Because apparently if we didn’t buy the game, we can’t talk about it…
Even if we have played the game from a friend’s house, or watched enough fights from Twitch, Youtube or even looked at it from tournaments. Even if we gathered all the info about the game itself, apparently, it doesn’t matter what our opinion is unless we bought it…
Have you seriously ever thought that through?
Legendary fail.
Ken’s hair looked better in EX3 than in SF5
Makes you think
3s did it Perfect in my book. i want the aged Cheddar version of everyone. Im happy with Ryu and want to see some Greys on Guile. Ken needs work he looks too young.
Watered down Juri incoming, the hype?
Why did they give Balrog and Juri such underwhelming Supers?
Balrogs aint that bad, its simple like dirty bull but much stronger
This is admitting to shit posting…
Balrogs super is definitely not underwhelming
Yeah I like it. It’s basically Bionic Arm V2.
Huh, funny how a “watered down” Juri still looks freakin’ awesome.
She can still fireball spam a bit in v trigger too and they go under Ryu/Nash fireballs
>Invested in the FGC
>Smash
Sure buddy
LOL I was watching CEO and the crowd was dead silent save a few moments, and when I heard noise I realized it was the Smash Bros attendees in the background having more fun. Smash is better than this game. Real talk.
Well what’s the comparison of one smash iteration to another? I heard melee was supposed to be the 3s of smash, am I wrong?
It seems Nintendo might be closer to to the pulse of what their audience wants from smash than Capcom does with its player base by how strong smash is in following.
I’m guessing here maybe it’s a stretch- that smash might technically be harder to play and I heard complaints that they made a lot of what was deep in that game loosened so new players can start in on it but it still has a high learning curve making it still interesting and deep to learn as supposed to the already simple formula Capcom has going.
Like the drop in depth and simplistic functions shows more in sfv than the newest smash maybe that’s why the game does better at growing it’s community because the game itself already has technical features that require a lot of commitment to just learn the basics. But for sfv, stripping it down too much has left the game feeling very robotic and on rails with its match ups. Just a comparison I think that goes against the philosophy of growing the player base Capcom wanted.
I think Capcom might have gone too bare bones while smash has so much stuff it can afford to simplify a little without losing the fun and exciting parts of why players enjoy competing in it.
Watch the [ESPN2 broadcast of] top 4 at EVO - Infiltration, Yukadon and Fuudo — you can’t call those matches robotic, on rails, or that the game itself is bare boned stripped of any depth.
“Smash” takes place in the entire Nintendo+++ universe if I’m not mistaken, so it has a larger demographic to draw in players from and besides that it’s on the surface also a “party game” and those are just easier to get a lot of players into.
Smash 64: It’s not bad, but there’s a lot of ToD’s and silly things that keep players away (and just one legal stage zzzzzz)
Melee: One of the hardest games to master due to his heavy execution needed to just move. Matches can be hype, but the balance of the game is terrible (few characters are viable).
Brawl: Made to be a casual game, only. Trying to play this competitively will bring nothing but headaches (also, terrible balancing).
Smash 4: Fixes all that’s wrong with Brawl, but whithout returning to Melee roots. Best balancing in the series (many viable characters).
I actually like comparing Smash 4 with SFV. Both games are more focused on fundamentals and have very few things that will require hours on training mode. I actually enjoy watching both (as long thare isn’t any Sonic’s playing zzzzz).
Well I just don’t see the game evolving past infiltration level. When the first major events happened he was at the top. Everyone speculated that the game will evolve and he won’t be the ONLY dude to beat but the same type of play he had at the very beginning of its release is the same play used to win Evo.
He figured out the meta while everyone else was still learning the game. Once you realize there isn’t much to it the staples of what’s good and what’s bad is pretty set in stone and it hasn’t even been a year yet.
Yes it’s exciting to watch as a spectator but to play it and compare it to previous incarnations of the franchise the variations of what can happen in a match are actually very limited. And what’s at the top of the game is based on being able to safely escape pressure.
Characters that don’t have 3 frame moves, invincible reversals or v reversals that reset neutral are all low tier still. You can pin point in less than a year where characters fall very easily in this short time period based on its limited gameplay options. These same observations were made within a month or two of the release and still hold true today.
The only added depth would be the increased match up knowledge of new characters being churned out.
Also the fact that smash has to appeal to its console exclusive fan base means they have much more control on responding to the needs of the community. Nintendo products are dedicated smash arcade cabinets.
The fuck?
Youre bagging on someone who gives props to smash? Wow … Even after an evo like that? Smh…