| Forum Index > General Games |
|
Zapdos_Smithh
Canada2620 Posts
For more details : http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=213744 The game is growing more popular and looks really fun imo. Hopefully this will bring melee and brawl players together and smash bros. will have a strong competitive scene again. The only issue is actually getting the game, which involves modifying the Wii, though it does not seem too difficult. There are already many Brawl+ tournaments as well. Here are some gameplay examples: A cool combo video: | ||
|
GhostKorean
United States2330 Posts
And I thought they made it exactly like Melee with the brawl characters | ||
|
dnastyx
United States2707 Posts
| ||
|
iSCOUT4me
Bhutan4 Posts
| ||
|
jodogohoo
Canada2533 Posts
64 was way faster than melee | ||
|
Grobyc
Canada18410 Posts
On May 08 2009 14:35 jodogohoo wrote: wtf? 64 was way faster than melee No it wasn't. It was like almost twice as slow. When was the last time you played it? The hang time of units jumping in the air was also really long. | ||
Plexa
Aotearoa39261 Posts
Starcraft II +!! | ||
Arrian
United States889 Posts
| ||
|
Hot_Bid
Braavos36374 Posts
On May 08 2009 14:35 jodogohoo wrote: wtf? 64 was way faster than melee lol what | ||
|
naventus
United States1337 Posts
| ||
|
dnastyx
United States2707 Posts
On May 08 2009 15:04 naventus wrote: Does it solve the multiplayer problem? There's basically no way to play brawl at all online. That's a problem inherent in the way Nintendo servers relay information. "HEY, GUYS, I HAVE A GREAT IDEA. EVEN IF YOU HAVE THE BEST CONNECTION POSSIBLE, WE SHOULD IMPLEMENT 10 MS OF LAG FOR NO REASON." "Sounds great." | ||
|
zizou21
United States3683 Posts
trying to play brawl online was like going back in time 10 years and struggling to get games to work over modem | ||
|
Zapdos_Smithh
Canada2620 Posts
On May 08 2009 15:04 naventus wrote: Does it solve the multiplayer problem? There's basically no way to play brawl at all online. Apparently it does work online, though I am not sure how well. I have heard that people say they got great connections but have also heard others say that they can't play @ all. | ||
|
SaveYourSavior
United States1071 Posts
Some smaller tournaments here and there may use Brawl+ but I am fairly sure that the big, nation-bringing tournaments (like Genesis) will never use this. I highly doubt it will bring many Melee players to Brawl+ because in the mind of many there is nothing wrong with Melee. Despite being an 8 year old game, Melee is still developing its metagame and there is still great fun to be had with the competitive nature of the game. It's interesting though because although Melee somewhat stagnated and died after Brawl came out, it is coming back a lot. Even if it doesn't really reach the "Golden Age" of Smash like in 2006-7, it definitely doesn't need something like Brawl+ to make Smash competitive again, it already is. Tournaments are still great to go to and watching the best players fight it out (except for Mango oddly, maybe because there seems to be no match for him) is still great fun to watch There is also a small 64 scene rising, at least where I live  | ||
|
zizou21
United States3683 Posts
speaking of which, y dont they release that shit on the wii as DLC? i would straight up buy a wii | ||
|
Zapdos_Smithh
Canada2620 Posts
On May 08 2009 15:12 SaveYourSavior wrote: Brawl+ looks interesting but I am fairly sure it will never be the competitive standard. Too many people already will never quit Brawl (original) maybe because they are too used to the original Brawl, love Metaknight, or like to have boring campfests. Also, some people just don't like vastly altering the game with hacks ( I'm not sure if you can revert it or play both versions), even if it makes the gameplay "better." Some smaller tournaments here and there may use Brawl+ but I am fairly sure that the big, nation-bringing tournaments (like Genesis) will never use this. I highly doubt it will bring many Melee players to Brawl+ because in the mind of many there is nothing wrong with Melee. Despite being an 8 year old game, Melee is still developing its metagame and there is still great fun to be had with the competitive nature of the game. It's interesting though because although Melee somewhat stagnated and died after Brawl came out, it is coming back a lot. Even if it doesn't really reach the "Golden Age" of Smash like in 2006-7, it definitely doesn't need something like Brawl+ to make Smash competitive again, it already is. Tournaments are still great to go to and watching the best players fight it out (except for Mango oddly, maybe because there seems to be no match for him) is still great fun to watch There is also a small 64 scene rising, at least where I live I think brawl+ will get very competitive, it already has gotten fairly competitive in some places as it is. Yeah it uses hacks, I see no reason why that should matter if it makes the game better. I mean dota got pretty competitive and it is just a ums. | ||
|
Perguvious
United States1783 Posts
On May 08 2009 14:50 Plexa wrote: I can see it now... Starcraft II +!! Starcraft+ + cracklings | ||
|
deathgod6
United States5064 Posts
| ||
|
Jayme
United States5866 Posts
On May 08 2009 15:12 SaveYourSavior wrote: Brawl+ looks interesting but I am fairly sure it will never be the competitive standard. Too many people already will never quit Brawl (original) maybe because they are too used to the original Brawl, love Metaknight, or like to have boring campfests. Also, some people just don't like vastly altering the game with hacks ( I'm not sure if you can revert it or play both versions), even if it makes the gameplay "better." There is no "better" about it, brawl+ is much more viable for tournament play then original brawl is. | ||
|
HonestTea
5007 Posts
I mean it's nice that a competitive scene came up... and it's interesting that you deemed it fit to modify the game to suit your standards... but come on. | ||
|
SaveYourSavior
United States1071 Posts
On May 08 2009 15:36 Jayme wrote: There is no "better" about it, brawl+ is much more viable for tournament play then original brawl is. I don't give a crap about brawl i'm quoting what other people say. There are people who swear by no l-cancelling, no hitstun, etc. I am not kidding. | ||
|
520
United States2822 Posts
On May 08 2009 15:57 HonestTea wrote: Ahahahah when will smash fans realize that SSB was never designed to be a competitive game. I mean it's nice that a competitive scene came up... and it's interesting that you deemed it fit to modify the game to suit your standards... but come on. The competitive players, I'm sure, don't care what the design intention of SSB is. It has the things that make it a good competitive game, so people will continue playing it as such. As long as there's money in it, who cares? | ||
|
anTi_
United States499 Posts
| ||
|
Pyrrhuloxia
United States6700 Posts
| ||
|
EchOne
United States2906 Posts
On May 08 2009 15:57 HonestTea wrote: Ahahahah when will smash fans realize that SSB was never designed to be a competitive game. I mean it's nice that a competitive scene came up... and it's interesting that you deemed it fit to modify the game to suit your standards... but come on. "eSports phenomenon" probably wasn't in the mission statement for SC:BW's designers, but I think we're all grateful it became what it is. On Brawl+, I think the niche it fills won't see much expansion, since it's really a segment they're trying to create out of two antipodes. There are hardcore gamers, and then there are scrubs. These segments' demands are differentiated enough that products that tailor specifically to their demands will always appeal more to them than those that try to grab both. It's like trying to market a vehicle to both blue-collar workers and movie stars. There are already vehicles that serve each segment much, much better, and there is no reason a product meeting a mix of their demands will be wanted any more. I might play Brawl+ if given the opportunity, but much persuasion will be needed before I decide it's more worthy of my time than Melee. | ||
|
rkarhu
Finland570 Posts
On May 08 2009 15:57 HonestTea wrote: Ahahahah when will smash fans realize that SSB was never designed to be a competitive game. I mean it's nice that a competitive scene came up... and it's interesting that you deemed it fit to modify the game to suit your standards... but come on. Sorry sir, but you fail. | ||
|
Trumpet
United States1935 Posts
On May 08 2009 16:04 p3numbra wrote: The competitive players, I'm sure, don't care what the design intention of SSB is. It has the things that make it a good competitive game, so people will continue playing it as such. As long as there's money in it, who cares? If that were true, you'd be playing the game nintendo made, not brawl +  You also wouldn't be banning over half the stages and all the items, but that's a whole different story.Actually, the biggest Mortal Kombat site recently shut down because they felt so insulted by the game developers that they simply gave up on it. On a slightly different note, why is the ssb community trying so hard to play one game only? Every major fighting game tournament runs several games, and I definitely don't like the idea of throwing away both melee and brawl for a hacked version of the game. (I did my best to hide my overwhelming bias against smash/smashboards. If it came out, I apologize in advance D: ) | ||
|
Meta
United States6225 Posts
For those that don't understand how groundbreaking this is, basically imagine SC2 was released features such as units randomly dying, your actions take 10 frames to respond (extra extra high latency as a standard feature), and every great micro and macro combo completely impossible to pull off due to that latency mechanic. Then imagine someone figures out how to win 100% of the time with zerg, due to some other mechanic. Then imagine Blizzard saying they were done with the starcraft universe and never patched the game for future balance reasons or anything else. That's basically the point SSBM fans are at right now, in this stage of brawl. If independents within the community modified this imaginary SC2 to take out all the bad and keep in all the good, wouldn't you be excited for it? Of course, I haven't played this new version of SSBB yet, so I should withhold my opinions, but from how the videos look it seems like exactly what I was looking for, but didn't get, when brawl came out. | ||
|
Crimson)S(hadow
Philippines526 Posts
| ||
|
Zurles
United Kingdom1659 Posts
On May 08 2009 14:33 dnastyx wrote: I am thoroughly convinced that the Brawl+ developers have no idea how to balance a game. and nintendo do? | ||
|
Zapdos_Smithh
Canada2620 Posts
On May 08 2009 20:31 Meta wrote: This is sooo awesome... This is really everything I ever could have wanted from brawl. I'm going out tomorrow and finding out how to mod my friend's wii to get this. It would have been tragic for such an amazing game as SSB to die with shitty vanilla brawl. For those that don't understand how groundbreaking this is, basically imagine SC2 was released features such as units randomly dying, your actions take 10 frames to respond (extra extra high latency as a standard feature), and every great micro and macro combo completely impossible to pull off due to that latency mechanic. Then imagine someone figures out how to win 100% of the time with zerg, due to some other mechanic. Then imagine Blizzard saying they were done with the starcraft universe and never patched the game for future balance reasons or anything else. That's basically the point SSBM fans are at right now, in this stage of brawl. If independents within the community modified this imaginary SC2 to take out all the bad and keep in all the good, wouldn't you be excited for it? Of course, I haven't played this new version of SSBB yet, so I should withhold my opinions, but from how the videos look it seems like exactly what I was looking for, but didn't get, when brawl came out. Yeah I agree 100%. For those who were excited about Brawl this is pretty amazing because we all felt a bit ripped off with the game, and now it is becoming competitive again. | ||
|
Piy
Scotland3152 Posts
Oh and this looks cool | ||
|
PanN
United States2828 Posts
On May 09 2009 05:59 Piy wrote: LOL - wtf is up with these comments. SSB is one of the highest level competetive games out there...WTF lol, I can't get over how stupid these comments are. Oh and this looks cool There's flash games harder than SSB. Quake, cs1.6, sc, are high level competitive games. | ||
Kinky
United States4126 Posts
On May 09 2009 06:17 PanN wrote: There's flash games harder than SSB. Quake, cs1.6, sc, are high level competitive games. You obviously don't know enough about competitive SSB if you can say something that stupid. | ||
Chill
Calgary25977 Posts
On May 09 2009 06:20 Kinky wrote: You obviously don't know enough about competitive SSB if you can say something that stupid. Why? It seems accurate to me. Many fighters are higher level than any Smash game, and that's only one genre. That's not knocking the game, since I love StarCraft, and there's games played at a higher level than it. | ||
|
Wohmfg
United Kingdom1292 Posts
On May 09 2009 06:36 Chill wrote: Why? It seems accurate to me. Many fighters are higher level than any Smash game, and that's only one genre. That's not knocking the game, since I love StarCraft, and there's games played at a higher level than it. What games are played at a higher level than Starcraft and how can you define what level they are on? I'm not disagreeing I'm just curious. | ||
|
Shade692003
Canada702 Posts
On May 09 2009 06:20 Kinky wrote: You obviously don't know enough about competitive SSB if you can say something that stupid. You obviously don't know anything about proper fighting games if you think SSB is competitive. | ||
|
L
Canada4732 Posts
| ||
|
Meta
United States6225 Posts
On May 09 2009 06:53 L wrote: To be fair, SSB is fairly competitive and a very skill intensive game, but there ARE higher standards in the genre. That said, I wouldn't take the position that smash is the godsend of fighting games, or that its completely terrible. Its just another flavor in the fighting game genre, and obviously not the tastiest one. Except for some people who don't like most fighting games, like me, it is the tastiest in the genre. I love the whole knock-out rather than hp style of winning. I also love edge-guarding, something that no other fighter has. | ||
|
H
New Zealand6138 Posts
| ||
|
Piy
Scotland3152 Posts
SSBM requires extremely high dexterity and has a diverse and complex combo system with the added benefit of the edge. SF also has a very complex game system. The community for Smash is pretty big, the SF one is pretty big. Any reasonably complex game with a big community could be said to be played at a very high level, due to the quantity of innovations and deviations on the metagame that will occur. CS 1.6, quake, CS:source (don't shoot me), War3, SC - all played at an insanely high level, with tricks in each that are incomprehensible to those who don't understand the game engine thoroughly. That said I think it would be difficult to argue that SC doesnt have the most complex and evolved meta game though. Anyways, kind of an off topic conversation, and Brawl+ will no doubt have a big impact on the Smash scene | ||
|
JeeJee
Canada5652 Posts
On May 08 2009 20:31 Meta wrote: This is sooo awesome... This is really everything I ever could have wanted from brawl. I'm going out tomorrow and finding out how to mod my friend's wii to get this. It would have been tragic for such an amazing game as SSB to die with shitty vanilla brawl. For those that don't understand how groundbreaking this is, basically imagine SC2 was released features such as units randomly dying, your actions take 10 frames to respond (extra extra high latency as a standard feature), and every great micro and macro combo completely impossible to pull off due to that latency mechanic. Then imagine someone figures out how to win 100% of the time with zerg, due to some other mechanic. Then imagine Blizzard saying they were done with the starcraft universe and never patched the game for future balance reasons or anything else. That's basically the point SSBM fans are at right now, in this stage of brawl. If independents within the community modified this imaginary SC2 to take out all the bad and keep in all the good, wouldn't you be excited for it? Of course, I haven't played this new version of SSBB yet, so I should withhold my opinions, but from how the videos look it seems like exactly what I was looking for, but didn't get, when brawl came out. bullshit. way to exaggerate brawl problems. nobody wins 100% with metaknight, what? yeah, he's the most popular, and yeah i think like 6 of the top 10 finishers of a nearby weekly were MKs, but he's not unbeatable (think o. sagat). just way more developed than other characters due to being retardedly overplayed (personally i hate his sword sounds, i can't play him. ^_^ gaw/diddy ftw) brawl+ hinges on the assumption that brawl is bad. a lot of people (myself included) don't think it's that bad of a game at all (except random tripping. fuck that shit) | ||
