The assist trophy needs to be picked up and then you have to stand still to pop it. Unlike a lot of other items, it is easily knocked out of your hands. You must sacrifice your defense for a moment JUST to pop it, and thats a risk. Especially considering the assist that comes out may not benefit you at all.
Fairness ends at the character select screen. Im not saying lightning is fair. Im saying its a risk, and its balanced withing the realm of SSMB’s gameplay. Shrinking or Growing is in NO was a guaranteed win/loss.
I was not directing the ‘go play with swf’ forums thing at you. Only the paragraph that said “at dude complimenting my attitude”. All I said to you was that the items in question are still not broken in the slightest.
Randomness doesn’t take away the competitiveness at all. What it does in this setting is add more chances for luck to take place during a match.
Items are not broken.
Items do not take away the competition of the game.
Items do add a random element to the game.
Random elements are usually bad in a skill based competition.
I can see and agree with the argument on both sides. It’s just when it comes to random being in tournament play, I like to avoid it if possible.
I doubt I’m swaying anyone with my views and I’m pretty much just repeating myself over and over each post. So yeah, I’ll stop posting in here now. Hopefully my point can be understood and appreciated by someone.
it is,
just some keep going in circles (or nowhere) trying to justify items/fs being random…which in turn, does give unfair advantages…big and small…which if CAN be taken out, should be. otherwise it makes it closer to a game of luck. @ evo items should be off
I respect the opinion as what it is, but this confused me. I see this as a contradiction. You see that randomness doesn’t take anything away from the competitiveness of the game, but it is bad? How so? At worst, it’s adding nothing to the competitiveness and then a neutral factor, at best, it’s beneficial and adds more facets to the competition.
Overall, opinions on the matter are fairly worthless in this topic as a whole. What seems to be the question at hand isn’t a poll asking which way they prefer, but what hurts the game’s competitiveness, which, aside from the opinions on the matter, hasn’t really been discussed at all, nor can be, honestly. The game’s too new to make decisions on it. Whatever our opinions may be, the fact is that what’s a problem for the game will be looked at for removal. Not what’s liked/disliked by a majority/minority.
You don’t need any cold hard facts to know when random is an issue. In limited capacities, you’re good to go with it. Otherwise, it creates too many instances where someone feels robbed or beaten by the game rather than the player.
In GG, Zappa can get 3 random “effects” to work for him. Easy to handle. Easy to balance.
When you increase that number and add in even MORE types, factors and effects, it becomes too much.
You can still COMPETE in a game as such. You can have a competitive spirit towards a game, still, and even have it be remotely good, I think is what that anit-random guy was saying.
Me, personally… I want to compete with people. Not stages. Not chance. If they could turn off the random dizzies in ST, it would be done (and it’s being done).
Random is “fun.” But there is a different type of fun when it comes to competition, for some people. And it’s compromised when you throw in random occurances.
You can throw “Strategic” and “Work for” and “strategy” around all you want, but it doesn’t really change a thing. You can give all the counters and “ways out” that you want, but it’s the situation itself that’s the issue to some people.
If someone gets knocked off the stage and can’t make it back and a smash ball apears and they lose the option for THAT as well, yeah, one could arue it was their fault for being off the stage.
But in the same exact situation with the roles reversed a game later, that same advantage might not come. Heck, some item might come out that’s a detriment.
I could see rather agitated at that.
But that’s just me.
People need to stop arguing that random doesn’t add a lot of luck factor because it does. They need to argue whether or not a game with such luck factors is worth it.
Just to clarify, I believe there can be competition in anything, even in something as random as the Lotto if people wish. But when a competition is mostly focused on skill (most fighting games for example), then I feel random is bad. That’s why I said “Random elements are usually bad in a skill based competition.”
So to reword myself, random won’t take away the competitiveness. It will just make luck factor in a lot more. Which in my opinion, is bad for a skill based competition, and should be avoided if possible.
Sorry for the confusion.
Good words from Dark Symphony and beatsofdevil. :tup:
I promised myself that I would be done with this thread, but I’m geniunely interested in why people bitch about most stages. Outside of Spear Pillar, Rumble Falls, and maybe Summit, all the obstacles in stages are surmountable and aren’t lethal are percentages were you wouldn’t normally be killed outside of being eaten on Distant Planet and getting hit by the cars on F-Zero.
Both of those have signs, so I would honestly like to know what’s “chancy” about the stage outside of blaming it for your own inattention (especially if the match is 1v1).
