News Article

First impressions: HD Brawling with Super Smash Bros. for Wii U

Posted by Martin Watts

Big screen action

At a first glance, you could be forgiven for assuming that Super Smash Bros. for Wii U is simply a HD refresh of Super Smash Bros. Brawl, especially given that the core gameplay concept hasn't evolved a great deal. Nevertheless, underneath its incredibly polished aesthetics and smooth 60 frames per second speed, there’s a wealth of improvements that make this latest instalment a much more refined experience.

As if the Super Smash Bros. Invitational tournament at E3 wasn't already evidence enough, subtle gameplay changes which increase the overall speed of gameplay and gravity’s effect on characters suggest that this title is being geared towards the competitive crowd. The removal of tripping, for example, is an instant blessing for anyone who has ever lost a match due to its random and cruel design. It’s nowhere near as complex as Super Smash Bros. Melee was and thankfully so, as there are plenty of regular players out there who will want to enjoy this too.

The Super Smash Bros. series was never designed with the sole purpose of trying to provide an ultra-balanced, highly competitive game, and while pro players may find this more appealing that the last title, the overall focus is still on providing frenetic and action-packed fun for all. Enhanced greatly by the luxury of high definition, simply looking at a stage is hazardous by itself as beautiful, dynamic backdrops are tempting enough to divert your eyes from the on-screen combat. Of particular note from our recent playthrough was the stage inspired by Pilotwings, which perfectly captures and merges the glorious scale of Pilotwings Resort’s Wuhu Island and the classic Mode 7 effect of the SNES original. Of course, the resolution boost helps to distinguish on-screen characters, items and hazards from one another, making it much easier to keep up with the action compared to the upcoming 3DS version, for which we also recently shared first impressions.

The new additions to the character roster also add something fresh to the mix. Previous Super Smash Bros. games have featured numerous clones of existing characters, and while we imagine this may still happen to some degree in the Wii U version, a lot of work has nevertheless gone into creating bespoke move sets for newcomers. Animal Crossing’s Villager, for example, calls upon a wide range of everyday items to rain destruction on his/her enemies, and has an unusual feat in that one of his/her mid-air attacks is actually a projectile. Little Mac, on the other hand, has a weighty feel and delivers hits with stunning force – provided he’s planted on the ground that is. All players will no doubt appreciate the diversity of character types on offer, but it’s the veterans who will get a real kick out of mastering a character with an entirely new feel to them.

Again, Super Smash Bros. for Wii U can’t help but look like its predecessors on the surface; players shouldn't expect revolutionary new gameplay mechanics, not to mention that the franchise was never in need of them. Instead, Sakurai-san and Co. have – based on what we’ve played – done a fabulous job of tweaking the nuts of bolts underneath it all, giving it a stunning coat of paint and ramping up the fun factor once again. Wii U owners are in for a real treat when Super Smash Bros. for Wii U lands a knockout punch this holiday season.

Some extra first impressions — Ron DelVillano

It's not entirely fair or easy to judge a game based on a few short minutes — my experience was at an occasionally chaotic Smash-Fest event. The idea of issuing one's first impressions on a game without extended exposure is, in a way, absolutely absurd. With that in mind, the good news is that a first impression is exactly what its name claims it to be: an initial response to something you know virtually nothing about. Remember when you first met your best friend and immediately knew they were someone with whom you could easily get along and have a lot of fun? Super Smash Bros. could easily be every Wii U owner’s new best friend.

One thing that is immediately apparent upon playing is that significant adjustments have been made to balance the characters. Even in this early build, the pace at which each individual fighter attacks, dodges, and recovers all feel distinctive, as if the in-game physics have been completely rebuilt from the ground up. Rather than feeling like an enhanced or altered version of the characters present in Melee or Brawl, this new game plays like a fresh experience. Combat is familiar, but all of your actions have more gravity to them, providing a more concise version of the frantic battles that we’re used to. Returning characters still felt familiar, but there is a new smoothness to gameplay that makes the experience all the more fluid.

If there was any issue with the game that I noticed, it was trying to get used to playing with the Pro Controller. Attacks are still linked to the A and B buttons, with jumps assigned to X and Y, but the layout had me attacking when I meant to jump, and hopping out of the way when I was aiming to finish off my opponents with a devastating blow. All four players were set up to use this controller, leaving the GamePad resting in its charging cradle. From where I stood, I could see that the GamePad was supporting off-television play, reflecting all of the action on the small screen. Here's to hoping that the controls can easily be adjusted to better reflect the setup of the GameCube controller in the full game, assuming we don't all just spring for the official adapter instead.

In terms of new fighters to the series, I only had the chance to play as Wii Fit Trainer and Little Mac. Wii Fit Trainer was much slower and heavier than expected, making her surprisingly difficult to use for a first match, but her attack strength more than made up for the low speed. Conversely, Little Mac's rapid ground attacks and movement speed felt smooth and natural, especially when juxtaposed against his sub-par aerial routine. Despite Little Mac's in-air vulnerability, his powerful fists ensure that he's still a contender who shouldn’t be dismissed. The two new characters that I got to play as didn’t feel like they fit into the Smash Bros. universe as naturally as series veterans do, but they still manage to exude the expected amount of charm, bringing their unique styles to the fray.

Subscribe to Nintendo Life on YouTube

Be sure to check out our other hands on features from E3:

From the web

Game Screenshots

User Comments (127)



JonathanX said:

I don't know if i will buy this game anymore... the Wii U version seems so better and playable in HD and a big screen... And unfortunately I don't have a Wii U



CapeSmash said:

Looking forward to both versions, especially the Wii U version. Getting the 3DS version day one, and I'll probably get the Wii U version as a Christmas gift.



Datasun_7 said:

@AdmiralThrawn you know there aren't two types of gamers right? These guys clearly aren't casual gamers as they show passion for video games through great content. So why wouldn't we listen to them? They have played the game, I have not. So I am going to listen to their thoughts



SethNintendo said:

I'm pumped... I was going to just buy the Wii U version but I'm thinking about buying both to get my fix on.



rjejr said:

I'm sure this game will look great and play just fine. The 3 things I am most interested are:

How does the amiibo work in practice when 4 people are playing?
Do the Mii fighters feel fleshed out enough to make them worth playing or will they be dominated by the other well rounded characters?
What are we getting to make up for the lack of a Subspace Emissary sequel?

Of course a date would be nice, but that has nothing to do w/ actually playing the game.



unrandomsam said:

It is annoying for me they delayed the 3DS version. Right now would have been perfect. (Haven't been on holiday with my brothers for at least 10 years and probably won't again for ages but they both have 3DS's.)

A week where I could play it properly would have been great.



Yorumi said:

The one thing I would kind of disagree with is this:

"It’s nowhere near as complex as Super Smash Bros. Melee was and thankfully so, as there are plenty of regular players out there who will want to enjoy this too."

Melee may have had complexity under the hood but it was still a 3 button game. I've never been at high levels of competitive play and I had no problem enjoying melee. I've never seen one single thing in melee that "excludes regular players," unless we some how have this notion that they should be playing at the highest levels of competitive play. Really pokemon is far far more complex under the hood and that never stopped any regular players from enjoying it. It just gives something more for those who want to go deeper to enjoy.

I'm just saying that just because something has complexity at a level you'll never see shouldn't stop anyone from enjoying it.



MegaWatts said:

@Yorumi I think you raise a fair point, and what I was trying to get across here is that the highest level of Melee is to an extent quite exclusive, but you wouldn't know it unless you played with those types of players. In this new version, online play is a more crucial element and, therefore, there's more opportunity for people to potentially come across these high-end players. Nevertheless — and as you astutely note — the game can certainly be enjoyed by many due to its overall simplicity.



Jazzer94 said:

"It’s nowhere near as complex as Super Smash Bros. Melee was and thankfully so, as there are plenty of regular players out there who will want to enjoy this too."

Why is this a good thing, I'm really curious to know why in more detail. Melee was never hurt by being complex plenty of people were oblivious to all the more complex skills and happily played it casually for years, I played it for 5 years before I even knew wavedashing existed. Games like Street Fighter, Tekken, Killer Instinct, Mortal Kombat 9 and Dead or Alive have huge fanbases made up of people who play both competitively and casual why can't Smash have this and quite a few of those games are very complex at high level.



DarkKirby said:

It’s nowhere near as complex as Super Smash Bros. Melee was and thankfully so, as there are plenty of regular players out there who will want to enjoy this too.

Competitive players really don't care that much about things like having to press buttons at precise times for things like wave dashing and L-canceling. I don't know why so many people have the misconception that they want the game to be hard to play for casuals.