|
PanN
United States2828 Posts
On May 09 2009 07:52 Piy wrote: lol, how do you even define a game as being played at a high level anyways? SSBM requires extremely high dexterity and has a diverse and complex combo system with the added benefit of the edge. SF also has a very complex game system. The community for Smash is pretty big, the SF one is pretty big. Any reasonably complex game with a big community could be said to be played at a very high level, due to the quantity of innovations and deviations on the metagame that will occur. CS 1.6, quake, CS:source (don't shoot me), War3, SC - all played at an insanely high level, with tricks in each that are incomprehensible to those who don't understand the game engine thoroughly. That said I think it would be difficult to argue that SC doesnt have the most complex and evolved meta game though. Anyways, kind of an off topic conversation, and Brawl+ will no doubt have a big impact on the Smash scene I apologize I meant SSBB. SSBM definitely requires skill, I respect it for that, its just not my game brah. But SSBB, no. (And I'll pretend you didn't say anything about source taking skill) | ||
|
Gliche
United States811 Posts
Game looks promising in the videos but my eyes have become so accustomed to melee that the speed seemed lacking. Also, does this mean the Brawl+ community can release "unofficial updates/patches" to balance the game? That would be very cool. | ||
|
Meta
United States6225 Posts
On May 09 2009 07:56 JeeJee wrote: bullshit. way to exaggerate brawl problems. nobody wins 100% with metaknight, what? yeah, he's the most popular, and yeah i think like 6 of the top 10 finishers of a nearby weekly were MKs, but he's not unbeatable (think o. sagat). just way more developed than other characters due to being retardedly overplayed (personally i hate his sword sounds, i can't play him. ^_^ gaw/diddy ftw) brawl+ hinges on the assumption that brawl is bad. a lot of people (myself included) don't think it's that bad of a game at all (except random tripping. fuck that shit) That's fine that you're an SSBB fan, I'm not at all, but I am a huuuugge SSBM fan, and I think that's the population that this mod is targetting. And furthermore coming from playing SSBM for the past six years I do think brawl is bad. It's just not as fast-paced or fun in my opinion. This mod seems like it will make it fast paced and fun, to me. | ||
|
Kyuukyuu
Canada6263 Posts
On May 09 2009 08:41 Meta wrote: That's fine that you're an SSBB fan, I'm not at all, but I am a huuuugge SSBM fan, and I think that's the population that this mod is targetting. And furthermore coming from playing SSBM for the past six years I do think brawl is bad. It's just not as fast-paced or fun in my opinion. This mod seems like it will make it fast paced and fun, to me. This is the only page of the thread I've read (and am going to read, because they always turn into brawl vs melee shitfests), but I just want to say that I agree 100% with this guy. And now to address random points I saw while skimming: Brawl+ doesn't hinge on the assumption that Brawl is bad. Brawl+ hinges on the OPINION that Brawl is bad, made by Melee players who believe Melee is a superior game. Also, MK is not really good because he is overplayed, he is just that imba. If he was just overplayed then people wouldn't discuss banning him | ||
|
ThatGuy
Canada695 Posts
I have been on the tournament scene for a long time playing SSBM and I like playing Brawl more. I use Mario/Wolf and get by pretty fine (recently I've been placing in the money in teams ), I feel that the MK issue really isn't that bad.I'm pretty much with JeeJee on this one. | ||
|
._.
1133 Posts
On May 08 2009 15:57 HonestTea wrote: Ahahahah when will smash fans realize that SSB was never designed to be a competitive game. I mean it's nice that a competitive scene came up... and it's interesting that you deemed it fit to modify the game to suit your standards... but come on. first cs was a user mod from hl engine... | ||
|
qaswedfr25
United States212 Posts
I'll try it, but I will still be SSBM fan at heart. | ||
|
anotak
United States1537 Posts
| ||
|
CynanMachae
Canada1459 Posts
I didn't have much gripes against Brawl that much really, I played SSBB and SSBM both, but Brawl+ just seemed right to me. | ||
|
traced
1739 Posts
On May 08 2009 15:57 HonestTea wrote: Ahahahah when will smash fans realize that SSB was never designed to be a competitive game. I mean it's nice that a competitive scene came up... and it's interesting that you deemed it fit to modify the game to suit your standards... but come on. it's never whether or not they design something to be competitive, it's whether or not they design something with depth melee has an amazing amount of depth by design. brawl doesn't, by conscious design. most people don't remember but melee had the same developer blog as brawl, by sakurai. in the melee one he went into multiple posts about l-cancelling, direct influence, smash di, teching, and probably other stuff i can't remember. in the brawl one, he said he wanted to design a smash game for everyone.  | ||
|
ThatGuy
Canada695 Posts
| ||
|
traced
1739 Posts
it just looks like longer hitstun as for games being higher level than melee... of course. however, it's still one of the more technically demanding fighters, both in natural talent and training. and although the move list is anemic, most people don't realize that it's really a platformer/fighter hybrid - there is a wealth of depth in the relationship between your position relative to the environment and your opponent. the metagame never really developed like a lot of other fighters, but there are a lot of reasons for that. smash's situations are esoteric and fluid, encouraging freestyle and quick-thinking, whereas in a lot of fighters there are exact and appropriate responses to different situations. the player base, while huge, is also very very young and disorganized. i'm not really sure many other games are much deeper, again by design, but obviously many games have been taken to a higher level by the community. | ||
|
traced
1739 Posts
On May 11 2009 02:20 ThatGuy wrote: Can you source that? I've never heard of such a thing. the blog was japanese only, but at the time i remember finding a website that translated the pages as they were put up, which no longer exists. here's the original, which has been changed around i think: http://www.nintendo.co.jp/n01/n64/software/nus_p_nalj/smash/flash/home.html here's the di one: http://www.nintendo.co.jp/n01/n64/software/nus_p_nalj/smash/flash/0817/index.html | ||
|
Zoler
Sweden6339 Posts
On May 08 2009 15:07 dnastyx wrote: That's a problem inherent in the way Nintendo servers relay information. "HEY, GUYS, I HAVE A GREAT IDEA. EVEN IF YOU HAVE THE BEST CONNECTION POSSIBLE, WE SHOULD IMPLEMENT 10 MS OF LAG FOR NO REASON." "Sounds great." sounds like bnet | ||
|
ThatGuy
Canada695 Posts
| ||
|
MuffinDude
United States3837 Posts
| ||
|
thunk
United States6233 Posts
On May 08 2009 14:50 Plexa wrote: I can see it now... Starcraft II +!! If SCII sucks, someone probably will try to fix it. Here's to hoping it doesn't suck. | ||
|
Zoler
Sweden6339 Posts
On May 11 2009 13:25 thunk wrote: If SCII sucks, someone probably will try to fix it. Here's to hoping it doesn't suck. It doesn't suck!! | ||
|
ilistis
United States828 Posts
On May 08 2009 15:12 SaveYourSavior wrote: Brawl+ looks interesting but I am fairly sure it will never be the competitive standard. Too many people already will never quit Brawl (original) maybe because they are too used to the original Brawl, love Metaknight, or like to have boring campfests. Also, some people just don't like vastly altering the game with hacks ( I'm not sure if you can revert it or play both versions), even if it makes the gameplay "better." Some smaller tournaments here and there may use Brawl+ but I am fairly sure that the big, nation-bringing tournaments (like Genesis) will never use this. I highly doubt it will bring many Melee players to Brawl+ because in the mind of many there is nothing wrong with Melee. Despite being an 8 year old game, Melee is still developing its metagame and there is still great fun to be had with the competitive nature of the game. It's interesting though because although Melee somewhat stagnated and died after Brawl came out, it is coming back a lot. Even if it doesn't really reach the "Golden Age" of Smash like in 2006-7, it definitely doesn't need something like Brawl+ to make Smash competitive again, it already is. Tournaments are still great to go to and watching the best players fight it out (except for Mango oddly, maybe because there seems to be no match for him) is still great fun to watch There is also a small 64 scene rising, at least where I live I guess you haven't played against metaknight. | ||
|
ilistis
United States828 Posts
On May 09 2009 07:56 JeeJee wrote: bullshit. way to exaggerate brawl problems. nobody wins 100% with metaknight, what? yeah, he's the most popular, and yeah i think like 6 of the top 10 finishers of a nearby weekly were MKs, but he's not unbeatable (think o. sagat). just way more developed than other characters due to being retardedly overplayed (personally i hate his sword sounds, i can't play him. ^_^ gaw/diddy ftw) brawl+ hinges on the assumption that brawl is bad. a lot of people (myself included) don't think it's that bad of a game at all (except random tripping. fuck that shit) Metaknight is not overplayed, he's overpowered. His priority is insane and people pick him because it gives them the best chance to win. That would be cool in sc, you know, pick terran, and then win because they build faster, have stronger units, etc. edit: Also, just because your friends and yourself don't think it's bad, doesn't mean it's bad for the COMPETITIVE scene. The game is a blast to play with a bunch of friends but not for those who go to tournies and devote time to it. | ||
thedeadhaji
39489 Posts
| ||
|
da_head
Canada3350 Posts
(my poor samus was nerfed like mad). now, all we play is starcraft and halo 3. | ||
|
Zoler
Sweden6339 Posts
| ||
|
JeeJee
Canada5652 Posts
On May 11 2009 22:32 ilistis wrote: Metaknight is not overplayed, he's overpowered. His priority is insane and people pick him because it gives them the best chance to win. That would be cool in sc, you know, pick terran, and then win because they build faster, have stronger units, etc. edit: Also, just because your friends and yourself don't think it's bad, doesn't mean it's bad for the COMPETITIVE scene. The game is a blast to play with a bunch of friends but not for those who go to tournies and devote time to it. this is silly. you don't pick metaknight and win. he's not an iwin button like you seem to believe. in fact, his main strength is that he has no particular weaknesses (read: can't counterpick him). that doesn't mean he dominates everyone he comes across, there are many characters who are perfectly capable of beating metaknight such as wario and diddy. the main difference between, for instance, MK and diddy (in terms of "imbaness") is that if you lose to diddy, you can cp someone like puff or a stage like brinstar and get a better chance in the next match, while with metaknight there's no such option. | ||
|
ilistis
United States828 Posts
On May 12 2009 07:54 JeeJee wrote: this is silly. you don't pick metaknight and win. he's not an iwin button like you seem to believe. in fact, his main strength is that he has no particular weaknesses (read: can't counterpick him). that doesn't mean he dominates everyone he comes across, there are many characters who are perfectly capable of beating metaknight such as wario and diddy. the main difference between, for instance, MK and diddy (in terms of "imbaness") is that if you lose to diddy, you can cp someone like puff or a stage like brinstar and get a better chance in the next match, while with metaknight there's no such option. That's why I said they pick him because they have a better chance to win against any character. You probably use metaknight, sorry I don't want to argue with a skilless newbie. Your probably mad that characters now have a better chance against mk and stfu. edit: Even if those characters have a higher chance than ike or link, he still his has a higher chance to win against them even if two players are equally skilled. They were actually thinking of banning metaknight. http://www.smashworld.org/showthread.php?t=230733&page=369 | ||
|
Zapdos_Smithh
Canada2620 Posts
On May 12 2009 08:08 ilistis wrote: That's why I said they pick him because they have a better chance to win against any character. You probably use metaknight, sorry I don't want to argue with a skilless newbie. Your probably mad that characters now have a better chance against mk and stfu. edit: Even if those characters have a higher chance than ike or link, he still his has a higher chance to win against them even if two players are equally skilled. They were actually thinking of banning metaknight. http://www.smashworld.org/showthread.php?t=230733&page=369 Yeah I agree metaknight is imbalanced and overplayed as a result. Kind of one of the reasons why I quit trying brawl @ competitive level. | ||
|
Mykill
Canada3402 Posts
He placed as # 1 best character to use by far seconded by snake. imba imba imbaaaa!!!! | ||
|
JeeJee
Canada5652 Posts
On May 12 2009 08:08 ilistis wrote: That's why I said they pick him because they have a better chance to win against any character. You probably use metaknight, sorry I don't want to argue with a skilless newbie. Your probably mad that characters now have a better chance against mk and stfu. edit: Even if those characters have a higher chance than ike or link, he still his has a higher chance to win against them even if two players are equally skilled. They were actually thinking of banning metaknight. http://www.smashworld.org/showthread.php?t=230733&page=369 you're pretty dumb. try reading the thread, that's a step in the right direction. as to what i play -- i play characters i enjoy and don't play those that i don't like (for however superficial the reason might be. for instance i dont play mk because i can't stand his sword sounds). the chars i do play happen to be gaw and diddy. also, you didn't say they pick him because they have a better chance to win against any character. if you did, i would have brought up a different point: other characters can dominate far more than mk. d3 for instance, there are MANY characters which he just destroys with his advanced metagame of downthrow and bair. the downside of course is that they also have weak matchups. either way, what you say makes no sense. edit: @mykill Metaknight is the one with #1 attack prority i think... He placed as # 1 best character to use by far seconded by snake. imba imba imbaaaa!!!! tier lists are stupid. anything in the high tier list or above (which may change from time to time) is viable for tournament play, and in the end it comes down to the player. look at melee for instance. spaceys are way up there. yet mango's puff 4stocks m2k's fox. whats up with that? in the end, there's only viable and non-viable characters, the rest is up to you. | ||
cgrinker
United States3824 Posts
On May 11 2009 22:41 thedeadhaji wrote: lol @ replies Double lol at replies | ||
|
ilistis
United States828 Posts