I used to be all, “items are too random for competitive fighting”. But then I realized that if this were a racing game forum then we’d be complaining about Mario Kart(lol, too bad you can’t turn off items in that game). I personally prefer no items and no crazy stages but I won’t be entering any tournies so that don’t mean shit anyway. If people are willing to pay money to enter item tournies then go ahead, no good reason to regulate all competitive Brawl tournies to bare bones.
lmao im done with this thread and the other one. i did my job of proving my point (in addition to spending an entire afternoon trolling instead of doing work). ive also killed made some zero-item enthusiasts and their attempts to argue. “DURH DURH MY PATIENTS IS INFINITE” LOL what a jok!
in all honesty ive only touched this game 4 times. LOLOLOL. in fact, ive only unlocked luigi.
its just that when i picked it up, i thought to myself, “why do people turn ALL items off. the randomness makes the game fun. games can be fun and keep an insane amount of competitiveness right?” afterall, no other game has as much randomness as marvel, and by far thats the best game to spectate. if i got to choose between a sequel to something fast paced and random versus space intensive and turtle centric, id choose the former. the latter just bores me.
nascar, or formula1? chess or poker? cvs2 or mvc2?
and it isnt just so much speed or complexity (look at guilty gear), its the turnaround factor that makes games exciting. americans like their football because one interception can turn an entire game around. this is also partially why super turbo, while simpler than alpha 3, has a bigger fanbase. you randomly get a dizzy and the crowd goes wild.
so what business do i have, making arguments as a spectator instead of a brawl player? simple- games increase their userbase when they just look more interesting. this is also why you dont see guilty gear at evo. it also explains that explosive jump in turnout in 3s after the daigo vs jwong video. if you still feel the game is better off being as simple and technical as possible, fine by me. you can join dark geese and run the game like some snk side tournament in 3 years, or watch your game go extinct like guilty gear in 5.
or your game can live for a long time, and inspire shit like this:
People in this thread often try t question something by GARREING with it, which si weird to me.
Not only does this post acknowledge that some stages can get in the way, it acknowledges that, signs or not, the stages can effect a match a great deal.
Avoidable or not, whether I can survive or not, I, personally, as I said, would rather focus on my opponent with the stage having a minor, consistent influence. I find many stages to be just plain intrusive due to how much they can influence a match.
So please think about your response. If all your response is is “that’s true, it just doesn’t bother me” then say that.
I’ve seen it so many times in this topic. Someone says items are random and someone counters with “You’re wrong! The random element adds skill to the game!”
News… that’s not a counter. You just agreed with a person.
I just want people to really understand what they are writing when tehy write it and be familiar with what point they’re trying to make.
So what you’re asking for is the game to be dumbed down, to make it easier for you? You’d rather not have to learn all aspects of the game, only a portion of it, and proceed to consider yourself a “tournament champion”?
That is my argument, and Im pretty sure it’s the argument of many here. The more you remove from the original game, the worse off it is.
I don’t think taking out items will dumb down the game. Items-on skill set is not totaly inclusive to items-off skillset. Someone who plays well in items-on game will not automatically be good in items-off game. Vice versa.
There are strategies that are exclusive to each format. Both are perfectly viable ways to playing the game. It really comes down to Evo’s definition of what Brawl gaming “should” be. Since items-on is default, does that make it the original game? Is taking out items neutering the game? It seems to come down to philosophical differences rather than technical details.
(Note: If you actually have dyslexia, then this isn’t meant to be insulting. Otherwise, why the fuck are you typing worse than me, who is chronically tired?)
But, seriously, you can agree with someone and not completely agree them. That’s actually what a lot of agreements occur over: petty little things, like items in a game.
Considering that most of the ones that effect the match a great deal will probably end up being banned (whether over legitimate reasons or not), I fail to see where you’re going with this. For the record, the only ones that affect the match a great deal are Mario Bros. (considering how easy it is die), The Summit (somewhat the same), Rumble Falls, Spear Pillar and maybe Great Sea and maybe Mushroomy Kingdom.
Considering those aren’t all the stages that have obstacles, I fail to see where you’re going with this.
So, repeating what Pimp Willy says, you prefer to lazily hide behind the pretext of “consistency” on supposedly “neutral” stages that are “free” of obstacles.
I mean, really, you going to really try and say that something like Mario Circuit is not consistent?
You’ll have to specify what “that” is for me to answer this.
If you mean having to avoid obstacles that are completely consistent and minor, then, yes, that doesn’t bother me and it shouldn’t bother you especially since you like stages like that.
I don’t really care whether you play on them or not. Lord knows that I haven’t played you yet and I doubt I will any time soon. I’m sure it would just be Final Destination and Battlefield all the time.
Fun.
Anyway, all I was wondering about if there any seemingly legitimate reasons that stages with obstacles were so “unfair” to many people when quite a lot of people have exactly what you say next:
I mean, dear fucking God that I don’t believe, I don’t think I’ve ever seen a community misuse a word so many fucking times.
If “random” was a person, then I’m sure that we would sued SWF for libel by now.
This is why I’m asking the question: What, exactly, is “random” about thigns that you can not only see coming and have visual cues (even if they aren’t explicit) and even have consistent timing?
I mean, if something even as active Norfair has consistent signs on all of obstacles, then I would much appreciate if you could please, please, tell me what is “random” about that.
I wouldn’t be so annoyed/interested if it wasn’t for people like you and a lot of people on SWF that apply “random” to every fucking stage instead of the very few stages that are actually “random”.
You know, you can not completely agree with someone.
It’s a novel concept, but I’m sure you could can understand it, given time.
It might help if they could understand what you’re saying first, though.
And, with that said, I’m out of this thread for good, especially since you’ll just completely avoid the question whether through omission or pretext.