All competitive players really want is a fast paced game that favors offense rather than defense. Slow movement and lots of lag on attacks favors defensive play in general when it comes to fighters (lots of recovery on attacks mean attacks are easily punishable), but Brawl went much further than that with multiple mechanics intentionally designed to discourage competitive play.

As to why less landing lag is important? Did you watch the Grand Finals at E3 2014? Kirby had a nearly impossible time approaching Zero Suit Samus despite clearly outplaying her (the players playing them that is). He couldn't approach safely from the air because of landing lag and of course the ground was taken up by Samus's whip. A game that favors not approaching and playing defensively like Brawl, is considered boring by many. It was what caused the original version of Street Fighter x Tekkan to be condemned, but they thankfully released a patch to mostly remedy the problem, but it was too late to really save the game from the success it might have been.

How many people hated Melee? Very few. Casuals and competitive players alike enjoyed it, even if they didn't play together. Compare that to Brawl, which has a following of casual fans, but is despised by many competitive players. How does focusing development on trying to restrict competitive play exactly even favor casual players? At the end of the day, casual players will never be close to even with practiced competitive players. It was that way even with Brawl.

Please do some research before labeling competitive players are elitists that want casuals to suffer, because frankly these days, I see FAR MORE casual elitists.



DiscoGentleman said:

"It’s nowhere near as complex as Super Smash Bros. Melee was and thankfully so, as there are plenty of regular players out there who will want to enjoy this too."

I also have issue with this statement.
Rabble rabble.



Silent said:

''It’s nowhere near as complex as Super Smash Bros. Melee was and thankfully so, as there are plenty of regular players out there who will want to enjoy this too.''
Yup. Pretty much casuals here...By the way, a beginner can enjoy Melee as much as a skilled player, the problem is that this mentality limits the skill cap and makes it a game that the casual player will pick up for 5 minutes and then never play again. This is the only thing that Sakurai doesn't understand. The first people who are going to buy the games are the fans, then come the pros and if they're going around about how bad this game is, Nintendo better prepare some huge advertising campaign...

Don't misunderstand, I love Brawl and Project M and I'm not huge on melee, but the freedom of movement and the high skill cap is very noticeable and I understand when people understand that Brawl is a defensive game thus I really hope Sakurai doesn't make the same mistake again.



Senario said:

@MegaWatts The problem I have with the statement is that competitive players are suggesting accessible versions of changes that add depth but all we ever get from some players is "thankfully it isn't as deep!" I am at a loss how lower landing lag across the board isn't accessible, how dashing being more fluid and less slide like isn't accessible since you just move the control stick, and how momentum being carried over when you run then jump like all other platformer is inaccessible or "too hard". There are other smaller concerns like how pressing a direction while in the air makes you move more in that direction but I can't see how more accessible that can be besides writing it down in the manual much like how jump cancels or rapid/roman/bold cancels ate in other fighting games. It really isn't that complicated and the mechanics that are complicated are pretty much in consensus that simplifying them is fine as long as it is in the game.



Senario said:

@Hero-of-WiiU Yes, all competitive players do it since it allows then to control how high or low they want to jump by pressing the button lighter or harder. Rather than pressing up which is almost always a full jump.



JaxonH said:


How can you call someone a casual who lives and breaths playing great games? That's just elitism. No one on this site is a "casual" gamer. You don't have to treat games like a sport to be considered "hardcore". These guys represent the vast majority of gamers who will be playing Smash Bros. The same vast majority that the game was designed for and is being targeted towards. His opinion is about as valid as they come.



JaxonH said:

And here's my opinion on the whole "casual/pro" thing...

From what I understand, Melee was what it was due in no small part to unintended consequences. You can't plan out development of unintended side effects that happen to work in the favor of competitive gaming. Technology has advanced, and glitches/bugs of past games are now being reconciled. This game is exactly the game Sakurai always intended for gamers to play. I feel it's high time people respect what the man wants to make, and enjoy it for what it is. If it's not satisfactorily geared toward competition to the standards you desire, well, you can always go back and keep playing Melee.

As for the rest of us, that don't study the intricate, technical aspects of fighters, get your body ready...



Yosher said:

Really getting pumped for some HD Smashing. Of course I'm getting both versions though!



Dpishere said:

Though I would certainly get the 3DS version if I didn't have a Wii U, I won't simply because both me and my bro would have to buy a copy in order to play together, while with a Wii U version we could both simply play on a nice big screen! 3DS version looks still looks stellar though!



Dpishere said:

@JaxonH It is kind of funny that although Brawl was heavily criticised for having casual elements like tripping I STILL consider it to be the superior game simply because of the staggering amount of content in that game and the fact that I find it simply more fun.



SphericalCrusher said:

@DiscoGentleman It does. It's a little faster than Brawl, but not quite as fast as Project M or Melee. It's a perfect mix of the two IMO.

I'll read the full article later. NintendoLife FTW.



Yorumi said:

@JaxonH you can't just chalk everything up to bugs. For example landing lag, something they're specifically tinkering with. It's clearly something they decided to add to the game. Furthermore a producer who does not learn from what worked in a game, no matter how accidental, isn't a good producer. That doesn't mean the formula can't be tinkered with at all it's just many things that became standard features in games were never initially intentional.

The thing that irks people with smash is brawl was nintendo essentially saying "we believe skill should not play a role in any kind of competitive gaming at any level." If Sakurai thought tripping was good game design that kind of diminishes his god like status far to many attribute to him.

As kirby pointed out, did any of the things in melee prevent anyone from enjoying the game? Nope. However, the same cannot be said of brawl, as anyone trying to get better was instantly smacked in the face with the brick wall of punishing skilled players. Essentially the better you got as the game the more it punished you. That's not good design, that's just frustration to anyone playing the game above a button mashing level. What's worse is it doesn't even achieve it's stated goal of closing the gap between skilled and unskilled players.



Senario said:

@JaxonH There were no glitches and bugs that had any significance in melee or 64 though. All of the stuff was game mechanics and functions of either the physics of the game where momentum was retained or an intended mechanic. One could argue that maybe wavedashing is an exploit but definitely not a glitch much like how snaking worked in mario kart ds. Regardless, nobody is arguing it to be back.

L cancelling is totally intended though. Not only are the files for the animation different but the mechanic was mentioned in the Smash 64 manual on the controls for the z button.

The thing is that as much as some people dislike to admit. The competitive smash bros community are still some of the biggest fans of the game. We want to love the game for a duality of party and competitive aspects but we are not so blind as to say that it is ok without looking at what matters to us. It is a very tired argument that we should go back to melee because as much as we want the game to be competitive and accessible we are not being accepted by some people despite our efforts to show that we are willing to compromise on some things. If you really want to be exclusionary that is your choice but we never stopped people from having fun their own way.

Also, if you determine a games worth by content amount that is fine. We just want the other side of the coin to be good too, the game mechanics. Also Sakurai has shown time and again that he wants to be exclusionary, it gets kind of hard when we are allowing him to learn and become a better game designer but he is so stubborn that he would rather exclude a very passionate group of players just so he can have it his way. We are consumers too you know and acting holier than thou to us just really is bad practice.



Dr_Corndog said:

@AdmiralThrawn Well, yeah. I mean, anyone who can't spend a few hours studying his opponent's artwork and then use that to sweep him in a four-stock match is casual to Grand Admiral Thrawn.



Jazzer94 said:

@JaxonH Well I know wavedashing wasn't a bug Sakurai has said in an interview that they knew it was there.
Also we know SSB4 isn't exactly as Sakurai intended Smash to be that would be Brawl with terrible mechanics like tripping which has been discarded because everyone hated it showing that fan input has a place in how Smash is developed and the biggest fans are the competitive players so why should they be ignored.



NintyMan said:

Even though I'll be getting both games on Day One and I'm looking forward to Smash Bros. 3DS quite a bit, I believe the Wii U version will be the definitive version. Even though we know very little about it, I believe there is a treasure trove of goodies that Sakurai is hiding since the 3DS one is releasing first. Super Smash Bros. has always firmly been a home console experience, and Smash Bros. Wii U is going to be the biggest version that will get families, friends, and strangers playing together at parties, tournaments, and events. Smash Bros. Wii U will also be a meatier game than Smash Bros. 3DS, and the soundtrack is already a sign since Smash Bros. Wii U has the big My Music options from Brawl returning while Smash Bros. 3DS only has two music tracks per stage.

Still, both games are going to be a blast to play!