On May 12 2009 09:51 JeeJee wrote: you're pretty dumb. try reading the thread, that's a step in the right direction. as to what i play -- i play characters i enjoy and don't play those that i don't like (for however superficial the reason might be. for instance i dont play mk because i can't stand his sword sounds). the chars i do play happen to be gaw and diddy. also, you didn't say they pick him because they have a better chance to win against any character. if you did, i would have brought up a different point: other characters can dominate far more than mk. d3 for instance, there are MANY characters which he just destroys with his advanced metagame of downthrow and bair. the downside of course is that they also have weak matchups. either way, what you say makes no sense. edit: @mykill tier lists are stupid. anything in the high tier list or above (which may change from time to time) is viable for tournament play, and in the end it comes down to the player. look at melee for instance. spaceys are way up there. yet mango's puff 4stocks m2k's fox. whats up with that? in the end, there's only viable and non-viable characters, the rest is up to you. What are you talking about? What the balls is that in bold? I did say that people play him because they have a better chance of winning. Oh and here's something interesting about Mk. He doesn't have counters.p D3 is countered by some characters. Like you said, there are viable characters and non-viable characters. It was even the same in Melee but melee had technique, it had wavedashing, dashdancing, l cancel that made ganondorf playable not the bull he is in ssbb. Oh and this is coming from a protoss player. No wonder. | ||
|
JeeJee
Canada5652 Posts
On May 12 2009 11:18 ilistis wrote: What are you talking about? What the balls is that in bold? I did say that people play him because they have a better chance of winning. Oh and here's something interesting about Mk. He doesn't have counters.p D3 is countered by some characters. Like you said, there are viable characters and non-viable characters. It was even the same in Melee but melee had technique, it had wavedashing, dashdancing, l cancel that made ganondorf playable not the bull he is in ssbb. Oh and this is coming from a protoss player. No wonder. you clearly aren't reading my replies or the thread in general, but i'll give it a shot one last time for completeness sake. @ What are you talking about? What the balls is that in bold? I did say that people play him because they have a better chance of winning. you write Metaknight is not overplayed, he's overpowered. His priority is insane and people pick him because it gives them the best chance to win. That's why I said they pick him because they have a better chance to win against any character. the two are not the same thing. moreover, they're both wrong. i've already explained why, for both of them.@ Oh and here's something interesting about Mk. He doesn't have counters.p D3 is countered by some characters. Very interesting. In fact, that's exactly what i said earlier, and how that's the main thing separating him from characters like diddy. It's not that he destroys every character (or even most of them) -- he doesn't. It's that at best other characters go even with him. No other character really has an advantage (although in the future i can see wario stepping up) Like you said, there are viable characters and non-viable characters. It was even the same in Melee but melee had technique, it had wavedashing, dashdancing, l cancel that made ganondorf playable not the bull he is in ssbb. except ganon was borderline viable in melee to begin with. yeah he sucks in brawl. what's your point? are you trying to argue that there's no techniques that make characters better in brawl? that's ridiculous. many characters would be worse off without their defining (if not unique) techs, like bucket cancelling, snake dashing, nana techs, etc. And finally, @ Oh and this is coming from a protoss player. No wonder. i assume this is supposed to refer to protoss being "ezmode". i fail to see what this has to do with anything, given that i already stated, multiple times that i don't play mk. here's an interesting fact: japan doesn't seem to have a big problem with mk. for instance, none of the top 3 players in japan main metaknight. | ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
| ||
|
SaveYourSavior
United States1071 Posts
On May 11 2009 22:26 ilistis wrote: I guess you haven't played against metaknight. I've seen enough to know what Metaknight is all about.. | ||
|
Trumpet
United States1935 Posts
You even kept your cool through all those sweeping generalizations and uninformed insults. Clearly a patient player :D | ||
|
PanN
United States2828 Posts
But in reality, all its going to do is divide the already shitty community for a shitty game farther. You can look at matchups for the character, and you can clearly see something is wrong, if not, you're blind. | ||
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
It must take a ridiculous level of fanboy-ism to actually hack a game and modify it to make it competitive, despite the myriad of other game options out there and despite the lead designer of the game intentionally making it non-competitive. This is like trying to turn Warcraft 3 into Starcraft instead of just playing Starcraft itself. =P | ||
|
tec27
United States3696 Posts
On May 13 2009 02:35 Bill307 wrote: Most people have a simple solution to games that suck: don't play them. Since Brawl sucks competitively, one can simply play Melee or a different fighter competitively. It must take a ridiculous level of fanboy-ism to actually hack a game and modify it to make it competitive, despite the myriad of other game options out there and despite the lead designer of the game intentionally making it non-competitive. This is like trying to turn Warcraft 3 into Starcraft instead of just playing Starcraft itself. =P I pretty much agree with this. If Brawl had viable online multiplayer, I could certainly see a reason to hack it into a competitive game (over just playing melee). But since Brawl's online is completely unplayable (and the a hack to make it playable is almost certainly unfeasible), there's really no reason to. | ||
|
Mogwai
United States13274 Posts
On May 13 2009 03:21 tec27 wrote: I pretty much agree with this. If Brawl had viable online multiplayer, I could certainly see a reason to hack it into a competitive game (over just playing melee). But since Brawl's online is completely unplayable (and the a hack to make it playable is almost certainly unfeasible), there's really no reason to. last I heard, some of the online issues are feasible to fix and are being worked on for brawl+. I'll still stick to my melee, thank you very much, but I don't understand why people would be upset about people hacking brawl. Your WC3 analogy decided to leave out all the new units and shiny graphics that certain people would be interested in. if they want to hack it, more power to em. | ||
|
Shade692003
Canada702 Posts
On May 13 2009 02:35 Bill307 wrote: Most people have a simple solution to games that suck: don't play them. Since Brawl sucks competitively, one can simply play Melee or a different fighter competitively. It must take a ridiculous level of fanboy-ism to actually hack a game and modify it to make it competitive, despite the myriad of other game options out there and despite the lead designer of the game intentionally making it non-competitive. This is like trying to turn Warcraft 3 into Starcraft instead of just playing Starcraft itself. =P Except the fact that,unlike brawl, wc3 is a competitive game (not, its not because its not better than sc that it makes it unworthy of being competitive) | ||
|
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
First, from the grand finals: IC throw loop is gay. From the first throw to the end of the match, MK inflicted only 15% damage. In response, we got the following game... I was literally yawning and falling asleep during this match. Thank god they switched to the (slightly less boring) MK vs MK matchup for the final game... What a great way to lose the tournament, eh? | ||
|
ThatGuy
Canada695 Posts
Toronto has one of the more boring scenes  | ||
|
Zapdos_Smithh
Canada2620 Posts
| ||
|
anotak
United States1537 Posts
On May 27 2009 17:16 Resonance wrote: Yeah Bill, normal competitive normal brawl is really imbalanced for sure. Brawl+ looks a lot more balanced though (though I still haven't tried it). I don't think imbalance was his point, rather than the way those entire tournament matches played. | ||
|
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
Endless Metaknight vs Metaknight mirrors is also a good reason to never play Brawl seriously. | ||
|
ketomai
United States2789 Posts
| ||
|
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
To me, Brawl feels very immobile even in comparison to 2D fighters. Smash's whole movement system should be revamped imo to make it a faster-paced game. (Preferably without the need for crazy button pressing and timing. ) | ||
|
JIJIyO
Canada1957 Posts
| ||
|
Mogwai
United States13274 Posts
| ||
|
JIJIyO
Canada1957 Posts
SSBM: Where Amazing Happens Enough said. I CAN'T WAIT FOR GENESIS. Hope there's going to be a ton of coverage. Ahhhh I really need to start smashing. | ||
|
traced
1739 Posts
On May 28 2009 11:56 Bill307 wrote: They should just redesign Smash. The game is obviously intended to have low mobility, and Melee has high mobility only because the developers didn't expect people to be pushing buttons so fast. To me, Brawl feels very immobile even in comparison to 2D fighters. Smash's whole movement system should be revamped imo to make it a faster-paced game. (Preferably without the need for crazy button pressing and timing. )at one point brawl had auto-l-canceling... it's just the devs wanted the game to be noob friendly. there's nothing really wrong with that, it's just a shame that it split the already small community | ||
|
traced
1739 Posts
On May 29 2009 04:38 JIJIyO wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U27TGES1-ZE&feature=channel_page SSBM: Where Amazing Happens Enough said. I CAN'T WAIT FOR GENESIS. Hope there's going to be a ton of coverage. Ahhhh I really need to start smashing. wow, those falcon combos in the middle were ridic | ||
|
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
On May 29 2009 10:26 traced wrote: it's just a shame that it split the already small community The Smash community is the last fighting game community that should be complaining about being small. In North America, it is the largest by far.Even with the community split, the only other fighting game that might be more popular than Brawl or Melee individually is Street Fighter 4. | ||
|
ThatGuy
Canada695 Posts
| ||
|
mog87
United States1586 Posts
| ||
|
Jonoman92
United States9103 Posts
| ||
|
Ancestral
United States3230 Posts
On May 29 2009 14:36 Jonoman92 wrote: I miss Super Smash Bros for the N64. I was awesome at that one, but Melee and Brawl are so much different. The original for N64 seemed so much cleaner than Melee and Brawl. I have a group of friends who play 64 ten hours a week or something. Essentially an entire dorm FLOOR all play it. I play with them a lot, I win extremely sparingly. | ||
|
Jimtudor
Canada259 Posts
On May 29 2009 15:05 Ancestral wrote: I have a group of friends who play 64 ten hours a week or something. Essentially an entire dorm FLOOR all play it. I play with them a lot, I win extremely sparingly. I saw that in a few university residences, they have the 64 smash running a lot of the time. | ||
|
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
On May 29 2009 13:34 ThatGuy wrote: Okay what? How is Brawl immobile? Do you think the game is too slow or something? Brawl is extremely flexible when it comes to movement. Are you kidding me? In the air: - No air dash. - Very slow air dodge. - No air block. - Slow horizontal air movement (for many characters). On the ground: - No forward dash. - No backdash. - Running limits your attack options. - Slow rolls. E.g. there's no way to dash towards your opponent on the ground without limiting yourself to like 3 different options (i.e. running). There's no way to dash back, either. Wavedashing filled both of these roles in Melee, though. As for attacks: - No jump-cancellable moves. - Few chains and cancellable moves (like Snake's A-A-A). - Few moves give you frame advantage on block. - Landing lag. In most cases, if you do 1 attack and it's blocked, your offensive is done. Also, because blocking is done with 1 button, the only mixup you can use against a defensive opponent is throw vs attack. In short, Brawl = immobile and inflexible. I can't see how anyone can find Brawl mobile or flexible, unless the only fighters they've played are Brawl, SSB64, SF2, or SF4. | ||
|
ThatGuy
Canada695 Posts
On May 29 2009 16:00 Bill307 wrote: Are you kidding me? In the air: - No air dash. - Very slow air dodge. - No air block. - Slow horizontal air movement (for many characters). On the ground: - No forward dash. - No backdash. - Running limits your attack options. - Slow rolls. E.g. there's no way to dash towards your opponent on the ground without limiting yourself to like 3 different options (i.e. running). There's no way to dash back, either. Wavedashing filled both of these roles in Melee, though. As for attacks: - No jump-cancellable moves. - Few chains and cancellable moves (like Snake's A-A-A). - Few moves give you frame advantage on block. - Landing lag. In most cases, if you do 1 attack and it's blocked, your offensive is done. Also, because blocking is done with 1 button, the only mixup you can use against a defensive opponent is throw vs attack. In short, Brawl = immobile and inflexible. I can't see how anyone can find Brawl mobile or flexible, unless the only fighters they've played are Brawl, SSB64, SF2, or SF4. In the air -No air dash is an argument? If anything it's simply a feature and not too many games have that, Brawl does not require it -Fast air dodges (do you mean slow as in long-lasting?). -Air block has nothing to do with mobility, but some characters have moves with super armor which may be used to absorb impact fully regardless. In any case the air dodge is way more than sufficient to handle that; otherwise, don't get hit. -If by slow you mean literally speaking, then yes, Brawl is a slower paced and floatier game than its predecessor. Relatively speaking, most characters still have a lot of control in the air. To add to that, Brawl also has: -B reversals -Plenty of special moves available for movement -Normal attacks that change momentum in the air -Multiple jumps for certain characters On the ground -There is a forward dash... -I will concede that reversing ground movement is not as flexible as it could be. Dash dancing is still there, but it can only be done on dash startup frames, so it's only useful for stalling in place and doesn't really get you anywhere (mild fakeout at best). That's why aerial mobility takes presence here, and walking is also ever present. -"Running limits your attack options" which is blatantly false. You can shield cancel your run (low shield drop lag), so anything you can do standing still you can do while running. Running is also necessary for dash attack cancels (explained later). You can also do reverse aerials (run, turn around and attack with a back air with full aerial momentum if desired), as well as pivot grabs. -The fact that you said 'slow rolls' is nuts. Rolls have been buffed in Brawl over Melee and are much harder to punish, due to invincibility, speed, and distance. There are few characters that have unviable rolls. Now for attacks: -Everything may be shield-cancelled now due to extremely low shield drop lag, so jump-cancelling is moot here. -All jabs may be jab-cancelled (Ike is notorious for this). Yes, there are very few combos in Brawl, that's the nature of the game -Correct, because of very low shield stun and shield drop lag. That also means spacing is very important. This also means that some ground games become quite risky to use. -Some characters have such little landing lag that it barely matters, but yes, increasing landing lag does hamper mobility. There's a heavy emphasis for spacing and timing here, and at least many aerials auto-cancel. "In most cases, if you do 1 attack and it's blocked, your offensive is done." You're right! It's a very defensive game. You have to be overly cautious with your offense in many cases. If you want my personal opinion on this, Brawl can actually have a pretty solid offensive game as well. I have many videos of my Mario (bottom tier )where I play very offensive if you are interested in watching them. Ally and M2K, the people who win the biggest and the most tournaments, are pretty offensive players."because blocking is done with 1 button" LOL. Almost every fighting game is like that! "the only mixup you can use against a defensive opponent is throw vs attack." I don't quite fully get this statement, but I assume you mean someone that shields a lot can only be beaten by throws? You can space aerials plenty well against a shielding opponent, and their shield will diminish enough for you to pierce it. Brawl also has: -Dash attack cancels (some characters may cancel dash attacks into UpSmashes, which give them a huge momentum boost along the ground similar to a Luigi wavedash. They may also be cancelled into item throws for the same effect) -Glide tossing (roll + toss item = gliding effect, normally not as long as aforementioned technique) | ||
