

 

[BGBW]

It sold over 2.65 million copies, not much of a bust or reaching a niche. Also I read and watched a lot of professional reviews and most went in thinking it was a rhythm game ergo their opinion isn't worth a damn. It would be like reviewing Mario Kart thinking it was meant to be a racing sim, close but no cigar.

And for every apparent misstep Nintendo has made you can bring up an example of where they were at the top of the game, Super Mario Bros, Ocarina of Time, Wii Sports, etc.

The funny thing about all this is that Smash 4/5 were developed by Namco, to be more specific, the Soul Calibur people. Nintendo did seek out help from a team with experience in the competitive fighting game market and yet people are not happy with the results. On the flip side Melee, the competitive darling, was made by team whose experience was Kirby.

 

[Yaphett Kotto]

The basis of a fighting game is competition. Competitively focused generally just means the gameplay is better.

This is the main thing about fighting games, or any competitive MP game for that matter, that people never get.

 

[A Link to the Past]

We're talking about a "serious competitive fighting game." Smash 4 was not designed to be that. Therefore, having Namco on board with Smash 4 is not relevant, and I don't know why you thought that it would be. It would be like calling Smash 4 a baseball game or a rhythm game simply because Namco also makes those games.

As for Wii Music, yes, selling 2 million is a bomb. Remember that the worst selling Wii Series game before its release was like, in the 10s of millions. Wii Music was a flop by a rather long shot, and it was released not long after Wii Fit, which is one of the best-selling Wii Series games. Your post also did not address the disastrous soundtrack for Wii Music. It's an interesting game, but interesting and fun are different things. Having a good sound track is not something you can only find in Guitar Hero or Ouendan, Wii Music could have had a great soundtrack. They even had access to some of the best music for gamers (their own music), yet they included next to none of their own songs, opting for cheap public domain stuff for the most part.

Also, again, you keep trying to veer the discussion away from the point. If Sakurai was going to make a serious competitive fighting game, not involving people who have an expertise in serious competitive fighting games is an objective mistake. No matter how good he could make it, the act increases the likelihood of it not being good. When Nintendo wants a sports game made, they ask Camelot, Namco, or Next Level Games, and for good reason. If OoT had someone involved in development who was more well-versed in the production of 3D games than anyone at Nintendo, it would have had a greater likelihood of being quality. That seems like common sense, and yet...

Nothing of what you've said invalidates the ultimate point that a serious competitive fighting game could benefit from people with expertise in that area - ie, Project M designers.

 

[MagiusNecros]

This isn't exactly true. What about My Music?

Some music is better then other music.

 

[BGBW]

Smash is designed that it can appeal to a wide range of audience including the competitive crowd, For Glory shows this. To make it purely a game for the competitive gaming community would basically stop it from being Smash any more. I mean look at the title Smash, it conjures up an image of a silly romp not a serious fight. Namco was clearly brought on board for their expertise in fighting games and Smash 4/5 was clearly designed to cater to the competitive crowd as well as the rest of the market. If the competitive crowd doesn't take to it, then that's just the way the cookie crumbles, it doesn't mean the game cannot be seen as a competent competitive scene game. I'd in fact question why the community (which I honestly can't see as being a complete hivemind despite how they seem to be represented) wouldn't even give the game a chance. It sounds like people are literally wanting Sakurai to change what Smash is. It was never designed to be solely a competitive scene fighter (I use the term scene, because anything multiplayer is going to be competitive by its nature. Smash Tour is competitive and yet hardly appropriate for the tournament scene) therefore Nintendo never needs to worry about making it like that. Also to say it's like calling Smash a baseball game is so beyond ridiculous.

If they wanted to make a game that was only aimed at the scene then they'd put together a team appropriate for the task. But then Sakurai returning or not doesn't matter, because it would be a new game series.

Also the purpose of Wii Music is to distort the music on offer to come up with your own pieces. The idea behind the selection is that it is a mix of pieces that are often used when training someone to play an instrument the first time and well known pieces. Basically it doesn't really matter what the soundtrack was because you are not meant to necessarily be playing along with the default note set. Nintendo actual problem with Wii Music was not communicating well what it was meant to be.

 

[Dryk]

Smash is designed that it can appeal to a wide range of audience including the competitive crowd, For Glory shows this.

It really, really doesn't

 

[Zalman]

This thread has turned into a pigsty.

 

[Metal B]

The basis of a fighting game is competition. Competitively focused generally just means the gameplay is better.

No, not really. There is a difference between designing a game with competition and a competitively focused game. Of course all competitively focused game are competitive games, but not all competitive games are designed to attract a audience, who is into competitive focus games. The difference is mostly in complexity, options and variables.

Simple example:
Stone, Paper, Scissors is a competitive game. Two player try to beat each other with choosing one of three option, which beats the option of the other player. If is a game about reading your opponent, tricking him and some luck. The game isn't much of competitively focused game, since there isn't much deep to it. The options are very simple, the mathematics behind the outcomes are basic and the skill-ceiling is really low.

