Author Topic: Official SSBB SmashDate Discussion (Read 608576 times)

Mashiro · « **Reply #425 on:** August 20, 2007, 06:41:31 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Louieturkey
With the Gale Boomerang, do you think you can pull a person back onto the stage? Like if you're playing Team battle, if your partner goes too far off the stage and their double jump and up+B don't get them back, can you time the gale boomerang to hit them and pull them closer to the stage?

Well if they have a friendly-fire mode in Brawl then you could use the boomerang to tug your opponent back towards you, in theory.

UltimatePartyBear · « **Reply #426 on:** August 20, 2007, 07:35:41 AM »

It might be worth it to tap him, anyway, just so he could use his Up+B again, but you'd probably be too busy in a 2 on 2.

Smash_Brother · « **Reply #427 on:** August 20, 2007, 09:04:09 AM »

I thought the same thing, but in the end, it would be more efficient to simply hit him/her with an arrow (or maybe grapple them back onto the stage).

anubis6789 · « **Reply #428 on:** August 20, 2007, 09:46:31 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Spak-Spang
As for the Spin attack, I wonder if it is still usable in the air if it is a chargable move...it is his up special, and charging could be difficult to accomplish without accidentally jumping.

Well in the second trailer it appears that Link has retained the in-air up B Spin Attack "uppercut", so no worries there if you thought that they made the Claw Shot his only recovery move.

Quote
Originally posted by: Ceric
Auto-aim for the ledges is cool. Also if a person wants to jump out and get hit to stop a recovery more power to them.

The strategy of stopping someone from returning is very viable, yes, but what I was talking about is a seemingly arbitrary choice made by the computer that determines where the tether goes, and that choice may screw the player, who does not have as much control over the situation, regardless of other player intervention. Granted, this all assumes that a tether can easily be stopped, that the tether does not have a different quality when it does hit someone (like a place change scenario, where the person hit by a tether will be pulled toward the tether holder's position while, at the same time, the tether holder is pulled toward the person who was hit by the tether's position), or that the developers have not thoroughly worked this out to make sure there are as few pitfalls as possible (which I am sure in reality is the complete opposite, Sora seems on the ball and with Sakurai leading them I have no doubt that this game will be thoroughly tested).

All in all though, you, Ceric, are exactly right, if there is a problem players will have to learn to work around it, I just was not thinking right when I posted that comment, so thanks for making me realize the error of my thought process.

UltimatePartyBear · « **Reply #429 on:** August 20, 2007, 10:05:52 AM »

I imagine the auto-aim is just to avoid the problem with the technique in Melee when you are close enough to the stage to use the hookshot, but the point you need to grapple is just slightly above the hookshot's completely horizontal path. In Brawl, the clawshot should simply automatically shoot towards the closest point on the stage. I don't think jumping in front of it will be enough to stop it. In Melee, the hookshot simply went through anyone you hit with it in the air, and I doubt the clawshot's auto-aim is going to track soft targets at all.

NinGurl69 *huggles · « **Reply #430 on:** August 20, 2007, 10:27:42 AM »

All these Brawl screens have a 4:3 aspect ratio.
Brawl fails the widescreen revolution.

-2.5 in graphiks

anubis6789 · « **Reply #431 on:** August 20, 2007, 12:00:09 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: PartyBear
In Melee, the hookshot simply went through anyone you hit with it in the air, and I doubt the clawshot's auto-aim is going to track soft targets at all.

I have not played Melee in quite along time, almost a year, so I do not remember how links hookshot reacted in the air. I remembered it retracting as soon as it hit someone, but if it goes through them then my sleep-deprived worries are completely unfounded, and I am proven even more wrong.

By the way, I never thought that the clawshot homed in on soft targets (I never thought I would be using that term in describing the play mechanics of SSB

), I just meant that if a player knows where the Clawshot will be fired at then they could jump out and interrupt it, again though, that was using my assumption that the hookshot retracted as soon as it hit someone when used in the air.

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666
All these Brawl screens have a 4:3 aspect ratio.
Brawl fails the widescreen revolution.

-2.5 in graphiks

A 16:9 SSB would have too much screen to keep track of everything going on in my opinion.

Personally I think that widescreen is a big farce. It was only created by the ailing movie industry back when TVs first became big to make sure that movies would either not be able to be shown on a TV or that they would have to be messed with in order to be shown at all (not to mention laws in the U.S. that kept broadcaster from showing letterbox versions because broadcasters had to use the whole screen), thus a way of forcing people into the Cinemas. I still prefer to watch movies the way they were filmed, be that 16:9, 4:3, or any other of the varying aspect ratios, but I believe, and some studies show (although I cannot find a source on the net even though I have read it before in many places), that a more square aspect ratio is more conducive to human sight then a more rectangular one.

Besides that though, the needs of the game (or movie for that matter), both functional and artistic, should be taken into account before an aspect ratio is decided upon. Widescreen should not just be thrown in because it is the current "in" thing with the "HD Revolution", it should only be used if the game can use and/or need it.

Well those are most of my views on widescreen, just do not get me started on the rest of the "HD Revolution".

