1
Podcast Discussion / Re: Episode 374: Men of Leisure
« on: March 17, 2014, 07:16:10 PM »
Good episode. I really liked the discussion on the economics of releasing stuff on Virtual Console. When they read the question, my knee-jerk reaction was the usual, "Because Nintendo doesn't care about North America," but the crew went through good reasons why we lag so far behind Japan.
Regarding the Smash Bros. at EVO thing, I think it's more of a question regarding what the intent of an event like EVO is. Is it more akin to a chess tournament, where the games are almost entirely skill, or is it more akin to the World Series of Poker, where luck plays a factor in the short-term results? This isn't a knock on poker or games with luck elements, mind you... Obviously, the better players will end up winning more often in the long term, and luck management is a very important aspect of these games.
I don't personally care for the whole "NO ITEMS/FOX ONLY/FINAL DESTINATION" thing, but I can get the appeal of it. It's more like real-life boxing or soccer or whatever. It doesn't make a lot of sense for an event like EVO to have a Street Fighter IV tournament, where the winner is crowned based almost entirely on skill, but then have a Smash Bros. tourney next door that is a wacky item-fest. These big championships and stuff seem to be a celebration of skill more than anything, and a "pure" wacky Smash Bros. game would feel kind of out of place.
Makes you wonder if the attendance for some of these things would be even higher if they had some of these higher-variance games. Thousands of people play in the World Series of Poker with the dreams of knocking off people like Phil Ivey. Maybe more people would try the same against the amazing Smash Bros. players?
Regarding the Smash Bros. at EVO thing, I think it's more of a question regarding what the intent of an event like EVO is. Is it more akin to a chess tournament, where the games are almost entirely skill, or is it more akin to the World Series of Poker, where luck plays a factor in the short-term results? This isn't a knock on poker or games with luck elements, mind you... Obviously, the better players will end up winning more often in the long term, and luck management is a very important aspect of these games.
I don't personally care for the whole "NO ITEMS/FOX ONLY/FINAL DESTINATION" thing, but I can get the appeal of it. It's more like real-life boxing or soccer or whatever. It doesn't make a lot of sense for an event like EVO to have a Street Fighter IV tournament, where the winner is crowned based almost entirely on skill, but then have a Smash Bros. tourney next door that is a wacky item-fest. These big championships and stuff seem to be a celebration of skill more than anything, and a "pure" wacky Smash Bros. game would feel kind of out of place.
Makes you wonder if the attendance for some of these things would be even higher if they had some of these higher-variance games. Thousands of people play in the World Series of Poker with the dreams of knocking off people like Phil Ivey. Maybe more people would try the same against the amazing Smash Bros. players?