That update was just as lame as when they first announced fox was going to be in the game.
Finally. An update that generates a discussion worth a damn.
I don’t think you even know what you’re opposing here. So you adhere to the idea that nixing versatility from a move increases depth; the opposite of which is the crux of my argument? Absurd. Don’t go throwing around irrelevant phrases.
By who’s standards? Yours? You didn’t even support this abstraction with any type of thesis or premise. There’s no argument to cling to here.
No, shine spiking works because shine by itself is just a damn good spike – arguably the best in the game. The nature of the spike is almost the same as it was in Smash 64 (of which you hold in much higher esteem) and the fact that it can be jump-cancelled has little bearing on it’s effectiveness as a spike .
You’re missing the bigger picture. Removing the more technical aspects of that one move all together, instead of administering mere tweaking, could denote a major shift in focus in Sakuri’s/Hal’s vision for the series. Without the myriad technical trickeries present in Melee such as the ones present in Fox’s shine, Smash would truly be nothing more than a party game.
Not to disparage you, but if you actually played the game seriously you wouldn’t be talking out of your ass right now. Not only do meteors become harder to cancel at higher percentages, but the element of surprise has its merits also. But that isn’t what really supports my idea of how I feel they should work in Brawl.
In Melee, most meteors have a very similar recovery time, making them generally easy to cancel across the board if you’re vigil. There is one notable exception however, in the form of Ganon’s Dair. The hitstun from that move is so much longer than other Meteors, that players miss the cancel most of the time because they’re caught trying to jam Up B during the hitstun. I’ve seen great players get meteored at very low percents because of the unconventional timing (“FUCK, I SO CANCELLED THAT SHIT!!” <---- Me).
If every Meteor had different timing for their cancels, it would force players to learn the timing for all of them instead of simply using the blanket timing everyone uses to cancel them today, undeniably adding more depth and skill to the gameplay.
-SynikaL
I agree with almost everything SynikaL has said.
hahaha.
I for one don’t think Smash bros was ever made to be a competitve franchise anyway. In default play it’s just far too random and silly. The fanbase TURNED IT into a competitve game IMO.
I agree with you…for the most part.
Smash was turned into a competitve title just like any other videogame taken seriously now or before it. No console game was made to be played in tournaments.
Aside from that, there are many unintentional things found in Melee that give the game it’s depth, I will freely admit that. But there are also just as many ingenious design decisions incorporated by Sakurai’s team that show that just as much of the game’s depth was intended. Subtle techniques such as DI and L-Cancel, the shield system (don’t even know where I’d start there, it’s so deep), the physics system, basic stages (such as Battefield and Final Destination), individual character traits…I could go on…all these things and much more would be invisible to the casual naked eye and all deliberate.
Honestly, most of the unintended shit are glitches or exploits, that if taken anyway, probably wouldn’t even effect the game competitvely in the slightest (i.e. Wavedash). The core gameplay is just that polished and solid.
-SynikaL
Whoa now come on. Ur being a little baised here. How can u say that Smash just “became competitive” just like the rest of tourney titles? Smash required a large amount of adjustment to be played at high level. Now dont get me wrong it has high lvl play, but dont say it became competitive just like say Accent Core. Accent Core was purposly made for the sake of balancing the game and fighting system. The adjustments in Smash were made by players slowly realizing what shouldnt be in the game to make it competitive.
Of course the game required a lot of adjustment, it’s not a traditional fighting game like GG. What’s your point?
I’m not being biased AT ALL, you are. NO GAME was created with the sole purpose of being taken seriously by a niche community and being showcased in some grassroots tournament.
-Syn
I totally agree there. Even without the gltiches, melee is still extremly deep. And I’ve always thought developers don’t take tournaments into concideration when making a game. (most games these days are unbalanced)
But that was the impression I got from your unitail post. I honestly think smash was meant to be 75% party game.
So, I also agree with lilman. High level smash play is basically alot of things taken out to make the game “fair”.
How am i being baised? I simply pointing out the Smash required more adjustment and consideration than the usual fighting game released in order to be played competitively.
Right. But you’re being biased because that is something you’re holding against it, when there is no larger point to made, feel me?
Yes, Smash did require tons of adjustment to make it competitive, anyone will admit that. But like I said, it’s not a traditional fighter like many others so that’s a given. Does that mean the game doesn’t HAVE high level play or DESERVE to be taken seriously? Of course not, even you’d agree that’s silly. In light of this, how the game came to be competitive is irrelevant. Fact is there ARE people taking the game very seriously.
The only place left to go with your line of reasoning is to say the game wasn’t made to be competitive, which I’m sure you’d agree is also silly, because as I’ve already stated, NO GAME was created for that purpose.
That simply brings things full-circle. As I’ve said, with that statement, there’s no larger point to be made.
Sorry if that’s confusing. I hope you follow the logic there.