NinGurl69 *huggles · « **Reply #432 on:** August 20, 2007, 01:02:54 PM »

Why not? You were doing so well =D

I have a habit of looking at a widescreen TVs and thinking to myself, "why can't it be taller and more square-ish? there's still a good 6-9 feet of space between the TV and the ceiling that could be filled up, which is especially apparent if I'm chillin' on a couch 10 feet away."

"a more square aspect ratio is more conducive to human sight then a more rectangular one"

^ This should make a lot of sense since we hu-mans look by focusing on a point; it's difficult to discern the visual information outside that point without moving the focal point; the farther away from the point, the less meaningful it is. Plus, i think the rectangular view only makes definitive sense when it's large enough to fill our eyesight like in a movie theater, effectively replacing our natural vision. Otherwise it's just a TV I feel needs more screen space up top and on the bottom.

anubis6789 · « **Reply #433 on:** August 20, 2007, 01:37:49 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666
Why not? You were doing so well =D

Well how about this; We have had "High Definition" screens in our homes for years, it is called a VGA monitor.

By the way, all of you with HDTVs waiting for that magical 2009 date believing that you will magically be inundated with HD content, and all SD content is going to be gone, are going to be disappointed, broadcasters only have to switch over to digital terrestrial broadcast as opposed to analog terrestrial broadcasts and the digital standard still includes the SD (480i) and ED (480p) resolutions, so they do not necessarily have to ever broadcast HD television.

Another funny fact: a lot of highly trained home theater calibrators say that they cannot tell the deferences between 720p and 1080i, so what do you think that means about the big new 1080p resolution that you have to pay out the wazzo for? A have even heard that not many can even tell the difference between a signal being carried over HDMI and Component (YPbPr) or VGA on a properly calibrated set. The only reason HDMI is being forced down our throat is because of HDCP.

Well that is enough for now.

Quote
I have a habit of looking at a widescreen TVs and thinking to myself, "why can't it be taller and more square-ish? there's still a good 6-9 feet of space between the TV and the ceiling that could be filled up, which is especially apparent if I'm chillin' on a couch 10 feet away."

"a more square aspect ratio is more conducive to human sight then a more rectangular one"

^ This should make a lot of sense since we hu-mans look by focusing on a point; it's difficult to discern the visual information outside that point without moving the focal point; the farther away from the point, the less meaningful it is. Plus, i think the rectangular view only makes definitive sense when it's large enough to fill our eyesight like in a movie theater, effectively replacing our natural vision. Otherwise it's just a TV I feel needs more screen space up top and on the bottom.

Are you a big Shmup fan?

In my opinion a 27' - 32' 4:3 SXGA monitor that can orient both horizontally and vertically would be all ten flavors of awesome.

Mashiro · « **Reply #434 on:** August 20, 2007, 08:04:27 PM »

Best story update ever?

Reference to R.O.B. and Subspace FTW!

Edit: I just noticed two R.O.B. units are holding one of the bombs. Evil R.O.B.s? Best Game Ever? You decide

Adrock · « **Reply #435 on:** August 20, 2007, 08:18:07 PM »

I've seen gorillas hopped up on heroin create better designs with their own feces. True story.

Nice reference to ROB though.

NWR_pap64 · « **Reply #436 on:** August 20, 2007, 08:21:18 PM »

Based on Petey's appearance at the end of the video it looks like the Nintendo bad guys are working for these new villains.

I just hope that he isn't a playable character, but considering that he's been in all the Mario games as a playable character he most likely is -_-** .

EDIT: He could be a mini boss, though. The way the video ends makes it look that at end of the cutscene you fight Petey in order to rescue the Princesses.

Mashiro · « **Reply #437 on:** August 20, 2007, 08:30:41 PM »

Finally got the video to load.

It would indeed seem like Nintendo's villains will be, well, villains in this game.

ShyGuy · « **Reply #438 on:** August 20, 2007, 08:48:53 PM »

I wonder if Wario will be a good guy or a bad guy.

Mikintosh · « **Reply #439 on:** August 20, 2007, 08:58:16 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: ShyGuy
I wonder if Wario will be a good guy or a bad guy.

I'd assume that since he's playable in the story mode, that would mean he's a good guy, but what about Bowser? would be the next thing.

Adrock · « **Reply #440 on:** August 20, 2007, 08:59:45 PM »

It seems to me like that they're taking the storyline a little too seriously. It's kind of like Snakes on a Plane, where it's a ridiculous concept, but it's trying to be passed off as not ridiculous and at the end, you're left feeling like it should have been more ridiculous than it was.

I admit that there's much I don't know and I'll reserve final judgment until after I've completed it, but from what's been shown thus far, something about it just seems off to me. Some of the descriptions are just so overdone, it's actually kind of lame, almost laughable (but not in a good way). For a Smash Bros. storyline, I imagined something a little more whimsical, maybe something tongue-in-cheek that constantly jabbed fun at itself. Or perhaps, something with kings and kingdoms and magic and all sorts of adventure/RPG cliches, done in the most melodramatic fashion that it's so obviously satire. Whereas Smash Bros. is kind of an anti-fighting game, the adventure mode would be something of an anti-Adventure/RPG.