If we want to make Stone, Paper, Scissors more competitively focused, we have to make changes. "Stone, Paper, Scissors, Spock, Lizard" is actually a more competitive change of the original rule set. Now we have a lot more options. Actually remembering the rules of the games becomes a skill, which can change the flow of the game and how you read your opponent.

But which of those two games is actually the more popular and casual one? Of course it is "Stone, Paper, Scissors". The question in the end is, which of the audiences do you want to reach. A casual player could still play "Stone, Paper, Scissors, Spock, Lizard" by simple randomly choose his option, but the lack of will of understanding the game, will discouraging him playing the game even more. So if you want to attract this audience, you either have to make your game simpler or change the other parts of it to help the player understand the game. BUT you have to change something, which is an important factor. There still will be ceiling, those types of players will never bother to chase.
The other way around a to basic game, will not attract the hardcore gamers. Mostly those people, who help keeping your competitive game alive in the long run.

So if your a company and want to appeal to a big audience, you would try to get the middle ground. Which i believe Sakurai tried to achieve with SSB4 and the developers of PM do not.

It really, really doesn't

Where is your prove of this matter? For Glory is designed for a competitive crowd. Just not the western competitive community. The Japanese community actually prefer the Final Destination form. The true answer (and problem for many) is, that the developers didn't took the western community in account.

 

[JoeInky]

For Glory 2v2 isn't even stock, I think it's a stretch to say it's a mode aimed at the competitive fanbase and not just a mode aimed at the "only ever picked FD in Brawl's online" fanbase.

 

[Regiruler]

No

His other projects give him much more creative power and I'd rather he work on those

 

[chaosblade]

No, not really. There is a difference between designing a game with competition and a competitively focused game. Of course all competitively focused game are competitive games, but not all competitive games are designed to attract a audience, who is into competitive focus games. The difference is mostly in complexity, options and variables.

Simple example:
Stone, Paper, Scissors is a competitive game. Two player try to beat each other with choosing one of three option, which beats the option of the other player. If is a game about reading your opponent, tricking him and some luck. The game isn't much of competitively focused game, since there isn't much deep to it. The options are very simple, the mathematics behind the outcomes are basic and the skill-ceiling is really low.

If we want to make Stone, Paper, Scissors more competitively focused, we have to make changes. "Stone, Paper, Scissors, Spock, Lizard" is actually a more competitive change of the original rule set. Now we have a lot more options. Actually remembering the rules of the games becomes a skill, which can change the flow of the game and how you read your opponent.

But which of those two games is actually the more popular and casual one? Of course it is "Stone, Paper, Scissors". The question in the end is, which of the audiences do you want to reach. A casual player could still play "Stone, Paper, Scissors, Spock, Lizard" by simple randomly choose his option, but the lack of will of understanding the game, will discouraging him playing the game even more. So if you want to attract this audience, you either have to make your game simpler or change the other parts of it to help the player understand the game. BUT you have to change something, which is an important factor. There still will be ceiling, those types of players will never bother to chase.
The other way around a to basic game, will not attract the hardcore gamers. Mostly those people, who help keeping your competitive game alive in the long run.

So if your a company and want to appeal to a big audience, you would try to get the middle ground. Which i believe Sakurai tried to achieve with SSB4 and the developers of PM do not.

This is the same sort of flawed analogy Sakurai used recently, basically saying higher skill ceiling = higher skill floor. That isn't true.

 

[Metal B]

Yeah, for Glory 2v2 sucks. I guess, the developers were afraid of too many people leaving the game, if someone losses there partner and the mode dying, because of this.

This is the same sort of flawed analogy Sakurai used recently, basically saying higher skill ceiling = higher skill floor. That isn't true.

I love people, who answer a long post with basically "No", and believe, somebody will actually take the time guessing there original thoughts on the matter.

 

[Puruzi]

Smash 4 is totally competitive, and very fun. If Sakurai only made games like Smash 4, but with more characters and content, I would still buy them.

 

[JoeInky]

Yeah, for Glory 2v2 sucks. I guess, the developers were afraid of too many people leaving the game, if someone losses there partner and the mode dying, because of this.

Yeah but I don't know why they couldn't have just left it like that in 2v2 For Fun if for glory is supposed to be a more serious mode.


The mode is dead to me because it isn't using stock, it's just a pointless mode.

 

[ec0ec0]

This is the same sort of flawed analogy Sakurai used recently, basically saying higher skill ceiling = higher skill floor. That isn't true.

it was definitely not true with 64 and melee.

 

[chaosblade]

Yeah, for Glory 2v2 sucks. I guess, the developers were afraid of too many people leaving the game, if someone losses there partner and the mode dying, because of this.


I love people, who answer a long post with basically "No", and believe, somebody will actually take the time guessing there original thoughts on the matter.

Primarily because this discussion has run it's course dozens of times over and there is literally nothing to add, because all people do is read into people's posts what they want to. I.e., no matter how many times people point out what sort of changes they would like to see in the series, people continually handwave everything with "we get it, it's not Melee."