-SynikaL
I understand what u mean by the competitive statement and in no way did i say Smash has a low amount of depth by any means. I just going to repeat what i said. Smash just required MORE TIME then any competitive game out to be played due too its default options which caused the game to be random on released. Dont take what i said as an insult or talking down in any way. That not how i meant it to be taken.
At first, no fighting game was really intended for the purpose of showing up at tournaments. The game developers are in a business and their top priority is to make money. Making the game tournament-worthy was probably the last thing on their minds at the time. With tournaments being held for fighting games, the game developers can now take that into consideration when coming up with another installment. Smash isn’t really an exception to all of this either.
Of course I didn’t take offense. 
But you’re still not understanding my post, because you are simply presenting the same evidence which proves, what…
Nothing.
Please, comprehend my post and think about it.
-Syn
There’s nothing to comprehend because you’re throwing out random sentences that almost sound like a cohesive point but actually aren’t.
LOL. Okay, guy. How about you point just one of them out and prove it wrong?
Or how about you just admit you don’t know what’s going on?
-Kye
The irony in Kye’s posts is utterly painful to read.
Explain.
edit
For those of you still in college, I highly recommend you take a course in Philosophy or any similar social science. I’m being arrogant nor insulting in my suggestion nor my upcoming criticisms, though I’m sure you all will respond with alacritous hate, regardless.
Reading through these posts, it’s clear most of you lack the ability to not only reason, but understand reasoning. You haven’t been exposed to any form of education that forces you to interpret facts, rather than simply sit and absorb them. As such, when presented with even the most linear of logic, each sentence seems like random abstractions because you haven’t been shown how to reason between each line of logic (a distinctive human trait known as rationalizing).
Hence, some of you accuse me of contradiction, babbling, etc.
I’ll make one more attempt to make it clear. Let’s try this.
First, looking back at the discussion, it seems these points are in accordance:
-
Smash indeed has legitimate high level play, regardless of what it takes to
achieve it. -
Following that postulate, you must agree the game has a right to be taken seriously by the individuals that choose to.
-
NO VIDEO GAME is developed for the sole purpose of being turned into a competitive/tournament capable fighting game.
Now, If you’re in agreeance with these three postulates, simply consider Lilman’s statement:
“I simply pointing out the Smash required more adjustment and consideration than the usual fighting game released in order to be played competitively.”
Then, ask yourself a very simple question:
“What does that prove?”
Play with that question and let it gestate in your head. Consider the lines of reasoning, until you come to a conclusion.
Those on the right track, I guarantee will come to none.
-Kye
How would it kill the entire competitive scope of the game if one character was made more balanced? 3-4 frames around is the normal startup for many fast moves and wouldn’t alter its effectiveness- even point blank.
That alteration seems more realistic but a breaking point would also be reasonable as well IMO.
You feel altering the move will somehow make the game uncompetitive which you have no proof of, especially with a game that will have a myriad of different characters. If Shine Canceling is not the chief mode of playing it will only make Fox’s playing style even more dependent of the other moves and normals (which might gain different effects in Brawl) allowing him to achieve the same ends but in a different less abusive way.
Wait so are you saying I’m the only one in the competitive smash community that thinks Fox is overprioritized and needs his moves balanced?
The property always existed but the use is still determined by the player. I’m sure HAL never designed it to be for Spiking but made the hit stun effect as a general defensive feature of a defensive move.
Shine’s effect was less powerful in SSB64 and could not be canceled in the same manner, so that comparison is quite hyperbolic because the Reflector was definately not the reason Fox was demi-top tier in 64. I cannot say the same for his Gamecube incarnation.
In the early days of SSBM Fox’s Shine cancelling was not as abused to the current extent and was even considered “highly advanced” by the early community. Shine Combo Videos were considered the upper echelon of skill, and yet smash was still considered competitive. I see no difference here.
Yeah because I have never meteor canceled? If you juxtapose Yoshi in SSB64 and Melee you can see a clear difference in its killing potential if you have used both these characters. Yoshi benefits a lot from spiking due to it’s high 2nd jump, unfortunately in Melee a connected spike from Yoshi can be Meteored and thus a large portion of it’s KOing potential is gone. So you end up working twice as hard for the same kills that Fox can achieve with Shine. (and that isn’t Fox’s only advantage)
Yes Ganon and a few others can spike early due to their sheer power or eccentricity of spiking properties (Y.Link Dair) but for the most part Meteors are easy to contend with for Intermediate players.
No problem with that idea,
Nerf Fox’s Shine. Nerf Fox’s Upsmash. That doesn’t sound too bad does it? His edge guarding skills is fucked up as it even without that shine. You know how far out he can do to guarantee the kill because of his amazing recovery length? Saying the nerfing Fox’s shine would ruin the competitive spirit of Smash is insane. It would just level the playing field a bit more. Fox without the shine is still one of the best characters so nerfing the shine shouldn’t be much of a problem.
I didn’t read an entire word past the second paragraph.
You don’t need to take a class on justifying bullshit to smell it from a mile away.