JaxonH said:


I'm not arguing those things shouldn't be in the game. I have no vested interest either way. It doesn't matter to me one way or the other. All I'm saying is they're not in the game. And it's his game. He's making it how he wants it to be. And I think people should appreciate it for exactly that, instead of playing backseat developer and dictating what he should or shouldn't do. I can appreciate that some are passionate, but people need to realize if they want a game to be a certain way, they should become a developer. But when you play other people's games, you have to appreciate their envisioning for how it should be.

Nintendo's games are notorious for utilizing random chance to affect play. And Smash is no different. I understand why some are against it, and that's why many don't play Nintendo games to begin with, games like Mario Kart for exampe. They want skill only. Nintendo isn't exactly the best place for that though.



Anguspuss said:

am i missing the point some times wii u. Mario kart upgraded visuals some new bits & a game we all love. SSB upgraded visuals new bits & bobs & the game we all loved. If they brought out a totally different game they would be slammed



JaxonH said:


"we are not being accepted by some people despite our efforts to show that we are willing to compromise on some things. If you really want to be exclusionary that is your choice but we never stopped people from having fun their own way"

I keep hearing stuff like this as if competitive players are being "victimized" by heartless casuals. Who's not accepting you? I never said I'm AGAINST certain technical features being in the game. I'm not AGAINST your way of having fun. I don't care what you do, or what's in the game, to be perfectly honest- I'm just calling it what it is and stating the facts. I'm not saying I DON'T WANT those features. I'm just stating an observation that THEY'RE NOT PRESENT. And the reason they're not present is because Sakurai chose for them to not be present. He chose for them to not be present, because he is designing the game in a manner which suits his desires. It's his game, and he can make it how he wishes. And all I'm saying, is people should respect that. If some find it not to their liking, I can understand that. But the game is what it is, ya know? This is how he wants it to be.

Not to mention, all those little tricks in Melee weren't found out about 6 months before launch. It took time. It took people playing it to figure it all out. There might be separate technicalities in this game too, different ones that make IT stand out. But people aren't giving it a chance. They're just judging because it isn't the exact replica of a 10 year old game they want it to be. People didn't know Melee was good until well after it released and they had time to play it a while. AT LEAST give this game the same courtesy. Know what I mean?



Yorumi said:

@JaxonH So basically people should give their opinions, shouldn't let nintendo know what they like and don't like etc? No one should ever voice any opinion over what a company is doing with a game. That kind of arrogance is the very thing that got nintendo into trouble in the first place. Furthermore not everyone has hundreds of millions of dollars to start a game company, hire hundreds of workers and spend years developing a AAA game. The changes being made between brawl and this new smash are a direct result of fan feedback, and now you're basically saying "you arn't welcome here if you have any feedback."



JaxonH said:


Who said you aren't welcome here? Who said you shouldn't voice your opinions? Man, competitive players sure love playing the victim don't they! I never said any such thing. Voice away. And as always, everyone is welcome here. Idk where how you construed THAT out of my comment, but whatever.



SparkOfSpirit said:

Sure is a lot of whining in here.

Anyway, I do hope the landing lag gets tweaked, though I'm fairly certain it will.



Senario said:

@JaxonH Nobody is asking for an exact copy of melee, refer to other posts. Nobody wants exactly melee. Criticisms are totally fine because they are not immediately dismissing the game, they are awknowledging that the game has some things that could be worked on and are giving feedback where NINTENDO ASKED. NINTENDO ASKED THEM. Waiting around and saying that everything is fine until release sounds like a bad idea. About as much as an irresponsible teacher grading your first draft of an essay by just checkmarking it and saying "its all good" then when you turn in the final draft you get an F.

Also I agree with Yorumi, you are saying we aren't welcome if we have feedback. And what matters is not what the author (or in this case the game developer) intended for the series. It is what the work is now, which is a widely popular competitive game that goes to the biggest fighting game tournaments around the world.

From idea channel, different topic (in this case anime rather than games) but same concepts apply. The author of Evangelion is in a similar situation as Sakurai himself.



JaxonH said:


If I wanted to tell someone they're not welcome, I'd come right out and say exactly that. Believe me I have no problem speaking my mind. You can rest assured, if that is what I wanted to say, I would have said it.

I also never said people shouldn't criticize. Please, by all means criticize away! I don't know where you're getting this stuff from. Really, you're digging in too deep to what I said I think.

My original post was merely my opinion- that people should respect what the man wants to make, whether it's what they want or not. You say the game is "a widely popular competitive game that goes to the biggest fighting tournaments in the world"> actually, only 1 game of the now 5 different releases fully falls into that category. And that's what I'm getting at. You say Brawl wasn't his envisioning? Well neither was Melee.He's made that clear through the other four entries that are NOT like it- N64, Wii, and now Wii U and 3DS. I understand a small, vocal group want the game a specific way, AND THAT'S FINE, but what I'm saying is people should at least TRY to appreciate the game for what it is, rather than what they personally desire.

You guys are welcome to complain to your heart's content. By all means, knock yourself out. I'm just saying, the original intentions of creating a Smash Bros game was to create a Mario Kart type experience of the fighting genre. Mario Kart is hardly something you can expect to be truly geared towards competitive players- although fans will compete and have fun doing so. Likewise, Smash was never meant to be more than Nintendo's light-hearted take on the fighting genre. I understand you and others want more, AND I RESPECT THAT> all I'm doing is pointing out the truth of the matter- that that was never Nintendo nor Sakurai's intentions.

You are among friends here. We can have a difference of opinion and still be good. You should never take anything I say at more than face value- I'm just sharing my personal view on the matter. I'm not crusading against your cause, ok?



Yorumi said:

@JaxonH oh gee I don't know how about:
"instead of playing backseat developer and dictating what he should or shouldn't do." So basically stop giving your opinions of the game.

And then in this post you start trying to group people up to play some sort of class warfare card with ad hominem attacks like: "Man, competitive players sure love playing the victim don't they! " I find it intersting that you show such hostility toward competitive players with that retort specially since I've said in my first post I'm not a competitive player. I've mostly played smash against the AI and friends, never online, and never against anyone more skilled than my immediate friends(hint none of us are all that skilled). You're using your own bias against people to make false claims about someone so you can portray them a certain way.

I've never once shown any hostility toward casual players or tell them they shouldn't voice their opinions, how could I, I am one. You should stick to the facts instead of telling people to go make their own game if they have an opinion. No one is capable of dictating to nintendo what they show do and that's a complete straw man argument. Opinions are not dictates.



ikki5 said:

And now we only need some info on what features the WIi U will have that the 3DS doesn't have...



Senario said:

@JaxonH 2/3 releases, Smash 4 isn't out and should not be counted yet as either competitive or party as the game isn't finished. Also the two versions of the game are not entries 4 and 5. They are a single entry.

Smash 64 is fairly popular though dwarfed by melee, both are competitive. Brawl really doesn't have a strong community and is actually dying out. Not counting project M as it is technically a mod but if you were to include would make the vast majority of smash games playable competitive and casual. It is extremely short sighted and stubborn on Sakurai's part to ignore the fanbase who really wants to like the new game for a long time to come. Just so he can achieve his "vision" that even Nintendo seems to be shying away from. Nintendo is having a 3DS tourney at San Diego Comic Con, they are sponsors at EVO this year, they are asking feedback from the competitive community. They are doing a lot and generally they are doing things right, as to how much influence they have with Sakurai it is in the air. Again, Sakurai is stubborn and unsupportive of what are essentially the only fans of the game that care about the deep mechanics of the game. If you played with friends you wouldn't care that air moves recovered fast, or you could dash forward a good distance then dash away without some silly sliding. Plus the fact that stage hazards and items accomplish the party game aspect regardless of what other mechanics you put in the game.



AceDefective said:

Oh god, there's an argument in the comment section over game mechanics not present in this current iteration.
Look, the way I see it is: in fighting games, learning is key to competition. Just because you're used to one set of mechanics in one game DOES NOT mean it'll transfer to another game with a new set. Melee FANBOYS need to get over this. Just because one game is inherently different in play from another DOES NOT make it less (objectively) competitive. Its one thing to have preferences, its another to dismiss a game entirely based upon your inability to adapt.



JaxonH said:


I should have been more specific. My hostility was toward the accusations slandered against me by not one, but two self proclaimed "competitive" players, one of which was you. I should have just come right out and called you by name, because the truth is I don't have anything against competitive players. I was trying to be polite and not call you by name, and it did come off as an attack against ALL competitive players.

Now, when I said "if people want a game a certain way, they should become developers and create that game" I meant it. You're never going to have a game exactly how you desire it to be. If you want an exact experience, you're gonna have to create it- a "want something done right gotta do it yourself" kind of thing. Until then, we have to settle for what's made by others, and enjoy it for what it is.