This is just another example of basically acting like a puppet and repeating exactly what Sakurai said despite him being obviously wrong. A game like chess has reasonably simple rules, each piece can only move a certain way, and there are only a handful of types of pieces. It's far more simple than something like Smash, even. And yet it an immensely deep game despite that.

 

[Metal B]

Yeah but I don't know why they couldn't have just left it like that in 2v2 For Fun if for glory is supposed to be a more serious mode.

The mode is dead to me because it isn't using stock, it's just a pointless mode.

Technically you can argue, that Time isn't a bad concept for Team Battles. All players are always in game and stalling with a lead is less of a problem, since two player can easily catch up a opponent and gang up on one of the players. The real deal breaker is having Team Attack off, which can be absurdly abused, and a better way of ending a tie then with Sudden Death.

Primarily because this discussion has run it's course dozens of times over and there is literally nothing to add, because all people do is read into people's posts what they want to. I.e., no matter how many times people point out what sort of changes they would like to see in the series, people continually handwave everything with "we get it, it's not Melee."

This is just another example of basically acting like a puppet and repeating exactly what Sakurai said despite him being obviously wrong. A game like chess has reasonably simple rules, each piece can only move a certain way, and there are only a handful of types of pieces. It's far more simple than something like Smash, even. And yet it an immensely deep game despite that.

I still see nothing other, then you presenting your opinion as fact.
Somewhere people discussed hundred years and come to conclusion, that Green is actually Red! Believe me, it is true.And no, i can't direct you to any prove. Just trust me.

 

[evilromero]

I honestly don't think there even needs to be another Smash Bros. game. It's strange to think that with so many years between Brawl and 4, it still seems a bit stale.

 

[chaosblade]

I honestly don't think there even needs to be another Smash Bros. game. It's strange to think that with so many years between Brawl and 4, it still seems a bit stale.

This more than anything else is why I want to see someone other than Sakurai. He's out of ideas. Smash Run is a re-used concept from one of his old games. And the ideas that have been brought to the table are mostly half-baked. I'd rather have half the modes and stuff in the next Smash game, but have all of it be great and not just decent.

\I still see nothing other, then you presenting your opinion as fact.
Somewhere people discussed hundred years and come to conclusion, that Green is actually Red! Believe me, it is true.And no, i can't direct you to any prove. Just trust me.

So you're saying chess is not a deep game in order to prove your point? Yeah, see, this isn't going anywhere.

 

[Metal B]

Smash actually went trough more changes, then other series in less time. It not being stale, is actually a critic point for some people.

 

[ec0ec0]

Primarily because this discussion has run it's course dozens of times over and there is literally nothing to add, because all people do is read into people's posts what they want to. I.e., no matter how many times people point out what sort of changes they would like to see in the series, people continually handwave everything with "we get it, it's not Melee."

It actually surprises me that, after so many smash threads discussing this, we still have that particular problem.

 

[Metal B]

So you're saying chess is not a deep game in order to prove your point? Yeah, see, this isn't going anywhere.

 

[NotLiquid]

Not worth sacrificing attention to detail, the sheer amount of content, pure love and respect for every individual franchise represented that made Smash Bros relevant in the first place for the sake of some Twitch viewers, and I say this as someone who regularly plays Smash with competitive rulesets. Sakurai is the only one who's proven himself able to accomplish the ultimate crossover.

 

[JoeInky]

I honestly don't think there even needs to be another Smash Bros. game. It's strange to think that with so many years between Brawl and 4, it still seems a bit stale.

This is just because it's the least changed Smash game, 64, Melee and Brawl all offered something different that was actually substantial.


In Smash 4, the new ways to play the game are all throwaway modes or just badly implemented to the point where you can't be bothered using them.

 

[chaosblade]

You said: high skill ceiling = high skill floor.
I said no. Backed up that point by mentioning chess, which has simple rules but is immensely deep.
You said: Lol opinions.


Also, sorry for being a dick. I'm kind of irritated at some unrelated stuff and ended up taking out some frustration in some posts where I shouldn't have.

 

[Wendler]

Someone else will direct the next SSB and people will cry for Sakurai to come back. It is an inevitability.

 

[DoctorFling]

I don't know if anyone else could think of some of the awesome/batshit crazy characters that get included. I would give a limb to see what characters were in his original plan.

 

[JoeInky]

Someone else will direct the next SSB and people will cry for Sakurai to come back. It is an inevitability.

It's more of a damned is he does, damned if he doesn't kind of thing.


After Smash 4 I've realised that Sakurai will probably never make a game I really enjoy in either multiplayer or single player anymore, another director probably wouldn't either, but atleast there's the chance of it being a fresh take on the series.

 

[ec0ec0]

Not worth sacrificing attention to detail, the sheer amount of content, pure love and respect for every individual franchise represented that made Smash Bros relevant in the first place...

I though that what made smash 64 relevant was it's gameplay. Nintendo characters attracted the players, and they stayed because they had fun. No? It definitely wasn't " the sheer amount of content" (smash 64 didn't have that). And i'm going to guess that it was not because of the "love".