I loved Brawl, until I played brawl+ which kicks 99999 times more ass.
Check it out at Brawlplus.net
Interesting. I love Brawl but playing SSB seriously at tourney level just seems a bit silly, It’s really the mario party of fighting games that’s why there are loads of one hit kill items and hazards because it wasn’t really suposed to be for this kind of thing. Unfortunately people trudge on because of SSBM wich was a fluke really, Brawl is fun but that’s about as far as you can take it and with Nintendos obsession for the casual market the next SSB probably won’t be a game fit for any real compititive play either. Sorry but i think that a game that has to be modded to this extent isn’t worth it.
On a slightly less dream shattering final note maybe Nintendo will get there shit together one day and produce something that the people who play it the most deserve.
You know what i’ve thought it over a bit and screw it. I think it’s nice that a group of people would have enough passion about a game that they would set out on a noble cause to better the game by giving it a tweak to gain it some repect among the hardcore fighting game crowd. Sorry about that, it’s just i’m a massive Nintendo fan and have been feeling a bit betrayed of late (I know i’m not the only one) I think a new SSB done right could be the makeup-hug that many fans of fighting games and nintendo alike want.
you’re silly.
brawl + is like street fighter 2 rainbow edition. lol.
Hey Dander, I think you want [media=youtube]MZnwO-aHu-k"[/media].
The problem with fighting games now is they are competing in the Red Ocean. Smash Bros is the last successful series since Tekken, and that was really due to 3D. Before that, it was Street Fighter 2. Fighting games have done worse and worse over time. Smash Bros, on the other hand, made a Blue Ocean bringing in non-fighting game fans into a fighting game.
The path you suggest is the path of the Red Ocean, which is the path of decay. Red Ocean means companies fight for dominance over the other, which usually results in companies competing over values that consumers don’t care about. Take the wine industry. They competed one values like age and prestige of the vineyard and had complex flavors. Then comes a new product called [yellow tail] which had simpler labels and simpler flavors, removing a lot of the fat. Long story short, [yellow tail] takes off while the other compete for a stagnating user base. Smash Bros. did the same thing in the fighting genre. Where most fighting games compete with each other, Smash forged a new path and was met with immediate success. Smash Bros is the best selling fighting game.
The point is that Smash has done everything right so far. The only thing they could do now is try to expand the market place even more. You may want Smash to be more for fighting games fans, but Nintendo doesn’t.
So SmashChu, when do you plan on making that Blue Ocean post over at SmashBoards? And you never seem to learn from the past conversations you’ve had with me and other people in the past. Instead of being so bull-headed about what other believe, I suggest having an open mind and not being hostile.
Anyway, onwards to responding to your post.
The problem with fighting games now is they are competing in the Red Ocean. Smash Bros is the last successful series since Tekken, and that was really due to 3D. Before that, it was Street Fighter 2. Fighting games have done worse and worse over time. Smash Bros, on the other hand, made a Blue Ocean bringing in non-fighting game fans into a fighting game.
You make it sound like competing against each other is a bad thing. Competition brings out the best, and at times worst, in all of us.Competition can bring out innovation that wins people over. This Blue Ocean practice aims for a different audience than which is normal, but this in itself is competitive.
Super Smash Bros. is not necessarily a Blue Ocean videogame. The game was designed as an alternative to the other fighting games out there. It was not meant to draw in an audience afraid of fighting games or something. This is what I’ve gathered from the interviews with Sakurai.
Oh, and one more thing to finish the response to this paragraph. To you, quality seems to be indicated by sales when we should all know by now that this is not the case. The big thing with fighting games back then was that some chose to stay 2D in a time where 3D games were incredibly popular and some became more technical as time went by. However, that’s not to say that the games themselves were crappy. They just had a high initial learning curve.
*The path you suggest is the path of the Red Ocean, which is the path of decay. Red Ocean means companies fight for dominance over the other, which usually results in companies competing over values that consumers don’t care about. Take the wine industry. They competed one values like age and prestige of the vineyard and had complex flavors. **Then comes a new product called [yellow tail] which had simpler labels and simpler flavors, removing a lot of the fat. Long story short, [yellow tail] takes off while the other compete for a stagnating user base. *Smash Bros. did the same thing in the fighting genre. Where most fighting games compete with each other, Smash forged a new path and was met with immediate success. Smash Bros is the best selling fighting game.
I looked a little bit on Wikipedia, and it seems that simplicity was only one factor in the success of [yellow tail]. Rather, it seems that low prices and catering to the export market were the other factors in their success. I’m not saying simplicity wasn’t a factor, but it wasn’t as big as the prices based on this article.
Anyway, all Smash did was create a new genre of fighting games (two if you count popularizing the mascot fighter). It doesn’t mean that they weren’t competing with others. From what I can tell, they did a new take on a dying genre and revitalized it. It doesn’t mean that all fighting games should play like Smash or anything.
*
The point is that Smash has done everything right so far. The only thing they could do now is try to expand the market place even more. You may want Smash to be more for fighting games fans, but Nintendo doesn’t.*
To you, it seems that “casualising” is the what it should do next. This would consist of bullshit inclusions like “auto recovery” for beginners and making skill are the irrelevant. All you’re suggesting is laziness for the new players. Nintendo’s strategy has never been about making things super easy in every game.