And IN MY OPINION, that's the problem with uber-fans. They get too demanding on what the next game MUST have and MUST NOT have. Instead of looking at things objectionably like they did before they became fans of that series.



Jazzer94 said:

@JaxonH " I understand a small, vocal group want the game a specific way"

It's not a small group of people it's thousands of people who go to tournaments either to cheer on there friends or play themselves, then there are even more who watch tournaments via streams these are the people who love Smash a great deal and keep it relevant when most people have moved on to the next thing.



JaxonH said:


I get it. You don't have to sell me on anything. I was never arguing those features shouldn't be in the game. BUT, I'm not saying they should. All I'm saying, is they aren't. And despite that not being what you want, you (generally speaking, the collective YOU), should just try the game out and see how YOU like it before judging it on a checklist of absent technical features you heard from the next guy. You might like the game MORE this way. You might find DIFFERENT technical moves not present in past games. You don't know until you try it. But people are too busy judging it prematurely.



JaxonH said:

Thousands, out of 10-20 million, is a small group. And I know competitive players like to take all the credit for keeping the game relative, but there are a ton of normal gamers, like myself, who will play the game for years and years (like Mario Kart) and keep the online just as alive as the competitive people. Only there's millions of us. So let's not get too gung-ho on taking credit for keeping it relative.



Yorumi said:

@JaxonH ok it's become obvious you're not intending to read what people are posting and instead want to just engage in ad hominem attacks. I have said not once, but TWICE now that I am not a competitive smash player. You're making these assumptions so you can lob attacks at people. That's why I believe you have some sort of resentment against all competitive players. You just assume things about people, and then even put words in their mouths they never said, in order to attack them.

Not only do you said I've proclaimed myself a competitive player, which I have not, and even said the opposite. But you also say people are demanding things when all they're doing is stating their opinion. You seem to only be posting here anymore to make false claims about people and attack them.

Hopefully others will read when you have not and see you for what you are in this comment section.



Ernest_The_Crab said:

@MegaWatts I thought you could customize your controls. I'm pretty sure that was mentioned at least of couple times on this site. You should probably make mention of that in the article.



JaxonH said:


If I misread you for saying you were competitive, sorry! My goodness who cares! You're making a mountain out of a molehill! Ever heard that saying? And for goodness sake learn what hypocrisy is. You were putting words in my mouth not five minutes ago, so please.

If I assumed you were competitive, it was probably because you were jumping down my throat with irrational attacks taking a stance in favor of their argument. So it doesn't matter if you are or aren't. I THOUGHT you were, and THAT is why I posted what I did.

You're right, I don't intend to read much of your posts because all you do is attack anyone who goes against your opinion. I didn't respond to anyone's post, I made an objective statement and YOU attacked me for it. Which is seeming to become a trend of late. So you'll understand if I skim your posts, which are nothing but attacks against opinion I have.

The people "just stating their opinion" are NOT who I was referring to. OBVIOUSLY.

Come here. State your opinion. Don't go on full paragraph rants against someone just because they assumed you were a competitive player...



Yorumi said:

@JaxonH point out in direct quotes in my first response to you where I made any kind of personal attack and wasn't merely responding to what you said with my own evidence and opion. If you cannot directly quote a personal attack on you in that post, and I know you can't, I want an appology now.

You've been attacking my character this entire time while admitting you arn't even reading what I'm saying. So I'm owed an appology right now.



KeithTheGeek said:

I respect Mr. Sakurai in that he's one of the few real auteur game designers in the big leagues (i.e. not an indie developer), and he's responsible for bringing not one but two of my top 3 game series to life - Kirby and, of course, Smash Bros. I do, however, highly disagree with the direction Brawl took, and I'm somewhat worried about this game as a result.

To be perfectly clear, I do not hate Brawl. Brawl was a fun game, and one I regularly played up until a couple years ago when my interest in the competitive scene really took hold of me. But matters of game design are very important to me, and I believe that the designer only makes half of the game. It's up to the players, the community, to take part in designing that other half. It leads to wonderful things like speed runs and, yes, tournament play for games you wouldn't ever expect to see them in. It disappoints me to see a developer I respect take efforts to quash the community just because they took a game in a different direction than intended.

I don't think we should be specifically catered to, either. There's no real reason to do that when the competitive scene is still the minority... But I don't think he should be specifically removing things without suitable replacements, just so the game could have as low of a skill ceiling as possible. Wave dashing and L-canceling are not necessary techniques, and only serve to raise the barrier to entry. So why not simplify things some without cutting out the depth? Universally reduced landing lag and improved movement options, such as Melee-style dashes and momentum would suffice.

Additionally, it strikes me as odd that the one constant of the Smash Bros games is being tinkered with to the point that they've completely missed the point. That is, ledge grabbing and trumping. On grabbing the ledge, you have a short invincibility period. This is there to insure you aren't in a completely disadvantageous position, among other things. Yet here you are able to trump it anyways, regardless if you're still invincible or not. I'm entirely okay with reducing or even removing invincibility on multiple ledge grabs, as it reduces ledge camping, but I feel like this removes the ledge game entirely and makes it more difficult to secure knock outs. Time will tell, however, if this is a negative gut says yes, but it could end up having interesting implications.



WreckItRyan said:

Um…well, of course new characters with new mechanics wouldn't feel as natural as series veterans!



Senario said:

@JaxonH And if I tried it at the best buy promotion during E3? You assume I've never played the game and thus have no input on it because I must be "taking these mechanics that are missing from somebody else's checklist" I have my own checklist and I tried it out what little time I did get to play the game over that. Plus I watched a few more games as well. Also, you have to admit you are kinda being rude to Yorumi. He is providing good counter arguments and you are telling him to shut up and not even reading what he is saying.

@KeithTheGeek and yes, the ledge is way too free in this game. You grab second -> You get ledge. It is bonkers to think that a game revolved around keeping your enemy off the stage keeps changing to make it easier for the person off the stage to get back on. Edgeguarding wasn't a problem and combining melee's invincibility mechanics with the current auto snap of smash 4 seemed to be a good way to do it since there are risks to guarding only on the ledge. You can still edge guard, but missing the sweet spot isn't as punishing because you generally can't miss it. A fair compromise...that didn't happen. Blast zones are kinda far out and recoveries are huge in this game, doesn't exactly help either.

And agreed about Sakurai in a way. It is such a shame he wants to squash the community when even Nintendo is supportive of it.



JaxonH said:


I'd have to disagree. I think both of you are picking an argument with me when there is none. The only valid point he has is that I misread and assumed he was a competitive player (oh the horror). I'm multi-tasking and skimmed too fast and missed what he said. Mistakes happen. But demanding an apology? You've gotta be kidding me.

You're trying to argue with my opinion- Idk why you're even trying to convince me otherwise. Ok, you played Smash. I never assumed you didn't. What I assumed was that you haven't sat down with the game and played for a month or two, and (correct me if I'm wrong), you haven't done that, right? Playing once at Best Buy isn't really enough to discover all the potential intricacies of the game.

I said it several times now, and I'll say it again. I'm not against your wanting these features in the game. I don't care one way or the other. That's NOT what I'm saying. All I'm saying is people should give the game a chance and evaluate it on its OWN merits, rather than the checklist of merits they want it to have (your checklist, others' checklists, doesn't matter). What I'm saying is people should at least try to enjoy it for what it is, rather than what they want it to be.

And if you try it, and you still don't like it, well at least you gave it a chance. Like I said before, at least you still have games like Melee and Project M to fall back on. But as for me, myself and I? I can tell you right now I'm never playing Melee or Brawl again after this one releases.



Yorumi said:

I know you don't read these but I was asking for an apology for you making false accusations about me making personal attacks. Something you have done to me, which I why I specifically asked for the quote, to prove you are outright lying about me. I'm still waiting for that btw.

Also for everyone else, no I won't be continuing this beyond this post. I'll only be posting again if I get a sincere apology or have something more to contribute related that's on topic with the article. I just do not tollerate someone lying about me and personally attacking my character.



Joetherocker said:

I dunno, if Sakurai was on an all out rampage to destroy the competitive scene I doubt For Glory would have ever even been considered and tripping would have stayed.

But that's just me.



ricklongo said:

@JonathanX Mercado Livre, my friend. Many dealers sell US consoles there. Bought mine there a little over a year ago, for 900 reais (plus an BRL 100 tax for 24 hour delivery, which was totally worth it). Just make sure you're buying from a reputable dealer and you're good to go.