|
Meta
United States6225 Posts
| ||
|
ketomai
United States2789 Posts
On May 29 2009 16:57 ThatGuy wrote: In the air -No air dash is an argument? If anything it's simply a feature and not too many games have that, Brawl does not require it -Fast air dodges (do you mean slow as in long-lasting?). -Air block has nothing to do with mobility, but some characters have moves with super armor which may be used to absorb impact fully regardless. In any case the air dodge is way more than sufficient to handle that; otherwise, don't get hit. -If by slow you mean literally speaking, then yes, Brawl is a slower paced and floatier game than its predecessor. Relatively speaking, most characters still have a lot of control in the air. To add to that, Brawl also has: -B reversals -Plenty of special moves available for movement -Normal attacks that change momentum in the air -Multiple jumps for certain characters On the ground -There is a forward dash... -I will concede that reversing ground movement is not as flexible as it could be. Dash dancing is still there, but it can only be done on dash startup frames, so it's only useful for stalling in place and doesn't really get you anywhere (mild fakeout at best). That's why aerial mobility takes presence here, and walking is also ever present. -"Running limits your attack options" which is blatantly false. You can shield cancel your run (low shield drop lag), so anything you can do standing still you can do while running. Running is also necessary for dash attack cancels (explained later). You can also do reverse aerials (run, turn around and attack with a back air with full aerial momentum if desired), as well as pivot grabs. -The fact that you said 'slow rolls' is nuts. Rolls have been buffed in Brawl over Melee and are much harder to punish, due to invincibility, speed, and distance. There are few characters that have unviable rolls. Now for attacks: -Everything may be shield-cancelled now due to extremely low shield drop lag, so jump-cancelling is moot here. -All jabs may be jab-cancelled (Ike is notorious for this). Yes, there are very few combos in Brawl, that's the nature of the game -Correct, because of very low shield stun and shield drop lag. That also means spacing is very important. This also means that some ground games become quite risky to use. -Some characters have such little landing lag that it barely matters, but yes, increasing landing lag does hamper mobility. There's a heavy emphasis for spacing and timing here, and at least many aerials auto-cancel. "In most cases, if you do 1 attack and it's blocked, your offensive is done." You're right! It's a very defensive game. You have to be overly cautious with your offense in many cases. If you want my personal opinion on this, Brawl can actually have a pretty solid offensive game as well. I have many videos of my Mario (bottom tier )where I play very offensive if you are interested in watching them. Ally and M2K, the people who win the biggest and the most tournaments, are pretty offensive players."because blocking is done with 1 button" LOL. Almost every fighting game is like that! "the only mixup you can use against a defensive opponent is throw vs attack." I don't quite fully get this statement, but I assume you mean someone that shields a lot can only be beaten by throws? You can space aerials plenty well against a shielding opponent, and their shield will diminish enough for you to pierce it. Brawl also has: -Dash attack cancels (some characters may cancel dash attacks into UpSmashes, which give them a huge momentum boost along the ground similar to a Luigi wavedash. They may also be cancelled into item throws for the same effect) -Glide tossing (roll + toss item = gliding effect, normally not as long as aforementioned technique) It's the physical slowness that inhibits the game. Half of melee was mind games and approaches. In melee, you could wavedash, short hop to waveland, pivot, do w/e the heck you wanted as you approached. This meant you kept your opponent on your toes and made aggressive play beneficial. In brawl, not only are you options limited, but everything is slow motion. Because of this, mind games lose a lot of its powers. So not only does it make the mechanics of the game extremely easy, it also takes away from the other facet of play. If you want an example of how the slow gameplay completely ruins the game, use BtT as an example. In Melee Break the Targets, people were maxing scores with 5 year old records. In Brawl, nearly all of the scores are almost perfectly maxed. In Melee, there are things that humans can't perform, but in Brawl, almost everything is probably possible for human hands. As a result of slow gameplay coupled with un innovative stages, stadium is already dead after barely a year after Brawl's debut, while Melee's stadium lived till the end. | ||
|
Trumpet
United States1935 Posts
On May 29 2009 16:57 ThatGuy wrote: "because blocking is done with 1 button" LOL. Almost every fighting game is like that! Well, that alone is enough to show you really don't know what you're talking about. Almost every fighting game blocks by holding straight backwards to block high and down back to block low. No difference between high / low when in the air for games with air blocking. The reason that matters is that means in most fighters you have at least 5 different ways to beat someone who's blocking (high, low, crossup high, crossup low, throw). Compared to brawl's 2 (attack, throw), it's much easier to block in brawl. Of 8 fighters Evolution will run this year, the only one with a block button is Soul Caliber IV, and that game still has high / low blocking (and other things like gaurd crushes and unblockables since there aren't crossups). I can't believe you'd argue that brawl actually has solid air mobility or much of an offensive game. It simply isn't true. And that doesn't necessarily make it a bad game either! But when Bill refers to air mobility and offensive options, he means the type of air control and speed present in games like Marvel vs Capcom 2, Arcana Heart, Guilty Gear X2 and the like. I could go on as to why, but it probably wouldn't make much sense without having played them for comparison yourself. | ||
|
anotak
United States1537 Posts
| ||
|
ThatGuy
Canada695 Posts
On May 29 2009 17:52 Meta wrote: Dude if you don't think brawl is slow and clunky you've clearly never played melee at a high level I used to, from 2006-2008. This is a video of Jarc and I beating RayneX and Unknown522 in teams (final game of the set). The notable thing in this video is despite my partner being gimped twice and killed once by me, and me being forced into a 1v2 vs. both these guys, we still won. I used to be a very good teams player. I can show a couple more videos if you want. My Singles skills were never up to par, sadly; Quebec is just way too good. @nevake: Yes, the game is slower than Melee. I find it to still be a reasonable pace, but I guess that's up for opinion. However, the speed is not what inhibits the mechanics here, it's the fact that there are literally very few difficult mechanics to actually work on (i.e. tech skill). The technical barrier for Brawl is practically non-existant, and most techniques can be picked up and implemented after about an hour of practice (or less). This makes the gap between players much closer than what people are normally used to. Mind games definately do not lose powers due to slow gameplay; in fact I think it's the opposite. Because the game is slow, mind games are much more important than before. You can no longer overwhelm an opponent with sheer execution; you have to out-think them every time, for every punish, especially since there are no combos. The entire game relies heavily on spacing, timing, and zoning. With such a lack of technical skill to add a skill gap, it's much easier to become good, but it's MUCH harder to become great. As for BTT, I honestly don't know what to say about this. Strategies are devised using Action Replay and other cheat methods to frame-by-frame everything, so speed of the game means nothing. It DOES mean that it's more difficult to have enough execution to get WR in Melee. I also agree that they could have done a MUCH better job with the BtT stages; definately not enough variety there. Other than that, I can't say I'm very involved with the competitive BtT stadium community, so I'll leave that one up to your judgement. @Trumpet: I misinterpreted his statement if that's what he meant. Blocking in conventional fighters is still 1 input. I thought he meant something like "Hold Punch+Kick+Back" to block, which is obviously an absurd idea; I guess I was just thinking to literally here. Shields diminish as you attack them, or as long as they are held up for enough time. You can therefore shieldstab opponents who hold their shield up for too much time. Kage did this very often in Melee with his Ganon, where he would use his hangtime for an impending attack to stab the bottom of shields with a down-air. 2:24 is a pretty blatant example, haha. In Brawl, the exact same concept applies. MK is notorious for shieldstabbing opponents due to his tornado. The basic method to defend this is to tilt the shield upwards to deflect the incoming hits, or you will get sucked in. Shields can be tilted in any direction to avoid any incoming stabs. I don't understand how Brawl doesn't have good aerial mobility. There is almost too much mobility in the air. Is it because Brawl is slower paced? I just found it funny that if Bill really meant games like that, then why doesn't he call Melee immobile and inflexible? Is it only because of the wavedash? @anotak: Yes, Brawl rewards defensive play very much (very strong airdodges, very strong sidesteps, easier powershielding, little shield stun, little shield drop lag). So what? Just because you're not used to it, doesn't make the game BAD. Here's a quick video of JJWolf, a player I enjoy watching for his finesse with Wolf (hilarious ending): Is the game really that slow? There are many different things you guys can complain about, but a lot of these arguments apply to Melee as well! Why aren't you talking that game's mobility down then? My personal pet peeves about Brawl: -Tripping. No one likes that. -UpB glitch. If you edgehop after doing an UpB, it will retain the landing lag of the UpB next time you land on the ground without attacking. It's really lame and only affects a few characters (one of them being my own )-Extra inputs for wall jumping. You can walljump by holding towards the wall and pushing away as well as holding towards the wall and pushing jump. I find the jumping input to be totally unecessary and it usually puts me in many stupid situations when I would just want to grab the edge. I would use that as an argument against Brawl's mobility. -Auto edge snapping. If it wasn't for this, people would not complain about 'broken edge tactics'. It just makes planking strategies more difficult to deal with than necessary. Brawl is probably one of the only games where offensive play is not very rewarding. If that is the reason why people think it's 'bad', then so be it; I personally think it's unique. | ||
|
ThatGuy
Canada695 Posts
| ||
|
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
In the air -No air dash is an argument? If anything it's simply a feature and not too many games have that, Brawl does not require it -Fast air dodges (do you mean slow as in long-lasting?). -Air block has nothing to do with mobility, but some characters have moves with super armor which may be used to absorb impact fully regardless. In any case the air dodge is way more than sufficient to handle that; otherwise, don't get hit. -If by slow you mean literally speaking, then yes, Brawl is a slower paced and floatier game than its predecessor. Relatively speaking, most characters still have a lot of control in the air. To add to that, Brawl also has: -B reversals -Plenty of special moves available for movement -Normal attacks that change momentum in the air -Multiple jumps for certain characters - No air dash reduces air mobilty substantially. There's a big difference between games that have it and games that don't. - Air dodges are slow as heck because of their long-ass recovery. - Air block adds to the air game. Without it, air confrontations boil down to one of two things: either you both do attacks and the better one wins, or one of you dodges and you both just fall back down. In contrast to dodging, air-blocking can lead to follow-up mindgames. - Lots of games have moves that change your trajectory in the air. But they are a lot less useful than air dashes because they (typically) last a lot longer and/or have considerable recovery. So you can't use them to, say, quickly close the gap and then attack arbitrarily. - Flying is pretty good for mobility, I'll give it that. On the ground -There is a forward dash... -I will concede that reversing ground movement is not as flexible as it could be. Dash dancing is still there, but it can only be done on dash startup frames, so it's only useful for stalling in place and doesn't really get you anywhere (mild fakeout at best). That's why aerial mobility takes presence here, and walking is also ever present. -"Running limits your attack options" which is blatantly false. You can shield cancel your run (low shield drop lag), so anything you can do standing still you can do while running. Running is also necessary for dash attack cancels (explained later). You can also do reverse aerials (run, turn around and attack with a back air with full aerial momentum if desired), as well as pivot grabs. -The fact that you said 'slow rolls' is nuts. Rolls have been buffed in Brawl over Melee and are much harder to punish, due to invincibility, speed, and distance. There are few characters that have unviable rolls. - I've never tried shield-cancelling a dash. Does it allow you to do quick dash-in jabs or dash-in *arbitrary attack*? I doubt it'd be nearly as fast as a dash-in attack in most 2D fighters, let alone wavedashing-in in Melee, but if it is, then I underestimated Brawl's ground mobility. I do think it's dumb to need to press shield in between, though. Pretty much any 2D fighter with dashing or running allows you to do arbitrary attacks out of it without needing something like shield-cancelling in between. - I'm not interested in rolls being punishable: I'm interested in them being useful for attacking. And compared to other games with rolls or other (semi-)invincible command dashes, rolls in Brawl are indeed slow. Example: rolls in CvS2: you can actually roll past most attacks and punish while the attack is still recovering. Shield-cancelling and shield-stabbing sound very useful for giving you more offensive options, which I like. Although being able to keep pressure on an opponent is not a mobility issue, to me it is important to make a game feel faster-paced and to give me more options for my offense. (i.e. more flexibility) As for Melee having no airdashes, it more than makes up for it with its ground mobility and short-hop-fast-fall antics, as well as characters like Jigglypuff who have great horizontal movement in the air. Although I don't play Melee at that level myself (or at all, really), I have no doubts about its mobility. I think I've made my point of how Brawl is immobile and inflexible compared to other 2D fighters in general, including but not limited to Melee. It doesn't make the game "bad" necessarily. It just makes it less appealing to those of us who prefer games with lots of mobility, flexibility, and options. Lastly, about game speed and mind games: imo a slower game has fewer mind games because more things can be anticipated and countered on-reaction. Fewer ways to threaten your opponent leads to fewer ways to play mind games with them, imo. | ||
|
selboN
United States2523 Posts
| ||
|
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
I don't understand why people think this is one of Melee's good traits. (2D?) Fighting games generally offer you benefits for having very advanced technical skills, and they generally have very high skill ceilings. However, as you get more and more advanced, the benefits (should) diminish. For a player like me, this means I can go into the game with pretty good technical skills and fare well against someone with extremely good technical skills. Of course he'll have an advantage, but it's a small one. IMO, ironically, by trying to make Smash games newbie-friendly, the developers created a situation where the "normal", newbie-friendly abilities of the characters are so limited that advanced techniques will grant large advantages to those who can wield them. | ||
