The next installment of Smash Bros.

[Xeogred]

Adventures, even if it was Zelda-Lite for toddlers, was still a cool game I thought.

Nintendo completely dropped the ball in not making a new Starfox on the Wii. Had all the potential in the world to work out with the controller and everything. I guess it just makes too much sense?...

[the7k]

I never understood the whole "randomness is bad" thing people complain about. It makes the matches more interesting in my opinion.

Agreed. I like Smash Bros. the most when it is zany and unpredictable. I have never before seen a fighting game where the emphasis is so heavily placed on all parties having fun and everyone has a chance to win.

But when competitive minds get into a game, any game, the first thing they want to excise is any random factor.

Randomness is bad for anything that is supposed to measure skill.

Nothing wrong with randomness for casuals, but it should be optional.

You may not mind random shit happening in a casual environment, but if you are playing in a tournament, with a large sum of money on the line - do you want to get eliminated and lose the chance at that prize NOT because the only player was better, NOT because of a mistake made on your part, but because the game randomly decided that this time you'd trip and be completely vulnerable to an attack?

Just because it's not something that matters to you doesn't mean it doesn't matter to a lot of other folks - and not giving these other folks options is ... well, bad business mostly, but also just idiotic.

[MrPopo]

Just because it's not something that matters to you doesn't mean it doesn't matter to a lot of other folks - and not giving these other folks options is ... well, bad business mostly, but also just idiotic.

Again, the game was never designed for money tournaments. It was designed for casuals to have fun. To expect them to put in options to support the tourney players is just silly. If anything, it's the fault of the tournament organizers to run tournaments for an "obviously flawed" game.

[ZeroAX]

You may not mind random shit happening in a casual environment, but if you are playing in a tournament, with a large sum of money on the line - do you want to get eliminated and lose the chance at that prize NOT because the only player was better, NOT because of a mistake made on your part, but because the game randomly decided that this time you'd trip and be completely vulnerable to an attack?

And in football the ball sometimes changes direction cause of the way it hit an uneven patch of ground (which might have been dug up earlier by mistake by a player's tackle or something), and it changes direction and goes into the net, helping a weaker team beat a much better one and making the game interesting.

Or the wind might blow the ball away. Or it might hit another player and by luck it will bounce off his back and into the feet of an opponent player and he can score a goal.

I don't see anyone complaining about changing the rules of the most expensive tournaments in the world so as goals which are scored by luck don't count.


And if anyone said that he'd be kicked out of the sport by the fans themselves. Randomness makes a game beautiful. Players who can't accept it are boring and don't understand fun.

[Jmustang1968]

I guess I never realized the amount of tournaments and prize based competitions on these games. I knew they existed but never realized it was a big enough factor to like Smah or not...

[CFFJR]

I've never seen a competitive fighting gamer take the Smash series seriously in the first place, so I'm not sure why the discussion is on the table at all.

You mention Smash to a competitive fighter, and they usually laugh, before going on a long, uninteresting rant about all of the things about Smash that mean it can't be taken seriously.

I mean, I have no opinion on the argument because I honestly don't care, but its always been my understanding that "Competitive Smash Brothers" is a joke to any tourney player outside of the Smash community.

Is that not true anymore?

[Flake]

Again, the game was never designed for money tournaments. It was designed for casuals to have fun. To expect them to put in options to support the tourney players is just silly. If anything, it's the fault of the tournament organizers to run tournaments for an "obviously flawed" game.

I don't understand why people have a hard time understanding what Popo is saying. Smash Bros. tournaments are an exercise in ass-backwards logic:

-Nintendo funds the development of a crazy, zany, random mascot party game with fighting elements.

-Game is very popular because of crazy zany randomness.

-Popularity creates demand for organized play.

-Organized players hate the crazy zany randomness.

...I am sure there must already be at least seven memes out there to describe Smash Bros. competitive players and their missing of the point.

[equalsign]

Anyone who thinks Melee was not made to be competitive is dead wrong. I've spent a couple thousand hours of my life playing that game, and it's damn competitive. I have fun with it because I feel like I can play as fast as I can think, and I feel I am always improving.

Brawl was designed to be far less competitive. They intentionally nerfed competitive play. I played Brawl for about 70 hours before I set it down and haven't touched it since. I have played Melee probably about 2500 hours. I think the latter is a better game.

I have one friend that I almost never beat at Melee. I win about 1 out of every 20 games, but he's still my favorite to face. His skill forces me to play better. I am pushed to a limit I cannot otherwise achieve when I play him. I think that's pretty fun.

I don't give a crap what the "competitive fighting community" thinks. I don't play much of their fighting games, and they don't play much of mine. At the end of the day, we can complain if we damn well please. It's fine that the alternative of Brawl randomness exists for people who like that, but it doesn't mean that I have to like the game or think that it's the right direction for the series.

[Erik_Twice]

So much negativity. Why do you all hate others having fun? Really, you all seem to think a game being tournament-worthy is a bad thing, which is silly beyond belief.

Competition is fun. Competition requires an even field and the heavy randomness of most Smash Bros items doesn't create one, rather, promotes uninteresting matches where one player wins without the fun competition and that's boring. If you make an item that provides an instakill, the fun of dodging, reading the opponent and zoning is gone and all you have is a brief, shallow lol moment.

But there's not even a debate at all, adding an option to turn items or random factors off takes no effort at all yet you guys are all hammering down how your definition of fun is the only valid one and how everyone else is "wrong" or "doesn't understand the game". Really dudes, what the fuck is wrong with you?

[pepharytheworm]

So much negativity. Why do you all hate others having fun? Really, you all seem to think a game being tournament-worthy is a bad thing, which is silly beyond belief.

Competition is fun. Competition requires an even field and the heavy randomness of most Smash Bros items doesn't create one, rather, promotes uninteresting matches where one player wins without the fun competition and that's boring. If you make an item that provides an instakill, the fun of dodging, reading the opponent and zoning is gone and all you have is a brief, shallow lol moment.

But there's not even a debate at all, adding an option to turn items or random factors off takes no effort at all yet you guys are all hammering down how your definition of fun is the only valid one and how everyone else is "wrong" or "doesn't understand the game". Really dudes, what the fuck is wrong with you?

Don't think of it as how much effort but rather is that what the developers want from their game.