Caryslan said:

Some thing that bothers me about these comments is that people are making assumptions that Smash 4 will be a horrible game compttivly, and that Sakurai has no clue what he's doing. My issue is that this is a game that the vast majority of us have not played yet. And even the pro players and the people at Best Buy demos played it for short periords of time, hardly enough to make a through judgment.

People are bashing this game all over the internet, but I have a question for everyone. When you first saw Melee trailers, did you think it would become a major tournament mainstay? Did you see anything beyond a party/fighting game hybrid that would be a fun diversion to Street Fighter and other "real" fighting games?

64, Melee, and Brawl's metagames were were not formed in a day, a week, a month, or even a year. It took time to discover all the little tricks that characters can do, exploits in the engine, and other stuff that made those games so popular with competitive players.

Now, Brawl did muddle up things to some degree. Tripping, questionable nerfs of veterans, and slower gameplay messed up Brawl's appeal to competitive gamers.

But Smash 4 seems to be taking a step back from that. The gameplay speed is faster, hitstun seems to be much better, many veterans like Link, Mario, and Samus have all be vastly improved, random tripping is gone, and there seems to be some effort to avoid the same pitfalls Brawl had.

Of course, there are unknowns. How will the new ledge mechanics effect the game for instance.

But to here some people talk, they act like Sakurai flipped the middle finger to the fans and introduced super tripping or some other things that messed up the game.

Maybe Smash 4 will be a disaster like Brawl was in terms of competitive play, but everything I've seen so far seems to show that some improvement has been made.

And that's the thing, for all any of us know, Smash 4 could end up having a very deep and rewarding metagame. People just need time with the game, and comparing to Melee all the time does not help matters.

Smash 64 was its own game, as were Melee and Brawl. Let's see how Smash 4 turns out before we judge it trash.



Senario said:

@Caryslan There is a difference between judging it trash and providing criticisms to help with game development. Since Nintendo was asking anyway.

I'm sure it'll be a fine party game. But after playing several times and watching many games I can see that there are some problems that need to be worked out. Maybe they will change maybe they won't. On the one hand you have Brawl which played a lot like melee in an early build (a few months before release apparently) which leads to some hope for a bunch of changes since Nintendo is taking input. But on the other hand you have Sakurai, the most stubborn developer who can't see that the presence of competitive play does not inhibit the free for all with items and stage hazards gameplay of the party aspect of the game. Oh and his precedent for removing competitive aspects and constantly calling the game as something he sees as "only a party game". Highly ironic because earlier he said that limiting yourself to only one idea makes your development view narrow. But staying silent isn't the answer. Again, we aren't dismissing it as trash but we do recognize there are parts that could be worked on so that everybody can have a game that is a great addition to the series from any point of view.

Edit: The topic of For Glory: Sakurai is kinda half listening. The most balanced stage isn't final destination at all, even Nintendo recognizes that with their invitational being grand finals on battlefield instead of final destination. I'm glad the for glory mode exists (as long as it has stock options and not just timed matches) but battlefield versions of every stage would've been better than FD. But I suppose we just have to take it, actual tournaments probably won't use the preset mode of for glory and will likely use a stage list that is narrowed down from the final list of available stages.



JaxonH said:


Get over your pride man and this whole "I'm the victim, I demand an apology" stuff. You sat there and falsely accused me of saying "You're not welcome here" and again falsely accused me of saying "no one is allowed to criticize" and again right now saying "you KNOW I don't read your posts", simply because I was busy and overlooked a small detail of your previous comments. That would be considered slander, or you could call it lies, or you could lump it into the personal attacks category. I'm not sitting here on my high horse demanding an apology from you for any of THAT. Nor am I demanding an apology for you calling my opinions arrogant. You are not the victim here. You are the aggressor playing the victim.



Dr_Corndog said:

Some of these comments just go to show there's no satisfying some people. The game is faster. Tripping's out. There's a competitive-only mode online. Numerous people who've played the game have commented that it plays a lot better than Brawl. Character balance seems to be a real priority.

Yet you still get this "Sakurai's a terrible developer because he has his own ideas and didn't write me a letter personally asking how I wanted the game to be" mentality from a FEW people. Chill, guys.



TeeJay said:

Ugh. The moment I read that sentence about Melee in the article I knew I would scroll down to meet a long string of arguments. Whatever.

As much as I know this will be the superior version visually, not having a Wii U I think the 3DS will suit my needs perfectly. When people describe the 3DS version as being "a warmup for when the real deal arrives in December" I actually get a little upset because the 3DS version is the exact same experience as the Wii U version core gameplay-wise. It's not like the mechanics or character roster will be dumbed down for the 3DS, so I don't understand that mindset at all. It will be an excellent title and a must-have in any 3DS library purely on it's own merits.



Yorumi said:

@Caryslan I don't think people are trashing the game, and I also don't think the comparison to the launch of melee is fair either. Melee launched in an era where the internet was still a relatively new thing, at that point most people had probably never seen competitive smash.

Let me make this clear I'm not saying we need a clone of melee, but for sake of a tought experiment what exactly would be wrong with that? Melee was a party game every bit as much as brawl was, it had plenty of items and general mayhem, a 7 year old could figure out how to play in a matter of minutes etc.

When a common response to the criticisms is "well it's not as bad as brawl" that to me kind of implies there's something better out there. I don't want to try to portray Sakurai in a hugely negative light, but considering there's a pretty good consensus going on which version of smash is the worst that should have been a bit of a wake up call. I don't know the man obviously but I do kind of get the feeling he resents the competitive scene and resents the fact that broadly speaking the smash community doens't agree with his visions. I'm still expecting a great game, I just think it's weird to compromise with a game that wasn't entirely well received.



HollowGrapeJ said:

Anyone else getting both versions day one? Oh, and can you believe that we're finally getting Smash on a handheld! So awesome! I can play Smash on the go with awesome exclusive stages and then when I get home I can play a whole new Smash Bros in HD. It's like a dream come true. Non Stop Smash!



TwilightAngel said:

I came back to this article and read the comment's and you can't please players especially competitive players.God they are so annoying now i had respect for them and it's gone.



Yorumi said:

@midnafanboy, @SockoMario I'm kind of curious what the competitive players did that was so aggregeous. With the exception of AdmiralThrawn, I don't see anything negative being said of less competitive playes, there's even people saying despite wanting the game to focus more on the competitive they don't think the competitive players should be specifically catered too.

Why do more serious gamers seem to elicit such negativity from people for simply expressing their opinions of what they like and don't like in a game? Why does there even need to be all this class warfare in gaming anyway?



TwilightAngel said:

@Yorumi I don't care is your opinion, but the thing i hate is competitive players want this game to be melee. And thinking this game is for them is not.This game is to save the wiiu not to please competitive players.People can not accept that and i am sick and tired of hearing them whine about this. Im a serious gamer but this getting ridiculous. You can have an argument with me about this, but you will not change my mind about competitive players sorry.



Yorumi said:

@midnafanboy I don't see anyone whining that's the thing, they're just stating their opinion. Part of this goes back to my earlier question for simple purposes a thought experiment, what would be so horrible if the game ended up being a melee clone mechanicall? Were casuals not able to play melee? Was it somehow not a party game?

I seriously want to know cause you're creating all this class warfare and for what exactly? Why so angry and insulting to people just expressing their opinions about a game's design? What I see in this comment section is mostly people talking about why they liked melee, what compromises their willing to make, stating they understand the casual crowd and understanding, and stating they don't believe the competitive crowd should be catered to. In return they're mostly getting hate back. Why?



TwilightAngel said:

@Yorumi I'm not insulting them you asked about my opinion about competitive players. I gave it too you.Don't come here asking why im angry i'm not. I'm just giving my opinion about them, i don't like them they whine about this game all over the internet so much. And i'm tired of it, when this game comes out i'm going to hear so many complaining .I'm a casual player on smash bro's cause i just play to have fun that's it. If you're a competitive player fine good for you.But i don't care i gave my opinion about the matter and i'm done have a nice day old sport.



Yorumi said:

I just don't get it, you come into a thread where most everyone is being rational, call competitive players whiners and say you're not insulting them. Would you not consider it insulting if someone turned your own words around and said "I'm sick of you coming here to do nothing but whine all the time about competitive players. You just go all over the internet and whine all the time, face it competitive players exist get used to it and stop being so annoying with your whining." Everyone on this site would be right to chastise someone doing that.

I just don't get all the class warfare. Do two wrongs make a right? Is it right to show up to a comment thread and call a bunch of people whiners when they are doing no such thing just because someone somewhere else on the internet did something you don't like? Is it not better to bring people together with a common enjoyment of a game rather than seeking to drive a wedge between them and get people to attack each other?

