Topic: Super Smash Bros. for WiiU (& 3DS)

[Luigi Dude]

Still I love Brawl way more than Melee. All I ask is can we have a fun party game where characters don't have OVERWHELMINGLY huge advantages over others? Slight advantages and disadvantages are one thing, but when one characters win ratio is 80/20 over another at high level play you know something is wrong.

Once again, high level play makes up less then 1% of the Smash Bros audience.  To the other 99% of people who play Smash Bros, Brawl was very well balanced and characters like Meta Knight didn't have huge advantages over everyone else.  Get the tournament bullshit out of here because it makes a very very very very very very small percent of the audience and doesn't represent the way the game actually is to most people.

[TJ Spyke]

I can't find anything on Capcom suing SNK. The only Capcom lawsuit I can find is them suing Data East over Fighter's History.

[nickmitch]

I don't think I'm fond enough of any Gen V pokemon to really look forward to any particular one being in the game.

[tendoboy1984]

I can't find anything on Capcom suing SNK. The only Capcom lawsuit I can find is them suing Data East over Fighter's History.

But Capcom could technically sue SNK for stealing and tweaking Ryu/Ken -> Ryo character.

[S-U-P-E-R]

Once again, high level play makes up less then 1% of the Smash Bros audience.  To the other 99% of people who play Smash Bros, Brawl was very well balanced and characters like Meta Knight didn't have huge advantages over everyone else.  Get the tournament bullshit out of here because it makes a very very very very very very small percent of the audience and doesn't represent the way the game actually is to most people.

It's a far greater percentage of people that get good enough to run into problems with the game, not just tournament jerks. Tell me, what is the downside of having balanced characters for all levels of play?

[S-U-P-E-R]

Maybe I'm wrong about their being a Capcom vs SNK lawsuit? I feel pretty confident I read about one. But I think maybe we should curtail Dan Hibiki chat in this thread...

[Caterkiller]

Still I love Brawl way more than Melee. All I ask is can we have a fun party game where characters don't have OVERWHELMINGLY huge advantages over others? Slight advantages and disadvantages are one thing, but when one characters win ratio is 80/20 over another at high level play you know something is wrong.

Once again, high level play makes up less then 1% of the Smash Bros audience.  To the other 99% of people who play Smash Bros, Brawl was very well balanced and characters like Meta Knight didn't have huge advantages over everyone else.  Get the tournament bullshit out of here because it makes a very very very very very very small percent of the audience and doesn't represent the way the game actually is to most people.

Smash is designed in a way so everyone can play in what ever way thy want right? To me everyone includes the groups who only play free for alls, the group that only plays 1vs1 with pokeballs, the group that only plays teams, the group that loves to only play giant brawl, the group that plays nothing but stamina, the group that loves 1vs1 with no items, etc. we are all included when it comes to everyone. So if we have the option to manipulate everything within the game, why oh why oh why is it so bad to have balance among the cast for the competive folks?

[Dasmos]

Tell me, what is the downside of having balanced characters for all levels of play?

Pretty much this. Why does it seem that some people in this thread are arguing for an unbalanced roster?

[TJ Spyke]

No one is, but some people think the problem is worse than it actually is.

[S-U-P-E-R]

I think because someone falsely juxtaposed it against having a large roster. Whoops! That or they're literally crazy.

[S-U-P-E-R]

It kind of boggles my mind that anybody would not want the game to be better, held to higher standards, and/or perfect in every way. Certainly there's no harm in aiming higher than just having the same game again but with more characters? I think the roadmap to this is pretty clear, and it's to bring in better balance testing and general design oversight. There is literally zero downside to this.

[Luigi Dude]

Pretty much this. Why does it seem that some people in this thread are arguing for an unbalanced roster?

No, the argument was about some people wanting the next Smash Bros to have a smaller roster then Brawl so it could be more balanced, which I responded would be dumb since most people who play Smash Bros play it for larger rosters and movesets and don't care much about balance.  I then added, that Brawl was pretty well balanced for basic level play which is how most people play Smash Bros even though it had 39 characters, showing a bigger roster wouldn't make the game more unbalanced since the last game was pretty well balanced.

Then people started complaing about how unbalanced Brawl was because of one character at high level play, which me and TJ Spyke have been responding that high level play as one character doesn't represent the over balance of the game for everyone else.  So as you can see, nobody is arguing for an unbalanced roster.

[Spak-Spang]

I think the deal is people want a better experience.  Brawl, Melee and SSB are not bad games.  In fact, when you talk to fans everyone has there personal favorite...and for different reasons.

I perfer the original, because the pacing, and balance seemed spot on for me.  The levels were smaller, and never distracted from the battle...but still added strategic elements, and items were better thought out and not too crazy.  It was a simplier game which meant it was easier and more enjoyable for people to just pick up and play...which is actually what makes the best FPSers in my opinion. 

Now, some people perfer Melee, because it added a ton to the formula and really brought the experience to a next generation level.  Everything was enhanced and really helped the play experience.  However that added complexity made it harder to master, and the speed was much faster and the new scrolling levels and more detailed levels made things harder to play.  Some level choices were just not enjoyable.

