On November 23 2018 06:02 TheYango wrote: As far as competitive play goes, "skill ceiling" is just elitist pedantry. It has very little to do with a game's competitive success.
Pace of play and audience engagement have a lot more to do with the game's competitive livelihood, which is really what the problem with SSB4 and Brawl was: once the games got figured out, competitive matches were glacially slow and relatively uninteresting to watch for the uninitiated viewer compared to Melee and 64. "Skill ceiling" was largely irrelevant.
Ok, but don't you think that part of the reason that the games were so easily figured out to the point they got slow and boring is that the competitor's options to overcome that deadlock were so heavily limited by the "skill ceiling"? You don't think that part of the reason Melee is so much more engaging and entertaining is that the game provides more options to the players to overcome the boring skill-capped potential of Brawl and 4?
I think of SC2 and how quickly it flamed out as the pros all figured out their death-ball armies compared to Brood War, which is still alive and kicking, with it's higher "skill ceiling" allowing more creativity, and thus higher entertainment value.
I mean, I don't totally disregard your point either. You can compare DOTA2 and LoL and see that a higher skill ceiling doesn't always result in higher popularity. Although anecdotally, it seems that LoL is beginning its slow death while DOTA's popularity is remaining fairly consistent. But for a while there LoL seemed to be winning that battle, primarily due to brighter colours and better clarity of the action happening on screen (and much better production value and properly trained casters).
You are making a false correlation between lower skill ceiling and more defensive gameplay. Soccer has a higher skill ceiling than every single videogame in existence and you can still park the bus.
Casual fans don't give a shit about macro mechanics, unlimited unit selection and all that elitist pedantry. It's invisible to them. BW succeeded in Korea because the game is far more understandable to casuals than SC2. Without all the bunching, it's easier for casual observers to tell which player has the numbers and which player is losing more units. Simpler graphics, fewer special effects and lack of visual clutter all play a bigger part than skill ceiling.
On November 23 2018 06:58 Nemireck wrote: You don't think that part of the reason Melee is so much more engaging and entertaining is that the game provides more options to the players to overcome the boring skill-capped potential of Brawl and 4?
No, because almost all of those things are nearly invisible to the spectator. A spectator doesn't see the game from an intellectual standpoint in terms of what options a player has, a spectator only sees the game as it is on the screen.
Except that those options are visible to the spectator in the form of a more entertaining product. While the specifics may be invisible to the viewer, the on-screen product is better because of the additional options provided to those players.
That's a very huge leap in logic. In fact, I would argue the opposite. Additional options only make sense when they are easily understandable to a casual viewer. If it is not visible and understandable, it will only end up confusing viewers.
Consider the following thought experiment: suppose we released a version of Melee with all fast-fallers removed from the game. "Floaties-only Melee" would still have all the same technical underpinnings as regular Melee. However, matches would by and large be slower, and most casual viewers find floaty matchups to be less exciting and engaging.
You're making a leap in logic between skill ceiling and spectator engagement with no actual logical foundation.
On November 24 2018 06:24 TheYango wrote: Consider the following thought experiment: suppose we released a version of Melee with all fast-fallers removed from the game. "Floaties-only Melee" would still have all the same technical underpinnings as regular Melee. However, matches would by and large be slower, and most casual viewers find floaty matchups to be less exciting and engaging.
You're making a leap in logic between skill ceiling and spectator engagement with no actual logical foundation.
One problem that some people put out against Project M is that the game has a higher percent of viable floaty characters, which tends to make matches slower at times. I don't doubt that one of melee's selling points is its high speed and great combos, especially from fast-fallers.
Smash got datamines. All the tracks are being uploaded to youtube. There are some really good tracks BIG BLUE remix Zinnia Remix Sigurd BBQ Remix to name a few
Does anyone have Nintendo Switch Online? I have two questions about the subscription...
1. Individual membership is $20 for a full year. My wife and I both have profiles on our Switch currently, so would we each need to have our own individual membership? The information says it's for "1 Nintendo Account Holder".
2. We might do the family pack with some friends because it can save us all money ($35/year for up to 8 accounts). Are we allowed to have multiple people online playing the Switch at the same time, under the same plan? In other words, will I still be able to get online whenever I want, regardless of whether or not other account holders are already online?