What purpose does it server other than to make the internet and this site a more hostile place?



TwilightAngel said:

@Yorumi Is my opinion and you asked why, i gave you the answer and you're acting like i did something horrible.If you didn't want to read my opinions then you why asked?Don't come here acting like you're the victim here, just because you read my opinion about the question you asked.Like JaxonH said "get over you're pride man"



Franklin said:

As a handheld title isn't as ideal for tournament gaming, and considering that more people own a 3DS, I think it would make sense for Nintendo to make the portable version more accessible, and the Wii U iteration more competitive.



randomous said:

I think this "Melee Brawl Competitive Whatever" problem has less to do with the "skill cap" and more to do with how enjoyable the game is to play at high levels. High level Brawl players will still destroy almost everyone they face (excluding other high level players); but the way to achieve this is through defensive play, which isn't nearly as fun as offensive play. You can train up your "mind games" and work on your ability to read players and bust right through anyone's perceived skill cap, but at the end of the day, you still want to have an enjoyable experience. It is so much more fun and rewarding to be throwing out attacks in a fast paced manner than to sit around dodging and camping until you trick your opponent into leaving themselves open. This isn't an issue about how skilled you can possibly become at the game, but which skills you have to utilize the most in order to be successful. The skills required to master Brawl are not quite as fun as the skills required to master Melee, so Melee wins in the competitive scene because it's more enjoyable to master.

I think this is why people are concerned about some of Smash 4's design choices. They appear to be leaning towards defensive play rather than offensive, which is leaving people worried that the game won't have a lasting appeal because it's not as fun or rewarding to master.



TheBlurB said:

It will be interesting to see the 3DS version work it's wireless muscles in a crowd of hundreds of wireless devices and other electronic interference. I'm hoping it works well so that smash 3ds will be worth playing in a tourney setting.



SuperiorYoshi87 said:

People can argue as much as they want but at the end of the day the bottem line is the game is only going to be as competitive as the community makes it. None of the Smash Bros games were made with a competitive environment in mind, it was the community that made the games competitive. Advance techniques came as people practiced and found them, whether they were accidental or placed in purposely is irrelevant. Smash 4 WILL be competitive if the community embraces it to be. Any Smash game can be competitive or played at a competitive level it's the communities opinion of it that effects it's life in a competitive environment. Not all competitive fighting games are offensive in style Street Fighter 4 is a fine example it's a game that favors defensive play and yet is still one of the largest competitive games. Brawl was being chastised from the start and yet a competitive community still exits, I'll be it not a large one. It's the communities choice to make the game competitive obviously this choice will be helped or hinderd by mechanics but still. True competitive Smash players play every Smash competitively they don't just play one, they may favor one but they don't exclusively play just one. If your a true competitive smasher you play all the games and learn the mechanics, the ins and outs and play it at a high level. I've played every Smash competitively with the same 2 mains every game. Smash 4 will be no different for me, I look foreword to learning the mechanics and enjoying the game at a competitive level.



Jazzer94 said:

@midnafanboy No one is saying they want it exactly like Melee I haven't seen one comment like that in the entire article, I think you are confused over the section most of us quoted as I was arguing that being more complex i.e. Melee was never a problem for the casual crowd in the first place.



Rin-go said:

My goodness. -_-


And I agree with @JaxonH that it will be the game it is supposed to be from a developer standpoint. If you don't like it the way it is, don't buy it. Simple.
Another thing is that the game isn't even released yet, so better wait until it gets released.

Nice comment. ^^



Yorumi said:

@midnafanboy it has nothing at all to do with pride or not wanting to see your opinions. It's about wanting to see a place where gamers can all enjoy the things they love without insulting, attacking, dehumanizing each other. Flaming people in a thread for something none of them did just because someone else in an entirely different section of the internet isn't productive. That's like going to find someone unrelated sitting in their home and chewing them out cause someone else cut you off on the road.

You've got jaxon admitting he doesn't read posts and just blindly attacking people in no way based on what they've said, and you attacking people here who havn't done what you accuse them of. What's the point other than intentionally trying to start a fight? None of this is me trying to play any kind of victem it's me saying show some maturity and treat people with respect when posting.



Luna-Harmony said:

So are the 3DS and Wii u games the same ? i would rather have the wii u as can see on a bigger screen.
This is going to be the best game of the year i will be upraised if people don't buy a wii u just for this game as so many great other wii u games out.



heyzeus002 said:

@SuperiorYoshi87 true in a sense about the community making it competitive but its give and take, the game has to allow that on its end.for instance, capcom vs snk 1 and sf x tekken (pre patch) weren't taken seriously at a competitive level due to issues with mechanics so even though the community wanted them yo be competitive, they just weren't mechanically so a lot will depend on the game and not just the community. Also, sf4 does not favour defensive play.nor does it favour offensive play.thats what makes it brilliant competitively, it is supremely well balanced and probably the best example in videogame history of a game that can cater to competitive and a non-competitve audience with equal aplomb.



heyzeus002 said:

@Luna-Harmony same in the sense that the characters and core gameplay are the same but stages are different and both versions will have exlusive modes and such far as im aware they arent going to be like other games where the console and handheld games are almost like two distinctly different games.



randomlypikachu said:

i dont see what the problem would be of allowing things to be geared more towards competitive play why alienate a whole group of fans in favor of "casual players" when really doing things to get the competitive audience back isn't going to affect casual could make the argument that with online play its necessary to hinder competitive play to give normal players a better chance, but thats still a really poor excuse to do that to so many fans, especially now that we have a for fun and for glory mode.

also i understand the comments about respecting what sakurai wishes to do with the game, believe me i get it. the thing is that respecting what someone wants to do doesnt mean a fan can't complain or make criticisms. criticizing and complaining can actually help a game get better and shouldnt be completely ignored because its not in line with what "insert any name of any person making a game here" was originally thinking.or intending.




@DarkKirby The problem is that the Melee community literally spits on Brawl, and that's undeserved. They come off as narcissistic for their game, belittling Brawl when its main purpose was to expand the audience for Smash, which Melee's scene repaid in kind with extreme bashing and eventually modding to make Brawl into MORE MELEE.

I honestly think that, as long as the game still uses the auto-cancel from Brawl, we should be straight. L-Cancel (smooth landings) made some characters too good in the air, and guys like Lil Mac would be straight up STUPID in this game if they can manually reduce recovery frames. They just need to speed up the actual recovery frames on the characters appropriately, but NO manual cancels, please.



Yorumi said:

@NINTENCHIP bashing a game isn't narcissistic, though more like elitist. Semantics aside I'm still trying to figure out what was so bad about melee in terms of casual players. I feel like people on both sides tend to just talk past each other. We often seem to cite advanced techniques to none of them would have even known existed. Even someone using them on you as a casual player you'd probably never know they did it.

I just feel like both games get presented falsely. Brawl is as worse than it actually is and melee is presented as some sort of hardcore super high barrier to entry game.

I'll wrap this up with this. The way I see it, a game like melee would please both crowds. The competitive ones get a tight offensive game, and the casuals get the typical party game with items and everything else creating mayhem. And look I am seriously looking for a discussion about this what really was so wrong with melee from a casual's perspective? I want to know cause I can't see it myself, I played the game casually for years and never had any issues with it.



Senario said:

@Yorumi I do get tired with trying to deal with people who are against the competitive community so I agree with what you said here. Competitive play in no way hurts casual play due to the very nature of items, stage hazards, and four player free for all. Low landing lag does nothing for any character, much less little mac, when their air game is already pretty bad (and not for the reasons of speed). Kirby in melee was like this. Fast ish character with not so good air moves in general where lower landing lag didn't make him godlike.

Oh, and I despise auto cancelling from brawl because it is an even worse mechanic than l cancelling. It punishes you for not knowing and forces you into ending your air attack only on certain frames. Decrease landing lag across the board to compensate for no L cancel like mechanic.



SuperiorYoshi87 said:

@heyzeus002 Well my comment of SF4 was going off of what friends of mine who play it competitively say they always told me it favored defensive play. So I can't debate that nor do I want to lol. My comment still stands though on I believe it's largely the community even more so than mechanics because it's the communities opinions of those mechanics to say whether or not they are competitive as in my personal view there is no deffinets in what is and isn't a competitive mechanic it's a matter of opinion. However I will agree to disagree as we obviously have different opinions on that subject and I respect that I'm not looking to add another argument to the "Sm4sh isn't going to be competitive argument". I'm just saying the true players will play it and do so at a high level. It's life cycle will depend on the mass opinion of the game. Even if EVERYONE dosent embrace Sm4sh it's still going to have a competitive following I can gaurenteed anyone who is in the competitive Brawl community will most likely adopt Sm4sh as their new chosen game. Melee players probably won't because it's different then the game they've been playing for 10 years and a lot of people don't like change.