|
ThatGuy
Canada695 Posts
.Yes, Shield dashing allows you to do any of those. You can only shield cancel out of a run however, not during the initial dash frames. This isn't really an issue most of the time considering that if a single dash will bring you to your opponent, you're pretty much in attacking distance most of the time. It's basically the same premise as dash cancelling in Melee using Crouch. Rolling inside of someone is usually good for evading a frontal attack to punish them from behind. Some people rely on it way too much. You can't cancel your roll into anything, but if you're smart with it you can punish your opponent's aggression with it. If you're at the edge and your opponent respawns, NEVER NEVER NEVER roll towards them! It's a classic bait that's been done since the early Melee days, and all the new scrubs keep falling for it! Fight for every square inch. To clarify on this, everything is situational. Most of the time, you don't have dominating mathematical frame advantage when you roll behind an opponent, but you do have positional advantage, and the frame advatage is usually pretty negligable based on reactions. This forces your opponent to react in a certain way: -Turn around and attack: This may defeat slower attacks, shield (safest option, but also usually the least rewarding), and slower grabs. This may be defeated by a sidestep, powershield, fast attacks, and sometimes a grab (if a grab connects at the same time as an attack, the attacker will damage the grabber, but the grabber will still grab the attacker and suffer no damage. This is known as 'Faux armor'.). Usually this reaction is too slow to beat attacks or grabs. -Shield: This will 'defeat' attacks in the sense that positional advantage is someone neutralized. Obviously destroyed by grabs. -Sidestep: Defeats trigger-happy people, but gets punished hard if predicted -Roll: Same as sidestep, and generally safer, but you don't get to directly attack your opponent Snake gets the added benefit of pulling out a grenade and shielding, so any attempted attack will result in a counter explosion, and if he gets grabbed there is a good chance that the grabber may trigger the grenade with a hitbox. Stupid Snake .For aerial momentum, you're right for the most part, although gliding is an important tool for Metaknight and Pit. However, the down air for Game and Watch and Sonic are pretty important for aerial movement (ZSS and Sheik have similar down airs but they don't seem to use it as much, although ZSS has a footstool infinite on ROB that requires Dair usage). It would be interesting to see air dashing in Brawl, I don't know what I could expect out of it, haha. You have to try out Wario in Brawl. His horizontal air movement is absurd. "Lastly, about game speed and mind games: imo a slower game has fewer mind games because more things can be anticipated and countered on-reaction. Fewer ways to threaten your opponent leads to fewer ways to play mind games with them, imo." I see what you mean. I'm not going to lie, of course you can counter a lot of things on reaction, but you would be surprised at how difficult it can be to defend against a smart offensive player. Pressure and zoning are big. I do admit that I rely quite a bit on visual cues to figure out what my opponent is going to do to me, so I can determine how I will react. Recently people have been baiting me by using these visual cues but going into a completely different mixup where my conventional punish does not work. I'm trying to change this by... WIFI TRAINING! Hilariously enough, in its current state wifi is probably more useful for self-improvement than if it was actually...good. I wrote a blog about my wifi experiences which you can read here: http://allisbrawl.com/blogpost.aspx?id=21180. TLDR version: Wifi is great for mental training because you cannot call out an opponent based on visual cues, you are forced to predict what they will do at least 1/2 a second in advance. It's an abysmal experience with great benefits if you can tough it out. Avoid playing on Wifi if you're trying to have a good time! | ||
|
ThatGuy
Canada695 Posts
@selboN: I use the standard GC controller as that is what I'm most familiar with. Many skilled players use the wiimote+nunchuck though. @Bill post # 2: Agreed, the technical skill requirement serves as a barrier. Some people love it, others hate it. Melee is interesting though, you don't need to have tremendous technical skill to keep up, you just need to be smart enough to know how to deal with it. Kage plays Ganon, and the biggest technical skill he needs to worry about is L-Cancelling. He almost never wavedashes, and he's been incorperating more platform dashes into his game over the past year. Yet he still places incredibly high in stacked tournaments because of his flawless spacing, pressure, and composure. Azen is another great example. For future reference, I apologize if I come off as a name-dropper for listing Kage all the time. I've sparred with him since early 2007. We met every week at Mean Matt's to play Melee and Poker. To think that Thad, Matt, and I used to be better than him back then...he's come a long way and I'm damn proud of him. He also causes the most bullshit in the game to happen. He's the luckiest smasher you will ever meet. | ||
|
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
(Brawl, on the other hand, I never want to see again. ) | ||
|
gn0m
Sweden302 Posts
On May 11 2009 13:25 thunk wrote: If SCII sucks, someone probably will try to fix it. Here's to hoping it doesn't suck. Well the difference is that Blizzard has an ambition to make a highly competitive game and have a dialogue with the professional scene, while Sakurai did everything in his power to make a game for the casual crowd. Melee is very deep but also easy to pick up which makes it enjoyable for all kinds of gamers. The reason for the removal of advanced techs and depth in Brawl was that it would be boring for casuals to get stomped online. Sakurai said something along the lines that only the top of the pyramid (referring to pros) would enjoy the game if the skill difference is too big. This statement can be found in an interview with Sakurai but I’m too lazy to look for it | ||
|
crate
United States2474 Posts
| ||
|
ketomai
United States2789 Posts
| ||
|
crate
United States2474 Posts
On May 30 2009 13:26 nevake wrote: I think a higher skill ceiling makes playing a game competitively much more enjoyable. Easiest comparison would be sc. It may chase away players that dabble in many different games, but for the people that just focus on smash, the gap between casual players and better players due to tech skill requirements creates a better, more developed competitive scene. I don't consider technical ability to be what fighting games (nor strategy games) should test. If I wanted a technically challenging game, I would play Guitar Hero or something. I play Melee (and Starcraft*) despite the techskill required. Actually the only reason I don't want to play Guilty Gear is because my techskill sucks balls. Fighting games and strategy games ... I play them for the mental aspect for sure. Nothing wrong if you disagree. I use the first person in those sentences for a reason. So I don't really feel like more techskill = higher skill ceiling in fighting games (or strategy games) at all. Even ignoring techskill I feel like Melee gives players more interesting choices to make though. *This is an interesting thing here because most of what I really have a problem with in SC is stuff SC2 changes. Multitask ability is very much part of what an RTS should test--otherwise, you should play a TBS instead. | ||
|
gn0m
Sweden302 Posts
On May 30 2009 13:55 crate wrote: I don't consider technical ability to be what fighting games (nor strategy games) should test. If I wanted a technically challenging game, I would play Guitar Hero or something. I play Melee (and Starcraft*) despite the techskill required. Actually the only reason I don't want to play Guilty Gear is because my techskill sucks balls. Fighting games and strategy games ... I play them for the mental aspect for sure. Nothing wrong if you disagree. I use the first person in those sentences for a reason. So I don't really feel like more techskill = higher skill ceiling in fighting games (or strategy games) at all. Even ignoring techskill I feel like Melee gives players more interesting choices to make though. *This is an interesting thing here because most of what I really have a problem with in SC is stuff SC2 changes. Multitask ability is very much part of what an RTS should test--otherwise, you should play a TBS instead. Of course techskill = higher skill ceiling in a game. This is quite self-explanatory; some techs are hard to perform but give you an advantage if you can master it. The technical aspects of melee are pretty much impossible to master. Consequently, the game has a high skill ceiling. More important, techskill gives more options which ultimately increase the depth of the game. Depth creates a complex meta-game that is, not only is hard to master (high skill ceiling), but also lets the gameplay evolve which increases the life-span of the game. Also, you are obviously entitled to an opinion but to say that technical ability shouldn’t be tested in a fighting game sounds pretty stupid in my opinion. In that case, you should stick to RPGs where the fights only involves strategy and no techs what so ever (unless its Paper Mario -_-) | ||
|
ThatGuy
Canada695 Posts
| ||
|
crate
United States2474 Posts
More important, techskill gives more options which ultimately increase the depth of the game. Not at all. Some things need to be technically challenging to give the player options (e.g. wavedashing letting you vary the timing and direction of the airdodge), but you are asserting the relationship is the other way around, which is false. If L-canceling instead involved hitting up+L+Z+Y in a certain order within 4 frames, would it make the game deeper? I very much don't think so ... but it would undoubtedly make the game more technical. The player doesn't get any more options from having that higher technical requirement. If anything I think it would be the opposite (not to mention the number of players who would be pushed toward characters like Sheik and Peach who don't benefit as much from L-canceling, and pushed away from the spacies) in this case. (As an aside I think having to press L every time you land during an aerial makes Melee worse than it would otherwise be. The only depth I see coming from L-canceling is the possibility of attempting to mess up your opponent's L-cancel timing (light shielding + shield tilting, mainly), but that's such a small addition that I think the lower techskill requirement would make up for it). In that case, you should stick to RPGs where the fights only involves strategy and no techs what so ever Right ... because PvAI is so much fun.... There was a very easy type of game (TBS) for you to compare it to. But then you miss the real-time aspect of fighting games, so the comparison still fails. When I say I don't like techskill, I mean I think executing any individual maneuver should be very easy. Timing them properly, linking them together properly, proper spacing/zoning (whatever you want to call it), reading your opponent.... There's more than just pressing 5 directions then a button to fighting games, and I like every single other bit of it more than the "press 5 directions then a button" part. I didn't expect people to agree with me. No one ever does. (aside 2: "techskill" is probably too broad a term for me to be using here, but I'm not sure there is a more precise one around for me to use) | ||
|
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
Raising execution (technical skill) requirements does NOT make a game deeper, or give it more mind-games. How does having to press L every time you land in Melee make it deeper? Or having wavedashes that are so difficult to execute? You could just auto-L-cancel and have 1-button wavedashes and the game would keep the same depth and mind-games. Moreover, these skills mean that players who haven't invested a LOT of time into the game will have FEWER mind games available and for them, the game will have LESS depth. Execution skills are definitely part of the fun of fighting games, no doubt. And like I said before, having a high ceiling for them is a good thing, imo. The question is how important they should be. I'm sure they are very important to some people. But to myself and many others, they should be much less important than the mental aspects. It's all a matter of opinion, really. Nevertheless, I think Guilty Gear is an example of a game that can appeal to both kinds of people. On one hand, you've got a lot of characters that are very time-intensive to learn: very precise timings, character-specific combos, and so on. But even if you're mediocre at those things, you can just pick Potemkin and play at a high level regardless. Another example is Arcana Heart. Most of the characters in this game have a variety of increasingly-difficult combos. Generally, the combos go something like: - dead-easy 1-2-3-super combo: ~7000 dmg - simple combo with fairly lax timing: ~9,000 dmg - more difficult combo: ~10,000 dmg - advanced combo with precise timing and situation/character specific: ~11,000 dmg Not to mention the variance between characters, where ones easy combo is as strong as anothers advanced one. So even if you suck at execution, you can beat people who make combo videos if your other skills and game knowledge are superior. IMO, games like these appeal to both kinds of players: those who don't like execution-heavy games, and those who do. Melee, unfortunately, only appeals to the latter. | ||
|
Elemenope
Burkina Faso1704 Posts
On May 31 2009 05:19 Bill307 wrote: Nevertheless, I think Guilty Gear is an example of a game that can appeal to both kinds of people. On one hand, you've got a lot of characters that are very time-intensive to learn: very precise timings, character-specific combos, and so on. But even if you're mediocre at those things, you can just pick Potemkin and play at a high level regardless. Fuck Potemkin yo. :3 | ||
|
traced
1739 Posts
and wavedashes are pretty easy to execute, and again they really don't add much more to your movement for most of the characters. it's fine the way it is. di is the worst tech skill, because of how unintuitive it is. you're basically pulling the velocity vector in a direction. you should...probably just push the control stick in the direction you most want to go. melee's real technical depth is the amount of freestyled, precise inputs you have to do in an extremely short amount of time, and the insanely small reaction time window you have. | ||
|
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
Which is pointless 'cause casual players can always find other casual players who want to play for fun without competing or playing to win. People could do this just fine in Melee, for instance. Not to mention the impossibility of his task, unless he wants to make a game suitable for 8-and-younger, 'cause no one older than 8 will want to play it. | ||
|
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
On May 31 2009 05:41 traced wrote: and wavedashes are pretty easy to execute No, WTF? On May 31 2009 05:41 traced wrote: and the insanely small reaction time window you have. Funny, I always thought that was called "reaction time", not technical skill. | ||
|
mog87
United States1586 Posts
