Super Smash Bros. 4 for the Wii U/3DS Announced!

Everything about the new Smash looks amazing. I've been feasting upon Mewtwo fan tears too, so there's that. I'm torn between maining either version of Samus and DK. I wanna pick up Little Mac but his recovery options are soooo baaaad... But if they have a Lucina alt costume for Marth, not just the mask but hair/face and maybe mute Marth or whatever, I'll hype so hard.

[color=green]Sonic is already in it. And as nice as it would be for Goku to join the roster, that will most likely never happen. [/color]

I wasn't really excited for this game, like at all, and that's after my reason for buying a Wii was Brawl, but holy shit. Greninja. Greninja has got me hype as fuck for SSB4 now. I'll probably pick it up for 3ds though because nothing sells me on a WiiU until we get a new Zelda and/or Metroid title or MH4 on WiiU. (not happening)

But yeah, Greninja, get hype. Also hoping for Ghirahim. That would be great.

Interested, but being a melee veteran I am withholding judgement on the longevity of Smash 4. Still not sure if it will have enough depth to be played competitively. It doesn't have to be exactly like Melee but at the very least make it not Brawl.

Other than that, seems fun. I'll definitely try the new characters and some stages.

>competitively

Why does that always have to be the first thing people see? Can you guys just stop overanalyzing it right now and just be hyped about it being fun overall? Star thinking "competitive" after it gets here.

/anti-competitve-fighting-gamer rant

Amen.

I, for one, am pretty damn hyped, especially for Zero Suit Samus and Greninja. I'm kind of sad that Jigglypuff will probably be gone since she's been around since the original Smash.

Holy shit, I'm getting positive reception for an unpopular opinion?

And Jigglypuff can get lost... stupid inflatable cunt...

I'm not saying it won't be fun. I'm just saying that if the game wants to be consistently played for a long time after release it needs competitive elements. I always hated that people judge the competitive scene saying it shouldn't exist or using arguments from ignorance to justify their dislike. Why do you guys get the game you want and we can't play the way we want to? Pokemon has a competitive scene and a casual scene and it is pretty fun, why can't smash be the same way and all inclusive for EVERYBODY? That said, I will get the game but how long I play it is dependent on how much depth there is to the game as it is a fighting game at heart.

And don't say Sakurai is doing enough right now. He has a track record of not supporting the competitive scene due to petty differences and not actual inclusiveness and fun for everyone. Competitive gamers are a bit skeptical on "For Glory" because Final Destination isn't even close to the most neutral stage ever. More matches are played on stages with platforms like battlefield.

As I've said, competitive doesn't mean the exclusion of fun. In my opinion it is an inclusion of fun for everybody. People who want to play casually can turn on all items and play on pretty much all stages they want to. Competitive players can play on neutral stages with no items and it is ok. They don't ruin your experience at all simply by being there.

I've seen a few petitions about people actually wanting Nintendo to take Glory Mode out of online mode(95% sure it was just a troll thing but it wouldn't surprise me if it was genuine). Just...no. I get that not everybody's super competitive and just wants to play it but don't ruin it for the rest of us who do. It's an option, don't pick it if you don't want to.

While Smash Bros being competitive is good and all, remember that the game itself was not meant to be a competitive fighter, like Street Fighter 3 or King of Fighters. The whole point was the frantic 4 player madness (which is why there is items in the first place). After all, I highly doubt anybody tried to play Power Stone competitively...

Obviously, game balance is important. Having certain characters being too good in general ruins everyone's experience, so there should be competitive balance. But complaining about there not being enough competitive modes I think is acting a little entitled. The whole reason the new mode is even in there is a in-joke between smash fans of "1v1, no items, final destination" which is used so commonly in tournaments.

Just because Sakurai doesn't cater to the competitive scene doesn't mean he hates them. It if anything is more of an indifference because people who get too caught up in the competitive part of video games become the "stop having fun" guys. I mean I have heard many a nerd talk about tiers of characters and it kind of annoys me. Smash Bros isn't a fighting game at heart, it's a party game.