Brawl is somewhere inbetween Melee and the orginal.  Slower paced, the gameplay enhances of Melee are tweaked and somewhat simplified.  The single player more robust...but also some say it is the most disappointing part of the game. 

Basically, I think everyone wants a better game...the best game we can get...they just believe different things will make the game better.

Me, I want more characters...because I want to play as many Nintendo characters as possible...that is what makes the games fun...but I want characters that feel unique and special...so fewer "clones." 

I want new engaging balanced levels.  I don't care if I have a stage for each character.  I want well designed enjoyable stages from each franchise...and if good ideas are created for more franchises then I want multiple stages from those franchises...but I want levels that are simpler...and do not hinder the combat...and please no crazy scrolling levels...those are the worst...only seconded by levels that are too large to realistically play on.

Finally, I want a further blending of Melee and SSB64.  Brawl had an ok return to some simpler game mechanics, but I want to see more leanings toward SSB than Melee...in a less is more sense.  Do not just add a billion Pokemon because you can...choose 20-25 good pokemon to attack...make them simple attacks that do not distract too much.  Please just do away with assit trophies.  Move away from final smashes, and simplify items.  I don't need 100 items to have a fun experience.  Create 20-30 iconic items for the series and just balance the items out. 

[S-U-P-E-R]

I wouldn't say just one character causes problems in Brawl's balance. The bottom 10 characters or so are like, crippled bad, and I think that's just as severe a problem.

The thing I have a beef with is denying there's a balance problem, being proven wrong, and then further backtracking and saying it doesn't matter for "99%" or whatever wild estimate of players like that makes it okay. Nintendo was pretty negligent letting Brawl ship in the condition it did. Smash on Wii U can meet with way bigger successes on every front - casuals, tournament players, copies sold, critical reception, or whatever - if the basic steps to protect a decent metagame are made.

[tendoboy1984]

I wouldn't say just one character causes problems in Brawl's balance. The bottom 10 characters or so are like, crippled bad, and I think that's just as severe a problem.

The thing I have a beef with is denying there's a balance problem, being proven wrong, and then further backtracking and saying it doesn't matter for "99%" or whatever wild estimate of players like that makes it okay. Nintendo was pretty negligent letting Brawl ship in the condition it did. Smash on Wii U can meet with way bigger successes on every front - casuals, tournament players, copies sold, critical reception, or whatever - if the basic steps to protect a decent metagame are made.

Bottom 10, so that includes Toon Link? I've seen some very good TL players, and I thought I was pretty good as him, but I got my ass kicked multiple times. Now if I'm against a player who is using Lucario or Falco, I have no chance to survive. Like I said, anyone can become skilled with any character, it takes practice and knowledge of their moveset.

[Oblivion]

Toon Link isn't considered a bottom tiered character. That would actually be Link. Actually, if memory serves, almost all the Zelda characters are bottom tiered.

[marty]

Once again, high level play makes up less then 1% of the Smash Bros audience.  To the other 99% of people who play Smash Bros, Brawl was very well balanced and characters like Meta Knight didn't have huge advantages over everyone else.  Get the tournament bullshit out of here because it makes a very very very very very very small percent of the audience and doesn't represent the way the game actually is to most people.

Pretty much this.  I don't know how people can bitch about a game for it not having the properties of the games it stood in opposition to.  If Nintendo wanted to make a technical fighter, they would--they made a slot-machine styled brawler instead.  I prefer it that way and don't understand why anyone would want Nintendo to focus on turning the series into something it's never been just to satisfy a virtually non-existant demand.

[Louieturkey]

Maybe I'm wrong about their being a Capcom vs SNK lawsuit? I feel pretty confident I read about one. But I think maybe we should curtail Dan Hibiki chat in this thread...

Wait, Dan's going to be in the new Smash Bros. game?!

[Louieturkey]

Once again, high level play makes up less then 1% of the Smash Bros audience.  To the other 99% of people who play Smash Bros, Brawl was very well balanced and characters like Meta Knight didn't have huge advantages over everyone else.  Get the tournament bullshit out of here because it makes a very very very very very very small percent of the audience and doesn't represent the way the game actually is to most people.

Pretty much this.  I don't know how people can bitch about a game for it not having the properties of the games it stood in opposition to.  If Nintendo wanted to make a technical fighter, they would--they made a slot-machine styled brawler instead.  I prefer it that way and don't understand why anyone would want Nintendo to focus on turning the series into something it's never been just to satisfy a virtually non-existant demand.

So you're saying the game should be more unbalanced?  Nobody has said they want the game to be like other fighters other than being better balanced than Brawl, which most traditional fighting games are better balanced than Brawl.

I'm not a fighting game fan at all.  I love the Smash Bros. games though and Melee is my favorite.  I'm not a tournament player nor am I a fan of watching fighting tournament play.  But something was off about Brawl and some characters were better than others.  That's a fact.  I want better balance in the new Smash compared to Brawl.  If they need to lower the number of characters to do it, then fine.  If they can balance better with more characters, that's just gravy.  But saying it's okay to be unbalanced because all other fighters are balanced and SB is the anti fighter game is beyond ridiculous.