@Yorumi If you play against casuals in enough games, you'd understand. I do, so I do understand. Consider this example:

-You and your 3 friends play Fighter X. You're the only one that understands the mechanics/glitches/exploits/tricks/techniques in it at an advanced level (pretty much everything a competitive player would take advantage of unless it's explicitly banned).

-Because of this, you easily win. Over and over again. The chances of you losing are extremely low, and if you do lose, your friends question if you let them win.

-Over time, either your friends get better, or the amount of them that want to play Fighter X goes from 3/3 to 0/3.

That's the basic gist of it. The point is to make it so that, even with advanced players, the possibility of winning doesn't seem so far out of reach that it doesn't deter those guys' friends from wanting to play/purchase the game too. Brawl did that, and sales for the game reflect the goodwill from it. My cousin (who's definitely a casual gamer) actually showed some pride in improving while playing Brawl, and it's one of the few fighting games I can suggest to play left in my house. Yea, his chances of winning are practically zilch, but it's not a complete curb stomp like it'd be if I were hard core in Melee and played him in that...or just played him in SF or Tekken or something.




@Senario Here's the thing about Lil Mac:

-His ground game isn't like Kirby's. His ground game is purposefully made to be the best in the game, or one of the best.

-His air game's built to be the worst in the game, or one of the worst.

If he's able to shffl to abuse air attacks with little to no lag while having a god tier ground game, what do you think that makes? A complete MONSTER. That simply isn't smart balancing. The point of removing smooth landings was to deter abusing short hops to throw out free, fast aerials on characters that shouldn't be able to launch them that fast. Kirby doesn't fit that example because he's not meant to be sluggish in the air, or a heavy hitter outside of his forward smash and hammer. If you can keep yourself from abusing short hops in-tandem with fast-falls, you can just have the auto-cancel cancel your move's animations for free by gauging the height of your jumps when attacking.



randomlypikachu said:

@NINTENDCHIP im just gona chime in with my problem with that. a competitive player takes time to master these advanced mechanics and tricks for competitive play. they aren't doing it to completely destroy casual players and friends (unless that friend happens to be another competitive player xP ) so they most likely aren't gona be doing any of these advanced mechanics during a casual match (unless of course theyre playing with friends who are also competitive and they choose to play a competitive match). also as i stated before that way of thinking is made even weaker with the for glory and for fun mode



Yorumi said:

@NINTENCHIP Well first off sales are an absolutely unfair comparison, you're trying to compare a console that has an install base of a little over 20 million to one with an install base over 100 million.

As for the rest, I guess what that's just it the casual crowd believes melee didn't punish skilled players enough for their dedication? I guess I just view it differently, skilled players should win, and brawl doesn't really close the gap at all. It just gives a player with a little more skill a slight disadvantage. To me when I win I want to know it was because of my skill. If I found out the only reason I ever won was because of a flip of a coin I'd be pretty pissed. You just can't take a professional sports player and put him on the same level as a 5 year old.

The other problem I have is these games have handicaps you can select to put on. I just don't like the notion that every single last competitive player should be punished for dedication just because some casuals don't want to take the time to set up a handicap. If winning is really that important to someone they need to put forth the effort to get better instead of begging for handouts.




@randomlypikachu Oh you'd THINK they wouldn't destroy you. I have friends that are competitive in fighting games I've never played before. They WILL NOT HESITATE. If you're completely hopeless, they might hold back for a second or two, but freaking trust me on this one. They will NOT hesitate.

Like I said: I have a bit of everything. I'm skilled in a decent slew of games. I'm not in others. I have friends that are totally casual, and others that aren't, but are better or worse than me at certain games. I've had experiences from just about every stand-point you could ask me to look at it from.




@Yorumi Brawl still sold better earlier on in the Wii's lifetime anyway. Part of that can be thanks to the reputation it earned from the previous entries, but part of that is also due to the longevity it gained in stores from people enjoying the game instead of getting crushed all year long.

Secondly, it's not about punishing skilled players. It's making sure skilled players aren't light years ahead of players trying to get better, so that those that aren't as good don't give up. Also, what about Brawl was a "coin flip"? Even if you don't like Brawl, to say it's based on a lucky coin flip is a tad -> elitist <- (right word this time). Anytime I win in Brawl I know it's based on my skill unless they tripped into my wining Smash attack when we're both on our final stocks at high percentages...which never happened. Regardless, based on the second paragraph, you hardly understand what I'm trying to convey to you.

And the third paragraph is once again about punishing better players. Look, I don't see what's in Brawl that punishes better players. Tripping was added to punish those that start and stop dashing too much (part of that schizo-looking meta from Melee), but as far as punishing you for being better in general? Nothing. So why are you saying it like if you become good in Brawl, you magically lose stocks? It's not about hand-outs when there's no items on, anyway, so that's also sort of moot.



Yorumi said:

@NINTENCHIP You're trying to have it both ways, it's can't be about skill and not about skill at the same time. If it's all about skill then the best player wins every time, if it's not about skill then the best player isn't guaranteed to win. You've essentially contradicted yourself because you're complaining that the most skilled player in melee always wins, and then said the most skilled player wins in brawl too. So what's the problem with melee exactly?

The only way to bring vastly different skill levels together is to actively punish the more skilled player. He's got to play with some sort of handicap, whether hardcoded into the game or self imposed, thus a punishment. Realistically the only way to do this is add random chance of failure in one form or another.

It just really kind of seems to me more like people hate melee out of spite more than any kind of empirical data.




@Yorumi You're still not understanding what I'm saying.

I'm not saying the most skilled player shouldn't win. I'm saying the skill cap for what's considered "good" shouldn't be barred by things like "You should be able to consistently input 6-7 different commands per second in order to shffl properly". It's about making sure that even if someone's good, the possibility of ever winning against them isn't so unbelievably low that people get deterred from playing the game. You can even out the playing field a bit without making a game either Mario Party or Street Fighter.

Secondly, no, the way you bring skill levels closer together can come in many ways. Yes, you can include random elements that punish skilled players, but you can also simplify/polish a game so there's less to be skilled at in the first place. That isn't punishment. That's just lack of a gain. The lack of shffl-ing and "wave dashing" isn't a punishment. It's just a lack of those things. So that slows down those that would otherwise use them, but it's not an in-game punishment for knowing how to use them.

I don't hate Melee. I hate Melee's elitist community, though, and I definitely spite the game to some degree due to them selling Brawl short at every possible turn. Brawl did what it was supposed to do: Expand the fan base. It did it well. Why Melee players make it look like a raw turd...I have no clue.



Senario said:

@NINTENCHIP no because the weakness in his air game is not coming from the landing is due to his air moves being pretty bad. Add to that his recovery is crap makes it a much more fair comparison. What use is a good ground game in a game where every hit sends the opponent flying?

As for skilled players being light years ahead. This is something that you cannot fix properly through the game without matchmaking done properly. But stopping competitive players from being able to achieve all they can sounds flawed because if the game is still somewhat skillful the better player will stomp all over a casual player. I don't expect to win at a basketball game vs a pro player as I understand they are more skillful. Even if the game hindered him and benefited me I would still lose. There is nothing wrong with the more skilled player being able to shut out the less skilled one assuming the difference in skill is that great. The answer is to pair people up based on skill level not to hinder players for being good at the game. People only get angry and quit if they are facing somebody massively better. And there is nothing wrong with that. Everybody can be a little salty after they lose but they should realize they lost because the opponent is a better player.

Edit: and now we see. You just hate the melee community and don't even know what many even in that community have been saying. The mechanics being there is necessary but being accessible is fine. There is no inaccessibility in short hopping and fast falling you press a button then you press down. Wavedashing is replaced by good dash mechanics and l cancelling is replaced by lower landing lag across the board. And no, it doesn't make little mac OP. Although I wouldn't expect you to know since you despise the competitive community.



Yorumi said:

@NINTENCHIP well first of all as far as expand the sales base you could actually argue it failed to do so. According to vgchartz smash 64 sold 5.5mil, melee 7.07, and brawl 11mil. Considering the wii sold 5 times as many consoles as the gamecube, there's that much more word of mouth and brawl didn't even achieve twice the sales, as a propotion of consoles sold melee went up over n64, but brawl went WAY down over melee.