Just because the game didn't start out as a competitive game doesn't mean it isn't allowed to be played that way. Look at Pokemon, you were supposed to level up your pokemon and get to a high level to beat your opponent. Then people discovered IV's and EV training as well as formulating strategies. Now the game has tournaments and a pretty healthy online community. Same goes for most other games, most shooter games are party games but they have a competitive scene.

We aren't asking for competitive modes. Nobody ever said that. We actually DO NOT care about competitive modes because they often miss the point of competitive. We ask for depth to the game, so that you can learn to be better at it and win vs. somebody purely based on skill. It isn't entitlement, if the game doesn't really allow us to play the way we want...we just go back to melee because it worked perfectly fine during Brawl's era. We would like it to have these elements, but if it doesn't we probably will stop playing it within a month.

1v1 and no items is true because it reduces randomness, but Fox only and final destination only can't be farther from the truth for the competitive scene. In fact, Battlefield is a more neutral stage. More often than not, stages with platforms are played MORE than Final Destination. And there are good reasons for this because characters like Falco wreck on FD. Fox only is simply untrue since most players play characters other than Fox. Fox may be the "top tier" character, but he takes so much effort to play that you would need to be a robot playing frame by frame to make full use of him. There are a lot more Falco players, Marth, Captain Falcon, Shiek, and Jigglypuff players out there. With a few Peach players.

And we don't say stop having fun. We have NEVER told people to stop playing if they don't play competitive. Where do you think new pros come from? They were casual once. Using your definition of fun to determine what is fun FOR US is the real problem here. We have fun competing and getting better at a game. You have fun with all items and four players, which we also do sometimes just for kicks.

It is people like you who can't accept that a game can be played by people who aren't like you that ruin it more than any tier list. Tier lists are more of suggestions on what can possibly be done with characters. It doesn't mean you HAVE to play top tier to do well. Ganondorf is definitively mid tier but can pack quite a punch.

I ask again, What is the problem with giving us THE OPTION to play as we want? We don't associate with you, you don't associate with us. We play the way we want and you play the way you want.

It is surprising that all of the proponents of "Fun" or "Party game" like to superimpose their version of fun on everybody and not consider that other people are different. That your way is not the only way. Competitive players play the way they want with rules, you don't have to follow them. And if you don't follow them, it can appeal to both groups.

*groan*
Look, I don't have a problem with competitive playing of Smash Bros. I'm not saying competitive players are all stop having fun guys either, I've played at a few smash bros tournaments. I used to play 1 v 1 against my brother, as well as my friends and I having tournaments between each other every once in a while. Nobody is insisting that 1 v 1 is the "wrong" way to play, it's just not what the game is specifically designed around.

The problem is what exactly you're asking for when you're talking about a competitive game. You're accusing me of saying the game should only be played a certain way, but you said it yourself that if the game isn't "competitive" enough you're just going back to Melee.

Even if you insist you aren't a "stop having fun guys" don't try to imply that those people don't exist in the smash community. Because in any kind of competitive game, those people exist. Be it counter-strike or league of legends, overzealous people who complain about how they changed it now it sucks will be there.

Be very careful with what you exactly mean by competitive. Do you mean having advanced moves, like L-Canceling or Wave-Dashing? Or make it so the game is quicker as to require better reflexes and require more practice? Or just the game generally having a higher skill ceiling?

Look, I understand that you're passionate about smash bros and its competitive scene. But don't be blowing up on me because I said smash bros is a party game.

Yummines, pls stop. I can literally quote you saying that you do have a problem with it.





Literally no one is stopping you from playing the game the way you want to. Also people aren't exactly asking for new modes. Personally, as セナリオ said, Battlefied allows other type of characters to shine, and I think adding an option on For Glory mode that allows you to choose between the two would be neat, but not needed since the meta game will adjust. Ultimately competitive scene will probably stick to local meet ups or playing custom online matches with their friends.