1. Does anyone know whether or not there will be a competitive online ladder system and ranking?
2. Does anyone know how opponents will be paired up against one another online (i.e., if a very good player randomly plays against a very bad player, it might not be very enjoyable for either of them)?
On December 03 2018 00:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Also, for Super Smash Bros. Ultimate:
1. Does anyone know whether or not there will be a competitive online ladder system and ranking?
2. Does anyone know how opponents will be paired up against one another online (i.e., if a very good player randomly plays against a very bad player, it might not be very enjoyable for either of them)?
1. Nope there will only be GSP (Global smash points/score), the number will be indicating how many people are worse than you. So if you have a GSP of 100.000 there are 99.999 people ranked worse than you. If you are good (don´t know what´s the cutoff there) you will be able to play Elite Smash and be paired with other people that have that kind of "rank". --> One thing unclear here (atleast for me) is how different settings in the search queue affect this, how I understood it you can play FFA with Items on and earn the same GSP as for 1v1 no items. GSP differs by charakter though, that has been shown.
2. So I guess pairing will be based on GSP and then in Elite you will have your own bracket.
Take this all with a grain of salt though I´m just writing down what I could get from the October direct, don´t know if something has been datamined for online stuff or if Nintendo said something else. For me atleast if it´s still the same it seems unintuitive and hard to guess your standings upon these parameters, also as I said I wonder how the will incorporate the countless different choices you can make for queing into this system.
On November 24 2018 05:12 andrewlt wrote: Casual fans don't give a shit about macro mechanics, unlimited unit selection and all that elitist pedantry. It's invisible to them. BW succeeded in Korea because the game is far more understandable to casuals than SC2. Without all the bunching, it's easier for casual observers to tell which player has the numbers and which player is losing more units. Simpler graphics, fewer special effects and lack of visual clutter all play a bigger part than skill ceiling.
this is a really good point.
this is what Overwatch esports is suffering from. 30 hero units with 60 special abilities and 1,000 possible spell interactions.. flashing colours and random blobs flying in every direction. People I know who've quit Overwatch for 6 months don't even know what is going on half the time in OWL games.
On December 03 2018 00:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Also, for Super Smash Bros. Ultimate:
1. Does anyone know whether or not there will be a competitive online ladder system and ranking?
2. Does anyone know how opponents will be paired up against one another online (i.e., if a very good player randomly plays against a very bad player, it might not be very enjoyable for either of them)?
1. Nope there will only be GSP (Global smash points/score), the number will be indicating how many people are worse than you. So if you have a GSP of 100.000 there are 99.999 people ranked worse than you. If you are good (don´t know what´s the cutoff there) you will be able to play Elite Smash and be paired with other people that have that kind of "rank". --> One thing unclear here (atleast for me) is how different settings in the search queue affect this, how I understood it you can play FFA with Items on and earn the same GSP as for 1v1 no items. GSP differs by charakter though, that has been shown.
2. So I guess pairing will be based on GSP and then in Elite you will have your own bracket.
Take this all with a grain of salt though I´m just writing down what I could get from the October direct, don´t know if something has been datamined for online stuff or if Nintendo said something else. For me atleast if it´s still the same it seems unintuitive and hard to guess your standings upon these parameters, also as I said I wonder how the will incorporate the countless different choices you can make for queing into this system.
Okay thanks! So we would have a different GSP number for every character? My Ness GSP would be different than my Marth or Sheik or Mario GSP? So it's less about how good DarkPlasmaBall is overall, and more about how DarkPlasmaBall's Ness compares to everyone else's Ness?
On December 03 2018 05:22 sharkie wrote: I dont think different GSP for every single character is viable. The rankings would explode like crazy
I assume the point of individual character rankings (rather than a single overall account ranking) would be so you could play your secondary/ infrequent/ just-for-fun characters without: 1. Getting your ass kicked because you're forced to play at your main character's MMR; 2. Not needing to worry about your primary character's ranking dropping just because you want to off-race. (I know half of this is StarCraft speak, but I'm too lazy to convert it to Smash right now).
There are some supposed shortcuts to unlocking characters more quickly, so says the interwebs and some Smash Facebook groups. I'm going to do it the standard way though, I think.
EPT