Their strategy is something akin to converting people to a religion. Nintendo is trying to create more gamers by making games for first time gamers, but this is so that they’ll later buy the hardcore games. This is why games like Metroid and Zelda have not been casualized and that stuff like Nintendogs and Wii Fit were made. With this in mind, Smash inherently isn’t a “casual” game despite how dumbed down (or whatever) it became in Brawl. This is because of all the stuff going on even at the beginner level. You have to jump, use inputs, shield, recover, etc.
Also, it would seem that at the very least, Nintendo wants this series to be taken seriously (hard to do so right now). Why else did Nintendo hire David Sirlin, designer of SSF2THDR, to go into the game to show there was more than meets the eye?
http://www.sirlin.net/blog/2008/11/9/smash-bros-brawl-tutorial-videos.html
Are they trying to reel in more fighting game fans, not necessarily. Just more people to help the scene grow.
The only way to make people take Smash seriously at this point is to reboot the damn franchise, balance characters as much as possible, and make certain items better balanced while maintaining their original intentions.
As of right now, Smash is a joke. It really is.
What do you have in mind for a reboot?
For the post, eventually. I have a statistics project I wanted to post first.
I could respond to every post you have from the book, but I don’t have time, so here is the gist.
The tag ling of the book is “making the competition irrelevant.” Competition is bad because it forces managers to compete rather then expand their customer base. This also leads to competition over values that consumers don’t really want. Blue Oceans work because it’s not focused on the competition or what they are doing, but by looking at customers directly. The book suggest companies look not at competition but at other industries and strategy groups. Smash would be looking at other games. Smash combines platforming to make a fighting game that played like a platform game and expanded the market.
That is what a Blue Ocean is. Blue Oceans focus on expanding the customer base.
People do not buy games they don’t like and will quickly sell back any game they didn’t enjoy. The game industry also sells most of their games though word of mouth. So, no, sales can be a measure of quality.
[yellow tail] had three key values (NOTE:all Blue Oceans only focus on a few factors). They were Easy drinking, easy selection, and adventurous (which is described more in the book). It was priced higher then budget wines. Also, wines are an export market as they travel around the world. The statement of “catering to the export market,” makes no sense as all it is is “capturing the marketplace.”
That’s the Blue Ocean for you.
You have a Red Ocean mentality. You see Smash as competing. You talk about depth, but depth isn’t expanding the user base. You have to do what will bring in more people to play your game.
This was also an unnecessary move. But, since it was just NoE and no one producing the game, it would have little effect.
Make the game much faster. I would say as fast as Melee or even faster than that.
Keep the character count to a maximum of 18 characters, and include characters from all three games while introducing new third party characters.
Make items like the Starman have less invincibility time, and make the Smash ball have a special motion rather than a simple button press.
There’s much more, but that about covers the initial intention.
Shall we discuss this over tea?
@SmashChu
There’s no sense in trying to talk to you at all. Go ahead and keep riding on the Blue Ocean Strategy’s dick for all I care. I still can’t wait to see this post of yours.
Then why did you reply to my comment in the first place if there is no sense talking to me. What is wrong with you.
Also, Blue Ocean Strategy is a highly regarded business book with lots of research and real market evidence behind it. I’m not riding it’s dick as you so put it. It is simple a good source and obviously relates to the fighting games as I’ve shown. Also, watch your language.
Yes.
I think I shall post a new topic on the reboot thing. :s
Amazing Game
How to make Brawl serious:
1.) More hit stun ( about 10%)
More follow ups and combos means more fun. It also shortens the length of the game some, which is much needed.
2.) Character balance
Nintendo needs to take a look at competitive smash and attempt to balance the game with out items. This will never happen but if this were to come true, this would need to happen. Patches would be nice too. Every 6 months, an official patch so the game can continue to be more balanced. The ultimate goal of any fighting game. 50/50 match ups ( which is impossible but ideal of course!)
3.)A super bar
Traditional fighter have it for a reason. Imagine of you could build meter to do EX versions of your attacks. The EX version would have more hit stun and knock back, ideal for combos and killing. You could use the same super meter to burst out of combos and save yourself. And finally, if you fill it you get your final smash. The final smashes need to be made into two classes for smash. A “on hit” smash that does tons of damage. Think Ikes, and Falcons and another that’s global but weaker damage, for team battle. You should be able to be hit during your final smash or killed even if you are more powerful during the final smash. It gives the defender options.
That’s my option as a competitive gamer, a fan of all fighting games, and having had played smash since Smash 64.
Every character having 50/50 is indeed impossible while keeping the characters different. What you need is an equal amount of good, bad, and average matchups. DLC patches would be bad because each update divides up the player base. This is why they didn’t go for it for SFIV.
You’re also one of the few Smash players I’ve seen to support the super meter idea. You and I should know that it gets flak from the fanboys. I like the ideas of EX attacks, but some might consider it to be too big of a jump. I have no qualms though considering I went into SFIV with those for the first time with no problems.
Your ideas for Final Smashes sound nice in theory, but there should be at most two FS available for strategic purposes (like we need more counterpicking). Your idea for team battle type ones sounds interesting, but I personally like seeing traditional supers being used in combos by two players playing in tandem. Also, yes, the attacker should be open to damage during the attack (outside of select attacks at the beginning).