You're being really dismissive and condescending though. Almost no one cares that Rocket Jumping, Combos in games like DMC or heck, even combos in fighting games weren't intentional, so why should this matter?

I really don't though. I have a problem with those that discuss tiers because they tend to get too caught up on which character is considered top tier, and often refuse to play lower tier characters because they are "not as good."

I'm not complaining about the for glory mode. Where does it imply I think it's a bad thing? I'm just saying not to expect more to come from Sakurai because he likely doesn't feel it to be necessary, because it really isn't. I don't have a problem with someone trying to be the top smash bros player.

I apologize if I sound condescending, but people complaining about minor stuff not being in games really bugs me. I understand that people like competing with others and being able to show how good they are, but I think the expectations are a little high for a company that only very recently embraced online play. Hell, I never even played Brawl online because I could never find a match and hate time mode anyways.

You do say the game should be played a certain way. You literally say it is a party game meant to be played by 4 players with items and no other way. There is nothing wrong with that but again, we want the option to play like we did in smash 64 and Melee. Me going back to Melee is not the same as saying the game should be played a certain way. It means that I am simply putting the new game down sooner to play the older game.

I don't think I need to be careful with what I mean by competitive. It is fairly straightforward. The game has to have depth, actual combos, and no random elements.

Wavedashing and L canceling gave you options, but they were far from the only important elements. L canceling could be replaced by lowered landing lag across the board because it doesn't give you any interesting choices of "Should I L cancel?" Because the answer is Yes. Wavedashing is really cool and part of the physics of the game. It adds some options for defense and a TON for offense. It is a shame it is gone but a replacement could be faster dodge rolls (although this isn't exactly perfect).

What is also important is Hitstun, grab mechanics, ledge mechanics, and so on. In Melee, pretty much all grabs when used threw you into the air so you could use Directional Influence to try and avoid your opponent. To regrab you, the opponent had to read where you were going to go and grab you midair before you touched the ground to roll away. This is how grabs should be as it is VERY balanced. There was only one grab infinite in wobbling and the rest of the chain grabs were done purely out of skill. Funnily enough, Fox and Falco were super easy to chaingrab because of their fall speed. Look at brawl and you have stupid grabs that chain into each other because they always throw the opponent the same way. Falco's forward throw, Marth's grab release(which shouldn't exist), ect. Sure, you can wiggle out of them but the fact that they exist in the first place is just stupid.

Ledge mechanics sadly don't look to be all too good in the next game. Hitting the edge of the ledge automatically if you are even close to it(regardless of the direction you are facing) makes for bad gameplay. It means that you have few offensive options to stop your opponent from getting on the ledge. If the defending player misses the ledge? Hit them with a smash or attack. Taking up the ledge yourself was only one way that was both risky and didn't work very well sometimes. This also means that moves like Mario's cape are pretty meaningless because he would usually use it to turn around his opponent and let them fall to their doom. Now it is a terrible anti projectile move.

There are a lot more things to consider, but generally depth is the key. You have a set group of choices you as a player can do for offense. The enemy has a set amount of things for defense, but their options don't outweigh offensive options. You make interesting and thought out decisions on your next move and what moves you throw out.

There are a lot more things to go over. Like how L canceling and Wavedashing are indeed intended mechanics. One due to it's presence in previous games and the other because it is part of the physics of the game. And of course jump canceling being very very useful for making the game play faster.

Also, I have never met anybody in the smash community who told people to "stop having fun". They may favor a way to play, but they don't tell other people to play in a way they don't want to. The only exception to this might be playing with friends, but friends usually end up in all the same group. If one is a melee player, and the others aren't into smash then they will likely start getting into melee(and vice versa).