Compare for example to mario kart, mkwii sold nearly 4 times as much as 64 and the wii sold roughly 4x as many consoles as n64. Consider also that double dash sold less than 64, which makes sense considering there were fewer gamecubes sold and thus a lower population of people to buy the game. Melee however, actually increased sales over 64 despite being on a console with fewer owners. Its hard to even argued that MK is a more popular franchise considering DD sold less than melee. Point is if we're going for sales relative to install base the case is much stronger that melee did more to expand the fanbase than brawl. I generally don't care about game sales but you keep bringing up the point and I just don't think you understand how unfavorable the comparison is for brawl.

As far as skill, you're option is pretty much either have skill or make it a button mash. When I lose my first thought isn't "make the game easier so I can win with less effort" it's "oh that was good can you teach me how you did that?" and the practice like crazy to get better.




@Senario As far as Mac goes: He's a boxer. Insanely fast, good counter, etc. The point is for him to use combos to build damage, STAY ON THE GROUND, and then use a finisher to send them from the ground to straight up KO. His domain is the ground, not the air. If he's able to cancel his air attacks' landing lag, he can use the faster aerials in-tandem with short hops, fast falls, and smooth landings to give himself more options than he's supposed to have based on his character design. The point of it is to make sure each characters falls inline with the strengths and weaknesses they were designed to have. Abusing the ability to make faster attacks out of aerials was seen as a problem in that regard, and thus removed.

As for skilled players being light years ahead, the FGC has been fixing that since SF4. Easier windows for combos, more competent combo breaking options, high-reward moves like Ultra Combos in SF4, and so forth. Fighting games have been taking steps to tone down the difficulty and huge learning curve for half a decade and counting. You can have a competitive game that can invite newcomers to be good at it too. The game doesn't have to crush peoples' spirits because you want the greatest of canyons between you and your opponent.

I don't just play fighters. I play MANY types of games competently. Pokemon, fighting games, racing games, RPGs, platformers. I'm definitely no slouch to hardcore gaming. Still, I'm not gonna sit here and say the demanding input speed for shffling was a great system mechanic that made the game look great. It looked choppy and buggy with all that speedy, jerky movement, and all those inputs just for the sake of MOVING, let alone fighting, was ridiculous.

Lastly: Lowering landing lag? Yea, fine. I didn't say I was against that. Not to the point of zipping around the stage like Melee, but somewhat if need be, sure. Good dashing mechanics? Outside of tripping, there's no need to make mention of it in the first place. Fast-falling? The point is that landing lag from incomplete attacks punishes the mindless use of fast-falling. Short-hopping? If you use short hops responsibly, you can avoid landing lag on most of your moves, anyway. i don't despise competitive play. I despise the Melee community's elitist mindset when addressing Brawl, which in-turn causes me to spite the game to some degree as well, which I don't think is unwarranted.




@Yorumi First off: Just because Brawl didn't sell 21 MILLION COPIES just to satisfy your demands of what expanding an audience "should" be, doesn't mean it didn't expand the audience and sell well. The point is that each version sold more than the last version. Saying "because there's 3 times as many of this console, there should be 3 times as many sales" isn't exactly fool-proof logic. Asking any game to sell 10 million is already a HUGE success. Why on Earth are you tossing around 21 million like it's easy and expected for ANY game to hit?

Secondly: You act like you're making points like Senario, but all you've done is say "If it isn't 100% hard core skills, it's Mario Party". So you haven't noticed how fighting game design has turned to ease their difficulty curves for newcomers for the past half a decade? All of a sudden Smash can't do this too?



Yorumi said:

@NINTENCHIP Because it under performed expectations. You're trying to argue that because brawl sold more than melee it's direct proof that snubbing the competitive community made it sell better. The sales trajectory of smash was already such that a new version could be expected to sell more than a previous. Smash 64 had an attach rate of rought 17%, melee 32%, brawl 11%. Smash 64 sold roughly 60% as much as mk64 sold, melee sold a tiny bit more, just call it 100% of MKDD, brawl sold 30% of mkwii. MKWii sold about 3.5times as much as mk64(wii sold roughly 3.5 times as many consoles as n64) brawl sold barely 2x smash 64, roughly 8 mil short of expectations. You're trying to directly attribute an increase in total units to design choices when by any kind of comparable measure brawl severely under performed.

"So you haven't noticed how fighting game design has turned to ease their difficulty curves for newcomers for the past half a decade?" Wait point out for me please where I said I like the casualization of all games that they've been doing for the last decade? Furthermore your only complaint about melee is that skilled players win, and that is better solved by proper matchmaking only which pleases everyone. All your solutions revolve around snubbing the competitive community.



Neferupitou said:

Can,t wait to put my hands on villager too! smash is always awesome! and ready to own some of you guys online.




@Yorumi 1) If you honestly, truly think that Brawl under-performed because it didn't reach TWENTY-ONE MILLION SALES, you can just stop replying now.

Remember: TWENTY-ONE MILLION sales is what you're telling me. How many games have ever even broken 10? Break out numbers like those are extremely rare, and you're saying Brawl under-performed because, even though it hit 11, it didn't hit TWENTY-ONE? I really want you to double and triple check yourself before confirming that.

2) My complaint isn't that skilled players win. It never was. All this tells me is that you don't really what I'm typing. So for the last time: The complaint isn't that skilled players win. It's that the things one had to master in Melee to be "good" in it were extremely demanding for the type of game it was. Removing that stuff helps push the overall appeal of the franchise to a wider audience, regardless of what the competitive minority thinks. If you can't comprehend that, then Idk what to tell you. You keep saying I'm saying the same things, and I keep having to correct you, only for you to bypass that correction to say I'm saying the same things as before. It's going around in circles because you aren't comprehending what I'm telling you.



Yorumi said:

@NINTENCHIP Perhaps you could take a moment and understand what's being said? To make the point more clear, try this, clearly the new features in MK8 are being absolutely rejected by MK fans and it's the worst MK ever made. The sales of the game are absolutely terrible compared to MKwii. It lost around 80% of their fans, clearly nintendo horribly screwed up making that game. BTW that follows exactly 100% the logic you're using with brawl.

Edit: Likewise smash 4 on wiiU is very likely to be the absolute worse selling smash of all time. To beat even 64 it's going to need to achieve an attach rate higher than melee. If it achieves brawls attach rate it will mean 80-90% of the "expanded fanbase" did not buy the next version of the game.

" The complaint isn't that skilled players win. It's that the things one had to master in Melee to be "good" in it were extremely demanding for the type of game it was."

The problem is you're defining "good" as being on the level of a competitive player. It wasn't until a few years ago I even knew most of the things existed in the game and I still had tremendous fun in party modes, lots of items, fun stages, pokeball battles etc. I was good enough to beat 3 max difficulty AI's on a team vs me.

If all you want is to be on a competitive level and you're not dedicated enough to master a few techniques you don't have the dedication to be competitive. Making the game easier just places an artificial skill cap and telling people with actual dedication to the game "it doesn't matter if you practice more there's an artificial skill cap and you won't get better after that."

If you're so obsessed with the fact that people who actually practice a lot beat you, then use the handicap system, play in party modes, add AI's to your team or whatever else. But as for me I sure know I had a tremendous amount of fun in melee without ever knowing any advanced techniques existed. In fact I rarely ever even played with all items turned off. I also love watching competitive players and don't want to see them artificially limited, the characters need to be balanced but after that it shoudl be like any other real sport, the only limits are on whatever the human body is capable of doing.




@Yorumi 1) No, I have NO IDEA what you're getting at with the MK8 example...none at all.

I knew you had problems comprehending me, but this is absurd. Sales performance isn't ENTIRELY based on one factor or the other. MK8 didn't sell poorly because there's less Wii Us out than Wiis, so we can't expect a huge number of MK8s sold in comparison to MK Wii. That is true, but at the same time, you can't say Brawl under-performed for not selling 21 million copies. Now you're just being annoying. There's only 3 franchises that I can recall that's ever done those numbers: Mario Kart, GTA, and CoD. You're saying Brawl failed because it didn't hit that number? That's not how sales performance works.

2) You forget that ALL GAMES HAVE SKILL CAPS. How high they are depends on the vision of the devs, fan demand, and so on. There's no game out there with literally no artificial skill cap because we play with balancing, unlike real life sports where the object is to be as OP as possible and win on your own or with a team. With that said, are you sure you had fun playing Melee against those that DID use those techniques while you COULDN'T? That's the difference, and less people will say yes than no. You can feign ignorance to what I'm conveying all you want, but you're in the minority on this one. Hence the changes to the game.



Starchaser02 said:

How is melee complex you have to be some type of village idiot to think that. Being close the the sharpest entry the series is a bad thing wow lol. It looks alot like brawl 2.0.

Leave A Comment

Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...