And I think it's kind of ironic that Peach and Zelda both get captured, but they were 2 of the best characters from Melee.

Mashiro · « **Reply #441 on:** August 20, 2007, 09:02:35 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Mikintosh
Quote
Originally posted by: ShyGuy
I wonder if Wario will be a good guy or a bad guy.

I'd assume that since he's playable in the story mode, that would mean he's a good guy, but what about Bowser? would be the next thing.

Maybe there are two separate story paths, one for the good guys and one for the bad?

Edit:

Quote
And I think it's kind of ironic that Peach and Zelda both get captured, but they were 2 of the best characters from Melee.

Wait peach was a good character?

SixthAngel · « **Reply #442 on:** August 20, 2007, 09:05:06 PM »

I assume Petey isn't playable because he is so big. The guy has to be bigger then Gigabowser so I imagine he will just be story mode boss. The minister on the other hand might be a playable character, a smash bros original for once.

Peach and Zelda can't go to the bathroom without being captured.

Adrock · « **Reply #443 on:** August 20, 2007, 09:11:11 PM »

Quote
Wait peach was a good character?

Peach was a powerhouse in Melee.

NWR_pap64 · « **Reply #444 on:** August 20, 2007, 09:33:41 PM »

I'm also wondering if the cutscenes are CG or real time. The first E3 trailer looked to be CG, but then I saw the 60 FPS version, which made it look like it was in real time. Maybe the cutscenes will use the same engine as the first trailer.

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #445 on:** August 20, 2007, 10:40:57 PM »

Hey look, it's Petey, just like I figured... =3

The chances of him being playable are pretty high now, me-thinks...

As for the story aspect, I have a feeling that the Minister is using the Ninty bad guys rather than working together with them...

Mikintosh · « **Reply #446 on:** August 20, 2007, 10:43:23 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Adrock
It seems to me like that they're taking the storyline a little too seriously. It's kind of like Snakes on a Plane, where it's a ridiculous concept, but it's trying to be passed off as not ridiculous and at the end, you're left feeling like it should have been more ridiculous than it was.

I admit that there's much I don't know and I'll reserve final judgment until after I've completed it, but from what's been shown thus far, something about it just seems off to me. Some of the descriptions are just so overdone, it's actually kind of lame, almost laughable (but not in a good way). For a Smash Bros. storyline, I imagined something a little more whimsical, maybe something tongue-in-cheek that constantly jabbed fun at itself. Or perhaps, something with kings and kingdoms and magic and all sorts of adventure/RPG cliches, done in the most melodramatic fashion that it's so obviously satire. Whereas Smash Bros. is kind of an anti-fighting game, the adventure mode would be something of an anti-Adventure/RPG.

I never thought of Smash Bros. as the anti-fighting game, just more of a party-like affair, as opposed to the usual 1 on 1 duels in Street Fighter, etc.

And I'm getting a kick out of the story mode, because it allows it to access the storytelling aspects of the various series it represents, something it could never try in the first two games (besides the mysterious prescence of Master Hand. I think this game is never going to get more serious than a Mario game (look at the goofy character designs, and Petey Piranha as a boss character is fairly amusing). They're doing a quirky little sci-fi story that allows them to plug any of the fighters in as the hero while presenting a credible threat to all of them, and I'm actually glad that they're not doing a goofy Paper Mario-esque thing with this, because this game's particularly epic, and they should strive for that same feeling in the story mode. But if you think it's "lame", then you're under the impression that they're being pretentious about the Subspace Emissary, when I think they're just trying to get people excited about it, since they're obviously putting in a lot of work.

As much as I like satire, I don't think Brawl's the right opportunity for it (except maybe in small amounts, which I'm sure Sakurai can provide).

matt oz · « **Reply #447 on:** August 20, 2007, 10:57:19 PM »

I have a feeling this is gonna be like the Soul Calibur II story scenes, about either Soul Calibur or Soul Edge, and no one's gonna fully understand it, or even care, they're just gonna play the game.

GoldenPhoenix · « **Reply #448 on:** August 20, 2007, 10:59:20 PM »

::yawn:: Still waiting for something other than cinematics, how about some actual gameplay clips of the story mode Nintendo! If I wanted to watch CGI I'll watch Metal Gear Solid.

anubis6789 · « **Reply #449 on:** August 20, 2007, 11:02:31 PM »

Although size does not mean anything for the most part, Petey just looks to big to be anything but a Boss in story mode, he is two and half to three times the size of the princesses' cages. If he does turnout to be an unplayable boss, that does not bode well for Ridley in my opinion, who may "suffer" (he would still be in the game, but I just think it would be cool for him to be playable) the same fate.

As far as the story goes, it kind of feels like a Kirby game, which is no surprise to me considering who is at the helm. Kirby games, especially Adventure and the Dreamland series, always kind of had that serious but comical sense to them. I do not think that the story mode is taking itself too serious yet.

News:

Author Topic: Official SSBB SmashDate Discussion (Read 608576 times)