On May 31 2009 05:19 Bill307 wrote: crate nailed it pretty much. Raising execution (technical skill) requirements does NOT make a game deeper, or give it more mind-games. How does having to press L every time you land in Melee make it deeper? Or having wavedashes that are so difficult to execute? You could just auto-L-cancel and have 1-button wavedashes and the game would keep the same depth and mind-games. Moreover, these skills mean that players who haven't invested a LOT of time into the game will have FEWER mind games available and for them, the game will have LESS depth. Execution skills are definitely part of the fun of fighting games, no doubt. And like I said before, having a high ceiling for them is a good thing, imo. The question is how important they should be. I'm sure they are very important to some people. But to myself and many others, they should be much less important than the mental aspects. It's all a matter of opinion, really. Nevertheless, I think Guilty Gear is an example of a game that can appeal to both kinds of people. On one hand, you've got a lot of characters that are very time-intensive to learn: very precise timings, character-specific combos, and so on. But even if you're mediocre at those things, you can just pick Potemkin and play at a high level regardless. Another example is Arcana Heart. Most of the characters in this game have a variety of increasingly-difficult combos. Generally, the combos go something like: - dead-easy 1-2-3-super combo: ~7000 dmg - simple combo with fairly lax timing: ~9,000 dmg - more difficult combo: ~10,000 dmg - advanced combo with precise timing and situation/character specific: ~11,000 dmg Not to mention the variance between characters, where ones easy combo is as strong as anothers advanced one. So even if you suck at execution, you can beat people who make combo videos if your other skills and game knowledge are superior. IMO, games like these appeal to both kinds of players: those who don't like execution-heavy games, and those who do. Melee, unfortunately, only appeals to the latter.Bullshit, when you have strong characters like SHIEK, PEACH, GANON AND JIGGLYPUFF. Who don't require such super technical execution. Hell you dont even need super tech skill to play fox at a high level. Press L to cancel lag isnt difficult at all, and wavedashing still isnt even a neccesary staple for certain characters, and yet still its not that difficult to learn these days when someone knows how to play. And in melee if you have greater knowledge and general smarts/experience you will more than likely beat the less experienced player who only has tech skill, its been that way since the beginning. For proof go find some old videos of Wife playing a character that isn't peach, he has (or had atleast) very low technical ability, but played a character that had easy "combos" and relied on his decision maker to become a dominant player at the time. But anyway brawl sucks badly. Really it does. | ||
|
gn0m
Sweden302 Posts
On May 31 2009 03:03 crate wrote: Not at all. Some things need to be technically challenging to give the player options (e.g. wavedashing letting you vary the timing and direction of the airdodge), but you are asserting the relationship is the other way around, which is false. If L-canceling instead involved hitting up+L+Z+Y in a certain order within 4 frames, would it make the game deeper? I very much don't think so ... but it would undoubtedly make the game more technical. The player doesn't get any more options from having that higher technical requirement. If anything I think it would be the opposite (not to mention the number of players who would be pushed toward characters like Sheik and Peach who don't benefit as much from L-canceling, and pushed away from the spacies) in this case. (As an aside I think having to press L every time you land during an aerial makes Melee worse than it would otherwise be. The only depth I see coming from L-canceling is the possibility of attempting to mess up your opponent's L-cancel timing (light shielding + shield tilting, mainly), but that's such a small addition that I think the lower techskill requirement would make up for it). Right ... because PvAI is so much fun.... There was a very easy type of game (TBS) for you to compare it to. But then you miss the real-time aspect of fighting games, so the comparison still fails. When I say I don't like techskill, I mean I think executing any individual maneuver should be very easy. Timing them properly, linking them together properly, proper spacing/zoning (whatever you want to call it), reading your opponent.... There's more than just pressing 5 directions then a button to fighting games, and I like every single other bit of it more than the "press 5 directions then a button" part. I didn't expect people to agree with me. No one ever does. (aside 2: "techskill" is probably too broad a term for me to be using here, but I'm not sure there is a more precise one around for me to use) First off, you stated that: “So I don't really feel like more techskill = higher skill ceiling in fighting games” To use you own example, if L-canceling would involve hitting up+L+Z+Y it would make it harder to perform, and less people would be able to do it. The harder it is to master techskill the higher the skill ceiling gets. If you could perform infinite combos with by just pressing on button once, there would be no room for improvement and the skill ceiling would be very low. Sure, tactics and such could still be improved but the game would still be easier in some aspects (techskill in this case) so the skill ceiling would therefore be lower overall. Moving over to the depth-discussion. I get your point, the fact that something is hard to perform does not make the game deeper. That is true, as long as the tech is available to the player it doesn’t matter how hard it is to perform it. However, this has nothing to do with what I said. I said that the techskill in Melee gives the player more options. Wavedashing, dashdancing, crouch cancelling, dash cancelling, techs (as in instant recovery, not “tech” for techniques) moonwalking, pivot etc. are all techs that give the player more options. (Yes, there are some techs like L-canceling that doesn’t provide depth but most of them do.) Just because they could be easier to perform doesn’t mean that they are not providing options. Some of them actually can’t be easier to perform without making other techs much harder (DI vs combos, recovery vs edge guard etc.) Ok, RPG might have been a bad comparison, I should have said action RPG/MMORPG. I think you get my point tho. EDIT. Sorry if I sound like a douche when saying that, but my point is that its only your subjective view that wavedash etc. are hard to perform. I really doesnt take you more than two weeks to learn it. I cant see how you would want to remove all execution skill in a fighting game because then it wouldnt be a figting game. Thats why I mentioned that other types of games would be more suitable for you. | ||
|
MagisterMan
Sweden525 Posts
| ||
|
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
On May 31 2009 05:57 mog87 wrote: Press L to cancel lag isnt difficult at all Way to miss the point of complaining about L-cancelling. The problem is not that it's "difficult". The problem is that it's stupid and should be unnecessary. Honestly, is there anyone who would have less fun if L-cancelling were automatic? I don't think anyone plays Melee for the joy of pressing L after every time they jump. Wavedashing is different. Having it in the game is good. Making it require an unnecessary and difficult sequence of button-presses -- especially if you use it frequently -- is bad. | ||
|
gn0m
Sweden302 Posts
On May 31 2009 08:12 Bill307 wrote: Wavedashing is different. Having it in the game is good. Making it require an unnecessary and difficult sequence of button-presses -- especially if you use it frequently -- is bad. Remember that the developers didn't intend to have the wavedash in the game. They found it just before it was released and decided to keep it in the game, probably not realizing how big of a deal it was (and who can blame them). I agree that the wavedash could be simplified but once you learn it, it becomes very natural and you don't think about it much | ||
|
ThatGuy
Canada695 Posts
On May 31 2009 05:41 traced wrote: di is the worst tech skill, because of how unintuitive it is. you're basically pulling the velocity vector in a direction. you should...probably just push the control stick in the direction you most want to go. DI is the most important skill to master, and the hardest to perfect. It's not only used to survive kill moves, it's also important for evading combos, screwing with the opponents head with real sketchy knockback (DI jabs behind the oppponent, for example), and aiming for parts of the stage to tech off of. There's also the concept of Smash DI. I don't understand what you mean by how unintuitive it is. The best survival DI is (for the most part) pushing the joystick perpendicular to what you expect your knockback to be. If you're going to die upwards, push to the side. If you're going to die to the side, push upwards and towards the opponent. It's a really unique concept, but it's not that tough to pick up. If you're actually suggesting that you can determine your trajectory on attacks based on the direction you're holding, wouldn't that be a bit silly? You would hold down so you never get off the stage. Without DI...well, look at SSB64 combo videos >_> EDIT: Can we change the title of this thread, or make a new one? It seems to be a lot about debating over Brawl and Melee rather than Brawl+. | ||
|
crate
United States2474 Posts
I play Sheik in Melee. I played Peach before that (until I realized that Sheik is so much better and easier). I play these characters precisely because I need minimal techskill to do so. Actually I switched off of Peach because I wasn't able to do stuff that I wanted to do to get better (instant float to nair, for example). I never said that I think wavedashing and l-canceling are particularly hard; they're not. I recognize it's quite possible to be fairly good at Melee with minimal techskill--my techskill sucks balls but I'm not terrible. I don't think Melee is necessarily a very technical game since I honestly don't know much about other fighters. I do think it's more technical than I would like it to be, and I say so. and wavedashes are pretty easy to execute, and again they really don't add much more to your movement for most of the characters. it's fine the way it is. Wavedashing exactly the distance you want to go every time is very hard lol. However in this case it's not something that should be automated (though having a "wavedash button" then having you hold the appropriate direction seems fine to me). Basically, if there is something that you want to do in every possible situation it should just be automatic imo. I don't like unnecessary techskill. The harder it is to master techskill the higher the skill ceiling gets. I think this is a case of us just debating semantics.... I consider the "skill ceiling" only applying to what I think the game should test. Better phrasing for what I mean: I don't feel like it [L-canceling and other unnecessarily hard-to-perform actions] makes the game better, and I don't feel like being good at it rewards what the game should reward, so it's bad. You think it does reward what the game should reward so it's ok (at least that's how I read your posts. I might be wrong). I said that the techskill in Melee gives the player more options. Wavedashing, dashdancing, crouch cancelling, dash cancelling, techs (as in instant recovery, not “tech” for techniques) moonwalking, pivot etc. are all techs that give the player more options. And this is a case of depth necessitating techskill. I'm fine with that. I even said as much earlier. I think each individual maneuver should be as easy to perform as possible however, and it's clear that in some games (not so much Melee or Brawl, but if you look at some other games ... I think stuff like half-circle movements are a bit extreme) this isn't the case. In Melee the obvious examples are forcing multiple button presses to wavedash from the ground (somewhat understandable because having a "wavedash button" wouldn't help you in the air at all) and L-canceling. Bill sees this exactly the same way I do, I think. | ||
|
mog87
United States1586 Posts
On May 31 2009 08:12 Bill307 wrote: Way to miss the point of complaining about L-cancelling. The problem is not that it's "difficult". The problem is that it's stupid and should be unnecessary. Honestly, is there anyone who would have less fun if L-cancelling were automatic? I don't think anyone plays Melee for the joy of pressing L after every time they jump. Wavedashing is different. Having it in the game is good. Making it require an unnecessary and difficult sequence of button-presses -- especially if you use it frequently -- is bad. I understood your point, but I was just saying that the frame window to L cancel correctly is so large that it isnt really an issue in your argument about melee being so tech heavy. I mean sure I guess Id would be nice, if you didnt have to, but I disagree with it being stupid and unneccesary. Wavedashing isnt simple as you probably know because it wasn't directly intended to be put in the game, so really thats something no one can do anything about, | ||
|
anotak
United States1537 Posts
On May 31 2009 08:12 Bill307 wrote: Way to miss the point of complaining about L-cancelling. The problem is not that it's "difficult". The problem is that it's stupid and should be unnecessary. Honestly, is there anyone who would have less fun if L-cancelling were automatic? I don't think anyone plays Melee for the joy of pressing L after every time they jump. Wavedashing is different. Having it in the game is good. Making it require an unnecessary and difficult sequence of button-presses -- especially if you use it frequently -- is bad. Bill, wavedashing is pretty easy... I never played melee seriously anywhere near a tournament level (and I'm glad about it actually), I never even owned the game, I didn't spend more than an hour in training mode practicing it and I could do it pretty consistently after that. I had more trouble learning to do a Shoryu FADC in street fighter 4 or nearly any character's bread and butter combos in a real fighting game. Execution in games is NOT a bad thing for the following reason: many strategies revolve around doing things faster than your opponent can execute... to do difficult things you have to be ready to do the input (ex standing 360 on super turbo). Even Daigo can't shoryu every jump in. I don't have much knowledge of high level smash play, but I wouldn't be surprised if the same thing were true. And again, I don't know about smash and L-Cancelling, but in Starcraft (and Street Fighter) I have a lot of fun because of the mechanical difficulty of the game. Not even the actual game, just the fact that I have to do all these different things and etc. I really think the anti-execution viewpoint is kind of silly. edit: I'm not really defending smash, so much as I'm defending execution. You're disliking smash for the wrong reasons. | ||
|
crate
United States2474 Posts
I really think the anti-execution viewpoint is kind of silly And I think the pro-execution viewpoint is kind of silly. There is no obvious answer to who is right, because it just depends on what you think the game should test. | ||
|
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