Also yes, Devil May Cry combos, Blazblue Combos, Street fighter combos, and Ultimate marvel vs capcom 3 combos didn't intend to be there. So intent of what somebody made something to be really doesn't matter. It doesn't matter that I can jump cancel Yamato strikes into beowulf/gilgamesh kick then prop and gunslinger -> million stab, or use Hazama for insane amounts of damage that wasn't originally intended by j.C spamming, or even do loops and infinites with Doom/Zero/Vergil or use unblockable setups. What matters is how it is in the end because of what people make from it.

P.S. Most people don't choose their character solely based on tier lists. They play what they like. It just so happens that characters like Marth, Falco, Shiek, Fox, Jigglpuff, Peach, and Captain falcon pretty much cover most of the bases for what people like out of characters. Also, it is NOT minor things that are being left out. All of the things are pretty major and have been in every game since 64 until Brawl.

Nintendo did it before without online, I fail to see how that is relevant for cutting them some slack in this area. They are a big game company and smash bros is one of their best franchises, I would expect nothing less than "Great for Everyone" from it. Seeing as that was the case in previous games, it had enough for competition and casual stuff. I love Nintendo stuff, but generally I don't like seeing fighting games I like being played for maybe a month or less then put down because it just isn't interesting anymore. I would be willing to cut them some slack on lesser known franchises like Tomodachi Life in the west. But not Smash Bros.

Smash isn't a fighting game so you're gonna have to get over it. I wouldn't expect more options for the competitive scene.

I don't like arguing so I'll just cut it short.

I'm saying that smash bros is designed around being a party game. It can be played competitively, but at the same time any multiplayer game can be played competitively. I'm not saying you should be playing it with items and 4 players, I don't care if you prefer 1 v 1 with no items. What I'm trying to get across is Sakurai doesn't have the mindset of the game being a competitive fighter, so I highly doubt that he will really look into making it more competitive.

I've seen plenty of threads where the anti-competitive/anti-fun brigade post this argument and similar articles.
1. Death of the Author
The creator is not be-all, or end-all of these sort of arguments. Sakurai can say Melee was a life simulator for all I care.
2. This quote from the article


The fighting game genre, like other genres are made up of certain recurring things. SSB as a series has a huge overlap with what's considered "fighting games". Even some people in the FCG will say SSB isn't a fighting game, and in some regards, I do agree with them. Maybe it really isn't one, doesn't change the fact that despite there being a big skill ceiling, it still manages to an enjoyable game for new people and casuals.

Sakurai has already confirmed that he was going to make the game with a speed in between melee's and brawls, with no tripping or random items when items are disabled. For Glory is a more of straight forward match, although as mentioned before, actual tourneyfags will play local or with friends in matches with custom modes. The game overall is looking like Project M. None of this an absolute indicator that Sakurai is trying to seriously court the more competitive people, but given how big the viewing for the EVO event was, and how people are more accepting and positive towards a fan mod of his game than his, it wouldn't be crazy to say that he's trying.



He literally says he's withholding judgement till the game comes out. I've talked more about the possibilities of the meta game more than he has, stop being such a faggot. There's absolutely nothing wrong with speculating and talking about possible changes to the gameplay/metagame. Also you're a massive cunt for hating Jigs.



That's a problem with a balancing, and if the game gets it right, everyone comes out as winners. I loved characters like Capn Falcon in Brawl, but he really wasn't a viable character unless others were at a handicap, or were using other awfully balanced characters.


I don't think I ever accused you of not liking this specific thing. I do recall listing a possible improvement to the mode though, although I don't think it's necessary in the end of the day.



You nor I get to decide what is necessary, we can talk about what we value more. And he's already announced significant changes that would lead people to believe that he does care about a more balanced games.

I have look through this thread, and I haven't seen anyone talk about wanting new modes or features, just a few character mentions. And everyone wants certain characters in, this isn't limited to competitive layers. I think everyone if not most can agree that getting a more balanced game benefits everyone.