[marty]

So you're saying the game should be more unbalanced?  Nobody has said they want the game to be like other fighters other than being better balanced than Brawl, which most traditional fighting games are better balanced than Brawl.

I'm not a fighting game fan at all.  I love the Smash Bros. games though and Melee is my favorite.  I'm not a tournament player nor am I a fan of watching fighting tournament play.  But something was off about Brawl and some characters were better than others.  That's a fact.  I want better balance in the new Smash compared to Brawl.  If they need to lower the number of characters to do it, then fine.  If they can balance better with more characters, that's just gravy.  But saying it's okay to be unbalanced because all other fighters are balanced and SB is the anti fighter game is beyond ridiculous.

Where do I say I want the game more unbalanced?  Oh, that's right--i didn't.  Glad that straw-man bullshit is behind us... let's see what else you have to say about things I didn't say...  Some characters are better than others... fact!  Okay, well, that's going to be true of every fighting game when there are different characters.  You want better balance even if it means less characters ... I don't.  I want more, not less, content, even if it means the game isn't balanced.  It is okay if SB isn't perfectly balanced because it isn't a pure fighting game.  Your last sentence makes zero sense.  Complaining about balance in SB is like whining that there isn't rocket jumping in CoD.

[Mop it up]

I actually feel SSBBrawl has more balanced characters than Melee, but Melee has far better item and stage balance. It's also a much better game overall. Balance isn't the issue I have with Brawl, it's randomness. No one I know likes the game because it's too hard to follow and it doesn't feel like you really have much pull over the outcome of anything. Despite Melee having a faster game speed, no one had trouble playing that game.

That said, I feel the original game has the best pacing, style, and stages. I'd actually like if they went back to the drawing board and pulled from the first game, matching its style but adding a lot more content to it.

[Sarail]

I miss the bowling pin sound effects when you whack your opponent...

[Evan_B]

Long story short- I want a Smash Bros. where it doesn't feel like a chore you play as the heavyweight characters. Boom kat.

Maybe this is why they got Namco working with them- so they can maybe have some semblance of balance?

[tendoboy1984]

So you're saying the game should be more unbalanced?  Nobody has said they want the game to be like other fighters other than being better balanced than Brawl, which most traditional fighting games are better balanced than Brawl.

I'm not a fighting game fan at all.  I love the Smash Bros. games though and Melee is my favorite.  I'm not a tournament player nor am I a fan of watching fighting tournament play.  But something was off about Brawl and some characters were better than others.  That's a fact.  I want better balance in the new Smash compared to Brawl.  If they need to lower the number of characters to do it, then fine.  If they can balance better with more characters, that's just gravy.  But saying it's okay to be unbalanced because all other fighters are balanced and SB is the anti fighter game is beyond ridiculous.

Where do I say I want the game more unbalanced?  Oh, that's right--i didn't.  Glad that straw-man bullshit is behind us... let's see what else you have to say about things I didn't say...  Some characters are better than others... fact!  Okay, well, that's going to be true of every fighting game when there are different characters.  You want better balance even if it means less characters ... I don't.  I want more, not less, content, even if it means the game isn't balanced.  It is okay if SB isn't perfectly balanced because it isn't a pure fighting game.  Your last sentence makes zero sense.  Complaining about balance in SB is like whining that there isn't rocket jumping in CoD.

No fighting game has perfectly balanced characters. And that really isn't a big deal.

[Caterkiller]

Once again, high level play makes up less then 1% of the Smash Bros audience.  To the other 99% of people who play Smash Bros, Brawl was very well balanced and characters like Meta Knight didn't have huge advantages over everyone else.  Get the tournament bullshit out of here because it makes a very very very very very very small percent of the audience and doesn't represent the way the game actually is to most people.

Pretty much this.  I don't know how people can bitch about a game for it not having the properties of the games it stood in opposition to.  If Nintendo wanted to make a technical fighter, they would--they made a slot-machine styled brawler instead.  I prefer it that way and don't understand why anyone would want Nintendo to focus on turning the series into something it's never been just to satisfy a virtually non-existant demand

On my crappy phone, hope this is clear.
No one said anything about turning it into Street fighter or Tekken with combos and such. We want smash to be smash. Still in Brawl characters like Bowser, Yoshi, Link, Ganondorf and many many more have HUGE disadvantages to characters like MetaKnight, Snake, Marth, DDD, Diddy Kong and Wario. To the point that it is literaly unfair.

Just because one doesn't play in tournaments doesn't mean some day they won't how to infinite another character that is susceptible to it.

All I want is a balanced roster of like 45-50 characters. That does not mean I want to hold tournies and play nothig but FD the rest of my life. I would love the option to be able to pick the character I love the best and not have to worry about exploits in the game. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

Because of Brawls nature of being able to play in any way i want, why cant I have the optipn of balanced tournament play?