On June 01 2009 00:45 anotak wrote: Bill, wavedashing is pretty easy... I never played melee seriously anywhere near a tournament level (and I'm glad about it actually), I never even owned the game, I didn't spend more than an hour in training mode practicing it and I could do it pretty consistently after that. I had more trouble learning to do a Shoryu FADC in street fighter 4 or nearly any character's bread and butter combos in a real fighting game. You think I haven't tried wavedashing before? I tried it with Marth and it took me maybe an hour to get it to happen even once. I can't see myself using it in a serious match without a LOT more practice to make it very consistent. I also learned that the timing is different for every character, which is yet another dumb obstacle. But even if I found it easy, it's pretty obvious that it's not easy for everybody. And about the comparison to SF4: what good is it to compare Melee to another game with difficult execution? Execution in games is NOT a bad thing for the following reason: many strategies revolve around doing things faster than your opponent can execute... to do difficult things you have to be ready to do the input (ex standing 360 on super turbo). Even Daigo can't shoryu every jump in. I don't have much knowledge of high level smash play, but I wouldn't be surprised if the same thing were true. And again, I don't know about smash and L-Cancelling, but in Starcraft (and Street Fighter) I have a lot of fun because of the mechanical difficulty of the game. Not even the actual game, just the fact that I have to do all these different things and etc. I've written pretty much exactly the same thing you did about the necessity of motions like dragon-punches and QCFx2 in other 2D fighters. (1-button 720s would be lolz.) And there is no comparison to what we are discussing here in Smash. I really think the anti-execution viewpoint is kind of silly. I'm not anti-execution. I'm specifically opposed to two things: 1. Pointless execution like L-cancelling and wavedashing, which might as well be automatic and easy, respectively. 2. The fact that high-level exection is too rewarding: having better and better execution should lead to dimishing returns. I've already posted why and I'm not going to post it again for people who overlooked it earlier. So if you disagree with me on this, then go find my reasons and quote them instead of quoting this post. edit: I'm not really defending smash, so much as I'm defending execution. You're disliking smash for the wrong reasons. How am I disliking Smash for the wrong reasons? I dislike having to invest a lot of time into execution in order to compete. Maybe I could play as Sheik, but what if I don't really like using that character? But it doesn't matter whether or not *I* like it. I could dislike it for some obscure reason, in which case there'd be no point in me posting about it. The reason I'm posting about it is because I think there's a large body of fighting game players, even competitive ones, who are pushed away from Melee because of its execution requirements. For me, this discussion isn't about changing Melee or making it better. Ultimately, this is about the design of fighting games in general. As someone who might be designing games professionally one day, discussing game design serves a purpose to me. No one is going to convince me to play Melee heavily: I have a number of gripes about the game, from the execution we've discussed, to the slippery-slope effect of taking damage. (One thing I like about other 2D fighters compared to StarCraft is that as I'm losing, my ability to make a comeback does not diminish, whereas in StarCraft a comeback becomes a LOT harder the worse off your situation gets. Now Smash doesn't suffer from this effect nearly as badly as StarCraft does, but it's there and it's noticeable.) It's not any more balanced than many other 2D fighters, either. So if you're debating with me to make me want to play it, you're probably wasting your time. But if you want to change my opinions on what makes good fighting game design, or good game design in general, or when tough execution is good or bad, then you may succeed. | ||
|
Meta
United States6225 Posts
I'd rather it just not be in the game than having it be automatic. | ||
|
anotak
United States1537 Posts
On June 01 2009 05:44 Bill307 wrote: And about the comparison to SF4: what good is it to compare Melee to another game with difficult execution? Did you really just call SF4 a game with difficult execution... ??? | ||
|
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
On June 01 2009 06:36 anotak wrote: Did you really just call SF4 a game with difficult execution... ??? My bad, one frame links are easy, sorry. Or if you're referring to shoryu FADC ultra, if you think that's easy then you've been playing fighting games for too long. I find it pretty easy myself, but I know that it's not easy when you try to look at it objectively. | ||
|
Bill307
Canada9103 Posts
On June 01 2009 06:16 Meta wrote: L-cancelling is hardly something that should be complained about... They should be second nature to anybody who's tried to play the game well. It just gives you a small edge if you can time it right... and I think that's great. Making it automatic is exactly like adding automine to sc 1. Sure, it'd be beneficial for noobs, but for people who've practiced mastering the finer aspects of the game already have it 100% down. I'd rather it just not be in the game than having it be automatic. Not that I'm against automine, but how is L-cancelling anything like automining? Not having automining not only increases the demand for multitasking skill, it also puts pressure on how much you can accomplish in a given time. Removing it doesn't just lower the multitasking skill requirement: it frees up time as well. L-cancelling gives you a small edge? For many air moves (e.g. Links' dair), missing an L-cancel is a free hit for your opponent. Why do you want to throw down a wall between people who can L-cancel and people who can't, anyway? There are lots of ways that people with practice can get better at Melee. What's so important about L-cancelling that it should be one of them? To me, it's just a waste of energy. Lastly, the whole "it's second nature with practice anyway" mentality is a common flaw of a bad game designer. =P | ||
|
gn0m
Sweden302 Posts
On June 01 2009 05:44 Bill307 wrote: You think I haven't tried wavedashing before? I tried it with Marth and it took me maybe an hour to get it to happen even once. I can't see myself using it in a serious match without a LOT more practice to make it very consistent. I also learned that the timing is different for every character, which is yet another dumb obstacle. You claim that you want to discuss game design and yet you are discussing wavedashing which wasn’t meant to be a technique in the game. I explained this in my previous post, go back and read again. If gamers find ways to tweak the physics of the game I guess you could argue that such exploits shouldn’t have been possible in the first place. But it’s pretty ridiculous to say that the exploits are too hard to perform. That would be like saying: “hey, make sure that there won’t be any ways of tweaking the game design, but if a gamer somehow comes up with a way, you must make sure that it’s very easy to execute.” The timing of the wavedash varies because different characters have different respons time to their jump, not because Nintendo wanted to ensure that a technique they didn’t intended to be in the game would be hard to pull off. I can however agree with your arguments regarding L-cancelling, though, in my opinion I think that it’s good that the game rewards players who have taken their time to learn techs. That purely subjective though, everyone can have different opinions. The reason I'm posting about it is because I think there's a large body of fighting game players, even competitive ones, who are pushed away from Melee because of its execution requirements. I don’t know anything about other fighting games but this statement surprised me. From discussions on smashboards (the largest smash forum) I have got the impression that gamers from other communities see smash as very untechnical. But you probably know better than I do. Anyway, I want to stress that Melee is very easy to pick up. You can have fun with the game within the first minute so I can’t imagine why there would be such a large body of uncompetitive gamers that find Melee too hard.. Honestly, it was meant to be a Nintendo party-game and has sold over 6 million copies (#1 selling GC-game). Very few of these have ever heard about the advanced techniques. No one is going to convince me to play Melee heavily: I have a number of gripes about the game, from the execution we've discussed, to the slippery-slope effect of taking damage. (One thing I like about other 2D fighters compared to StarCraft is that as I'm losing, my ability to make a comeback does not diminish, whereas in StarCraft a comeback becomes a LOT harder the worse off your situation gets. Now Smash doesn't suffer from this effect nearly as badly as StarCraft does, but it's there and it's noticeable.) False. How did you even come up with this? First of all, attacks do less and less damage. If I hit you with the same attack over and over, the damage you get will be lower for each time. This benefit the one taking hits. Secondly, more % give you more knockback. This means that it gets harder and harder to pull off a combo as the player with high % can DI away. Note that it gets much harder to land KO-hits when they are not connected in a combo. Take Marth for instance. Marth can often link chain-grabbs or hits to tippers and get KOs around 60-80%. But when the opponent gets more % this gets harder/impossible to do so which makes it much harder to land a KO-hit. It’s also easier for the one with high % to perform a big combo on a low % player than vice-versa. In Melee you can see 0-60%-combos (or even 0%-KO) but never 100-160%-combos. Finally, when someone is KO’ed he get invincibility time as well as 0 % which enables him to trade hits which is a big help. All these factors make a comeback easier. If you watch competitive Melee, it’s pretty common that they take turns in KOs. Of course high % makes you more vulnerable to strong attacks. Just as low HP will get you killed easier in other fighting games. But that’s pretty much the point of the game. Why would you try to hit you opponent if it didn’t give you an advantage whatsoever? It's not any more balanced than many other 2D fighters, either. That is true. They also nerfed weak characters when releasing new versions. At least there is not one character that is far more dominant like in Brawl. | ||
|
ThatGuy
Canada695 Posts
| ||
|
traced
1739 Posts
On May 31 2009 09:18 ThatGuy wrote: DI is the most important skill to master, and the hardest to perfect. It's not only used to survive kill moves, it's also important for evading combos, screwing with the opponents head with real sketchy knockback (DI jabs behind the oppponent, for example), and aiming for parts of the stage to tech off of. There's also the concept of Smash DI. I don't understand what you mean by how unintuitive it is. The best survival DI is (for the most part) pushing the joystick perpendicular to what you expect your knockback to be. If you're going to die upwards, push to the side. If you're going to die to the side, push upwards and towards the opponent. It's a really unique concept, but it's not that tough to pick up. If you're actually suggesting that you can determine your trajectory on attacks based on the direction you're holding, wouldn't that be a bit silly? You would hold down so you never get off the stage. Without DI...well, look at SSB64 combo videos >_> EDIT: Can we change the title of this thread, or make a new one? It seems to be a lot about debating over Brawl and Melee rather than Brawl+. man you didn't understand what i meant at all. i know about di. and i was in no way "suggesting" anything you wrote. i guess the misunderstanding was "di is the worst tech skill." it's the worst implemented tech skill. i'm not saying it shouldn't be in the game, just that the way it works is retarded. how does holding a direction after you get hit to pull the direction of the velocity vector make any sense? if people are hit in a certain direction, people naturally hold the opposite direction - this is why it's unintuitive. really it should work exactly the same as how post-stun air momentum works - if you hold a direction, you're adding a velocity in that direction. so no, if you hold down when you get hit you won't always stay on the stage (what?) because if you get hit at say...realfastx10, and holding down is only slowx3 you'll still travel upwards at realfastx10-slowx3. | ||
|
traced
1739 Posts
On May 31 2009 05:50 Bill307 wrote: No, WTF? Funny, I always thought that was called "reaction time", not technical skill. 1st quote - it's a timing thing. i can teach people who've never wavedashed to consistently do it in like 10 minutes irl. yeah i guess it's difficult for someone who has never wavedashed to wavedash out of the blue with no guidance, but such is anything. it's an easily executed mechanic. 2nd - well...no, it's part reaction time, part tech skill. it's kind of like apm/micro in sc | ||
|
EchOne
United States2906 Posts
What I want to point out is that for wavedashes, simplifying its execution to a single input will actually decrease a player's range of options, since in the input sequence that creates a wavedash, a player can dictate how far he wants to wavedash. Players with control can wavedash at varying lengths in order to adjust for spacing (wavedash length varies based on angle of the D-stick). The simplest example would be Marth wavedashing into fsmash tipper spacing. By controlling wavedash length he can apply tippers in more situations than otherwise. So yeah, I doubt "1 button wavedashes" could emulate the range of control. | ||
|
ThatGuy
Canada695 Posts
On June 01 2009 12:57 traced wrote: man you didn't understand what i meant at all. i know about di. and i was in no way "suggesting" anything you wrote. i guess the misunderstanding was "di is the worst tech skill." it's the worst implemented tech skill. i'm not saying it shouldn't be in the game, just that the way it works is retarded. how does holding a direction after you get hit to pull the direction of the velocity vector make any sense? if people are hit in a certain direction, people naturally hold the opposite direction - this is why it's unintuitive. really it should work exactly the same as how post-stun air momentum works - if you hold a direction, you're adding a velocity in that direction. so no, if you hold down when you get hit you won't always stay on the stage (what?) because if you get hit at say...realfastx10, and holding down is only slowx3 you'll still travel upwards at realfastx10-slowx3. In any case, I like how DI works, it's so awesome . I guess it's all personal preference. | ||
|
JIJIyO
Canada1957 Posts
On June 01 2009 12:33 ThatGuy wrote: Best comeback ever ^_^: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lIcE_-tWv8 It's got a thousand views!! COME ON MITCHO! | ||
|
Trumpet
United States1935 Posts
100% behind anotak. SF4 is ridiculously easy execution. One frame links are hard, yes. Thankfully, the only character that consistently uses one to my knowledge is Rufus (lk -> hp). The common "hard" links are all 2 frame (ryu's f + hp into jab, sagat c.lkx2, etc.) Maybe it's hard to consistently ex seismo sjc into meterless fadc ultra as viper, but things like that are the exception not the rule (and just take some extra time to get down in match.) Had you said most anything else, I'd agree with you, but SF4 is anything but execution heavy. Fadcs and wavedashes are pretty similar in that all it takes is playing a little to get them down with little trouble (speaking from personal experience). Do it a couple times with Luigi (I think thats right, been a while) to see how it's done since his is lenient as hell, then adjust it to the char of your choice. Is this really the same Bill who made that Arcana Heart combo video!? That comeback video got the most important element of comeback videos wrong. There's no crowd in it Fun to see melee and brawl juxtaposed though. I'd forgotten how much better of a game melee really is. For more on what comeback videos should look like: :D | ||
|
gn0m
Sweden302 Posts
On June 01 2009 13:44 EchOne wrote: What I want to point out is that for wavedashes, simplifying its execution to a single input will actually decrease a player's range of options, since in the input sequence that creates a wavedash, a player can dictate how far he wants to wavedash. Players with control can wavedash at varying lengths in order to adjust for spacing (wavedash length varies based on angle of the D-stick). The simplest example would be Marth wavedashing into fsmash tipper spacing. By controlling wavedash length he can apply tippers in more situations than otherwise. So yeah, I doubt "1 button wavedashes" could emulate the range of control. Yeah I was going to mention this but my previous post got so long. People claiming that Melee have techs that just forces the player to press a lot of buttons have absolutely no knowledge of the Melee game-play. Hot_Bid mentioned a standard Fox-combo earlier; a shuffled drillshine followed by a wavedash to an up smash. Sure, a lot of buttons must be pressed very fast in order to execute this combo, but every action has a specific purpose. These are the buttons pressed: Short jump (you only want to be in the air when performing an areal, or you put yourself in a bad position) Dair (gives the opponent the first hit-stun and is one option that can start the combo [other options are of course available, like a Nair]) Fast fall (see short jump) L-cancel (reduce the lag time you get when you land) Shine (deflects shieldgrabbing and one option that continues the combo) Jump [as the first part of the wavedash] (cancel the lagtime of the shine) R/L + joystick (let you control how long you need to wavedash in order to catch up with the opponents DI so you can continue the combo) Up smash (one option that continues the combo) The combo system in smash is very dynamic, each of these actions has a purpose and let the player control the flow of the combo. In some other fighting games you need to press a series of buttons and then a combo is released upon the opponent. In smash you have to keep pressing in order to keep the combo going and because of DI and choices, the combos can look very different. (Note that I know that you have to keep making attacks in other fighting games to keep the combo going, but in Melee there are no pre-set combos) Some of these actions could be neglected and the player would still be able to pull it off, but each action makes it easier to succeed. So my point is, each button press has one purpose. How could this be simplified, without removing the players’ control of the combo? The exception is L-cancelling which obviously could be automatic, but other stuff like fast falling and short jumping should not be automatic because the player must also have the option to full jump and not fast fall etc. | ||
|
ThatGuy
Canada695 Posts
I think there are other versions floating around somewhere. | ||
|
anotak
United States1537 Posts
On June 01 2009 16:57 Trumpet wrote: For more on what comeback videos should look like: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeM0rH_4ung This video made third strike popular because of the impressive execution involved. On June 01 2009 05:44 Bill307 wrote: You think I haven't tried wavedashing before? I tried it with Marth and it took me maybe an hour to get it to happen even once. I can't see myself using it in a serious match without a LOT more practice to make it very consistent. I also learned that the timing is different for every character, which is yet another dumb obstacle. I did it with marth too as he was my main. And yes, the timing is different for every character I've written pretty much exactly the same thing you did about the necessity of motions like dragon-punches and QCFx2 in other 2D fighters. (1-button 720s would be lolz.) And there is no comparison to what we are discussing here in Smash. Why is there no comparison? Sure, it's a wavedash isn't a shoryu, but it's an action in a game that you have to be READY TO DO. How am I disliking Smash for the wrong reasons? I dislike having to invest a lot of time into execution in order to compete. Then perhaps competitive gaming is not for you. Every serious competitive game has an execution barrier involved. As a player who generally has terrible execution in every game I play, I still ENJOY the requirement. Among other things, it lets me outsmart players with better execution than me a great challenge and a very rewarding feeling when I do so. For me, this discussion isn't about changing Melee or making it better. Ultimately, this is about the design of fighting games in general. As someone who might be designing games professionally one day, discussing game design serves a purpose to me. As it does to me for the same reasons. But if you want to change my opinions on what makes good fighting game design, or good game design in general, or when tough execution is good or bad, then you may succeed. I doubt it, people tend to be very convinced of opinions like this. I know that vocal parts of the fighting game community dislike execution (really Sirlin mainly). I'll try anyway I suppose. Here's a post a friend of mine made in a thread on SRK quite a while ago about 3P/3K buttons in tournaments: The difficulty of execution in fighting games is not an unintended effect. If it was then spinning pile driver would not be a 360 motion, it would be a quarter circle or even the same as a normal throw. In the case of mapping PPP/KKK to buttons in SF4, it is ridiculous because it would effectively give Zangief and only Zangief a dragon punch button. It is no mystery that the lariats have huge hitbox on activation, and the kick lariat in particular will beat just about every ground poke that touches it during its activation. You might think that this is a stupid example because hitting 3 buttons at the same time should be effortless for a stick player, but then try this example and see what you think: To get lariat to come out the fastest possible, you have to have your fingers resting on all three of the button type you want before it is time to react and do the lariat to eliminate travel time of your fingers moving into position if they have to and then actually moving downward to hit the buttons (very small but significant added execution time). Try getting a stick and putting 3 fingers on the kicks, and record ryu to throw fireballs and see your success rate of trying to lariat with this technique, no lifting your fingers to hit the buttons allowed. Even if you are good at doing it, there will likely be times where you will mess up and get a normal and not lariat, this kind of screwup is very significant in a heated match where you are say trying to hit rufus c.fp with a kick lariat on reaction. Not only is there a possibility of error, but because you have three fingers busy with trying to hit lariat as fast as possible, you will be slightly delayed in trying to do something else because of the awkward hand position. Such a wall of text dedicated to these small downsides, but they are what makes it possible for rufus to have c.fp as a usable move (usable as in being an attack that can be in rufus' advantage to do). Compare to if you have one button for PPP and one for KKK. Not much forethought is required other than placing a pinky on KKK button. There is no possibility of messing up and getting a normal, and the rest of the fingers are free to freely maneuver with, so Rufus will now be severely limited in his methods of attack in this already difficult matchup. So as you see, this issue of EXECUTION affects the STRATEGY of a matchup. If every option in every situation is immediately accessible then suddenly the game becomes to an extent less strategic. A lot of things about fighting games relies on doing thing your opponent is not ready for and therefore cannot do in time. Sagat's standing roundhouse can be jabbed by zangief, or it can be SPD'd. The SPD does much more damage, gives a knockdown, yet the jab is a better strategy. I'll write a more thorough explanation of issues related to this soon I'm just very tired right now. On June 01 2009 07:49 Bill307 wrote: Or if you're referring to shoryu FADC ultra, if you think that's easy then you've been playing fighting games for too long. I've been playing fighting games since last september. | ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
| ||
|
mog87
United States1586 Posts
On June 07 2009 08:16 Amber[LighT] wrote: did anyone happen to download the codes? the download links are apparently down and I want to try this. I'm using 4.0 and i have homebrew channel + gecko OS installed. http://web.me.com/shane_mulligan/Brawl _Nightly_Builds/LatestNightly.html google is your friend...but I tried it last night..its better than brawl crawl, but all things considered Id play melee anyday over it. Also Funny fact about the ek vs amsah match is that EK almost made the exact comeback from 4 stocks down earlier in the set I believe, but ended up falling short. Oh well...tis alot harder to do with Marth..especially PAL marth, then again against PAL sheik the matchup is prolly evenish in the first place. | ||
|
GoSu
Korea (South)1773 Posts
On May 08 2009 14:35 jodogohoo wrote: wtf? 64 was way faster than melee totally agree with that | ||
|
piratebay
United States399 Posts
| ||
|
Bebop Berserker
United States246 Posts
64 was slower than melee. | ||
|
roronoe
Canada1527 Posts
totally agree with this | ||
|
JeeJee
Canada5652 Posts
64 was faster than melee | ||
|
EchOne
United States2906 Posts
| ||
|
Gustav_Wind
United States646 Posts
On June 07 2009 10:55 EchOne wrote: Please only make judgments of 64 if you have credentials and/or evidence. I have none, but I'd love to see a substantial debate if there are people who can field one. Lol what kind of credentials are you looking for? And what debate are you talking about? | ||
|
VarsityUser
United States84 Posts
And no these games aren't even close to being balanced. Have u seen what they did to mario since melee? he has some useless butter gun and they nerfed him for no reason. I guess they figured talented gamers who don't own the game will play Mario and beat their friends, so they must change that. Guess what? it worked, I never bought a smash since 64. | ||
|
Gustav_Wind
United States646 Posts
On June 07 2009 22:14 VarsityUser wrote: I used to watch SSBM pros on youtube. really great stuff, but gets repetitive after a while. Theres a lot of hand eye skill, and they tend to use the same 1/3rd characters oft the game. Anyone looking to learn just youtube SSBM azen i think. also PC.chris or something is great. And no these games aren't even close to being balanced. Have u seen what they did to mario since melee? he has some useless butter gun and they nerfed him for no reason. I guess they figured talented gamers who don't own the game will play Mario and beat their friends, so they must change that. Guess what? it worked, I never bought a smash since 64. Strange that you chose to mention Azen primarily... he has a really weird style that very few people can emulate, and he was the best player for a relatively short period of time | ||
|
Zoler
Sweden6339 Posts
Need help | ||
|
EchOne
United States2906 Posts
On learning Melee... it's crucial in Melee to have friends that you can play against often (and are somewhat decent), and later it's crucial to go to tournaments. Once you choose a character, you can go to smashboards' individual Melee character forums and look for guides and threads that will detail what you should do with him (hopefully involving combos). Two of the most combo heavy characters are Cpt. Falcon and Falco. The most crucial skill to focus on in the beginning is dodging your opponents' approaches and punishing them for them. Different characters' options vary in their effectiveness for this, but dash-dance is the most common and is really applicable to some extent or another for every character. You can read about it on smashboards, or you can ask someone to explain it here. The reason for this is because it takes a lot more experience to learn how to safely approach than it does to learn how to safely camp. Watch pro vids. There are new tournaments coming out with vids all the time, and smashboards has its own forum for new vids. If you want to watch them to learn, I think you know what to do. Analyze them like you would an SC replay: with the intent to know the players' intents for every move. At a more shallow level of analysis, you can also pick up little tricks that they do. Watch combo vids. Youtube rocks. If ever you go "holy shit what just happened?" make sure you find out what just happened. On L cancelling... it can help combos obviously by reducing your landing lag, and you usually want to fast-fall into it to further minimize lag. Get into the habit of doing something as soon as your L cancel ends. Dashing is a good habit, as it helps you chase and thus chain combos. It also helps for the defensive role of L cancel... that is, making your aerials difficult to punish. There's a lot more to mention, but I don't want to be a bore, so that's it. Find some friends, get on smashboards, and watch some vids. | ||
|
Zoler
Sweden6339 Posts
I beat the lvl 9 comp now without losing a stock and before I would lose like 2-3 (5 stock from start) hehe My movement really got better and somehow I've learned how to block attacks just by watching pro vods O_O | ||
|
Gustav_Wind
United States646 Posts
On June 07 2009 23:20 Zoler wrote: Actually I've already got a bit better just by watching some pro vods in here ^^ I beat the lvl 9 comp now without losing a stock and before I would lose like 2-3 (5 stock from start) hehe My movement really got better and somehow I've learned how to block attacks just by watching pro vods O_O Stop fighting level 9s. That's a really bad thing to do if you want to get better. You're playing 64, right? Learn how to short hop consistently and how to z cancel all your aerials consistently. Practice in training mode at first, then vs a level 1. Short hopping is just pressing the jump button as usual but releasing it really quickly. It's like a quick tap of the jump button. Your jump will be significantly shorter. Those are the first two things to learn. Once you learn those, you can learn combos. After the basic technical skill though it all comes down to playing other people who are decent/good. You can do this by playing online. visit the 64 forum on smashboards if you're interested: http://www.smashboards.com/forumdisplay.php?f=11 If you want to watch videos for 64, watch Isai's vids: http://www.youtube.com/mevsec he's freakishly good at 64. Very few people even come close. | ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
On June 07 2009 17:02 Gustav_Wind wrote: The engine of 64 is clearly much slower than that of melee (due mostly to the fact that characters fall slower in 64). The combos are just longer because of insane hitstun and lack of DI. In certain matchups stocks go by as fast or faster in 64 than in melee. Lol what kind of credentials are you looking for? And what debate are you talking about? you better have a PhD in Super Smash Brothers to post itt  Did anyone end up installing Brawl+ ? I wanna play with some people | ||
|
mog87
United States1586 Posts
On June 08 2009 05:20 Amber[LighT] wrote: you better have a PhD in Super Smash Brothers to post itt Did anyone end up installing Brawl+ ? I wanna play with some people whats ur friend code And Melee is also about who you play..You improve so much just from playing decent people. Watching videos helps, especially if its all you have but you grow the most from playing others. But seriously I wouldnt bother playing melee, at this point in time, unless you can find other skilled people to play, or atleast have a buncha friends who really wanna get good at it. | ||
|
Zoler
Sweden6339 Posts
On June 08 2009 03:25 Gustav_Wind wrote: Stop fighting level 9s. That's a really bad thing to do if you want to get better. You're playing 64, right? Learn how to short hop consistently and how to z cancel all your aerials consistently. Practice in training mode at first, then vs a level 1. Short hopping is just pressing the jump button as usual but releasing it really quickly. It's like a quick tap of the jump button. Your jump will be significantly shorter. Those are the first two things to learn. Once you learn those, you can learn combos. After the basic technical skill though it all comes down to playing other people who are decent/good. You can do this by playing online. visit the 64 forum on smashboards if you're interested: http://www.smashboards.com/forumdisplay.php?f=11 If you want to watch videos for 64, watch Isai's vids: http://www.youtube.com/mevsec he's freakishly good at 64. Very few people even come close. I know short hop and cancelling pretty decent ^^ I just need to play but I dont know vs who | ||
|
Racenilatr
United States2756 Posts
| ||
|
ThatGuy
Canada695 Posts
VarsityUser, Mario is much much better than the scene gives him credit for. He's just highly underrepresented. He's also took a dive in tiers due to the fact that there is only 1 Mario player in the Smash Back Room (the commitee who votes on the tiers/tournament ruleset/etc.) and he's pretty much dropped Mario for Luigi. Of course no one's going to vote for him if there are no Mario players out there to watch. That being said, you think the game is imbalanced because Mario is bad? That's not a balance issue, that's you being a fanboy | ||
|
EchOne
United States2906 Posts
| ||
|
SaveYourSavior
United States1071 Posts
there's also some lower risk/ high reward characters as well.. There are many great combos, gimps, but at the same time there can be massive camping or patience for waiting for that one moment where you can get in to hit your opponent to reap huge rewards. If you want to learn some tricks that you probably did not know before, you should check out http://www.youtube.com/sMoke2jointz It has some crummy online matches but also it has some instructional vids on a lot of stuff. | ||
|
Gustav_Wind
United States646 Posts
On June 08 2009 06:29 Zoler wrote: I know short hop and cancelling pretty decent ^^ I just need to play but I dont know vs who Have you tried setting up online play? Get Project64k or Mupen and you can play vs other people on Kaillera post on Smashboards maybe if you want help with that or if you want to find people to play | ||
|
igotmyown
United States4291 Posts
Incredibly difficult | ||
|
EchOne
United States2906 Posts
| ||
|
traced
1739 Posts
| ||
|
Gustav_Wind
United States646 Posts
though it was revolutionary in its time | ||
|
igotmyown
United States4291 Posts
| ||
|
mog87
United States1586 Posts
| ||
| ||
|
|
OSC
Replay Cast
OSC
WardiTV Invitational
OSC
Korean StarCraft League
SOOP
sOs vs Percival
CranKy Ducklings
WardiTV Invitational
Cheesadelphia
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
