Casual vs Tournament: An Honest Question

Cactuar · Nov 27, 2007

Sorry to encourage a few more posts about the Casual vs Tourny thing, but I don't understand what argument Casual players have against tournament players. The tournament scene is determined by players who play the game for the objective. We kill each other as effectively as possible using every technique possible. We make rules that encourage the game being as even as possible to encourage skill vs skill rather than random effects of the game skewing the results.

Casual players will generally always lose to a tournament level player regardless of the rule set, but this is out of our experience in playing the game with the intention of being competitive. Really... we could let a random person create whatever rules they wanted for a tournament (assuming they were fair) and we would still win. I don't mean this to sound elitist.

I suppose my real question is...

Why do casual players of a game complain about the competitive scene, when most of these players do not participate in the scene? Even if we changed the rules to exactly how they wanted them, they wouldn't beat a player that has spent time playing in that scene.

Advanced techniques exist in every competitive game. There are players that spend time exploring possibilities and develop these techniques. Given that they are not broken, glitches are taken advantage of by higher level players in all of those games. Our desire to be able to compete at the highest levels of play demand that we take advantage of everything we possibly can so that we can stay competitive in a scene that is constantly evolving and incorporating everything that players discover. I want to have a legitimate discussion about this. If you plan on answering, support your argument.

GreenKirby · Nov 27, 2007

Because the elite people of the competive scene thinks there noobs for using items and playing on whatever stage they wanna play. Also, as if Smash Bros was a religion, they think their method is best.

Of course, the elite casual side is no better either.

Youko, I now request a Kirby backthrow suicide. lol

Gilgamesh · Nov 27, 2007

Well, i don't know why. They should leave each other in peace. I suppose the reason is that there are idiots in both groups.

Cactuar · Nov 27, 2007

I don't find people noobish because they use items or play on weird stages. The generalization is that people who do that are just not good at the game in the sense of the objective. Making them noobs. I don't use the term noob as offensive, it just describes a lower echelon of playing ability.

DraginHikari · Nov 27, 2007

Human nature makes people rejective of things that aren't in there own seperate viewpoint... then again I tend to remain neutral for the most part so what do I know?

@Cactuar

You realize N00b is suppose to be a offensive term in the general sense of it?

Gilgamesh · Nov 27, 2007

Cactuar said:
I don't find people noobish because they use items or play on weird stages. The generalization is that people who do that are just not good at the game in the sense of the objective. Making them noobs. I don't use the term noob as offensive, it just describes a lower echelon of playing ability.

But you do know that people generally don't know that beforehand, and might still be offended by it?

If the answer is "yes, but i don't care...." well, what can i say, there's your answer i guess.

Cactuar · Nov 27, 2007

@ Dragin: That's why I explained my use of it as not offensive. Give me a term that isn't offensive for a person who is not good at something and I will use it. They exist, but it's your preference.

@ Gilga: That is a fault of the person offended in that they either come to an early conclusion about the thoughts of another person or that they choose not to explore the reason as they need to justify that they are losing for reasons other than their own lack of ability. I do care about what people think and why, hence the reason for this thread. :laugh:

Tom · Nov 27, 2007

GreenKirby said:
Because the elite people of the competive scene thinks there noobs for using items and playing on whatever stage they wanna play. Also, as if Smash Bros was a religion, they think their method is best.

Thats actually just a stereotypical generalization, and I wish more people knew that it isn't true. The elite competitive players don't look down on casual players for playing with items or on stages banned in tournaments. In fact, at smashfests and tournaments all around the competitive scene, you will find people playing with items on brinstar depths or hyrule.

Competitive players don't think you suck for playing with items or on certain stages. They just all agree that in tournaments, where you enter and put money on the line, the scene is fairest when certain random or unfair elements are absent. If you playing in a tournament, then competitive rules dont apply to you! :D its as simple as that.

Cactuar said:
The generalization is that people who do that are just not good at the game in the sense of the objective.

This is true because most people who play smash around the tournament scene adopt the tournament rules. The fact that you play with different rules doesn't mean you are worse at the game at all, but you cannot honestly say that there is no correlation, SIMPLY because those who play with the competitive rules are those who play the most, against the largest amount of individuals.

NES n00b · Nov 27, 2007

People do not like to be told or feel like they are inferior in some way. So these type of people look for excuses why things the way they are. Whether it is more "fun" or "honorable" or "playing the real game" or advance tech johns or having a life or travel/money johns. So when some advance tech player says "People who don't use advance techs are bad at the game," "casuals " get angry and when casuals say "The way you are playing is wrong and was not intended," "competitive" players get angry. The people then try to cling to the worst part of a certain group and say that is all there is in a strawmen like thing. It doesn't help that really negative things are easier to remember than normal/good things.

Finally, Gilgamesh said it best. There are idiots on both sides.

Cactuar · Nov 27, 2007

@Tom: I kinda love your scrolling sig.

@NES: I agree that it is human nature to not want to be inferior at anything, but it goes hand in hand with it being human nature to be competitive. I am trying to encourage an individual on an extreme of either side to come here and support their argument as I am curious to see how they would do so.

DraginHikari · Nov 27, 2007

Cactuar said:
@ Dragin: That's why I explained my use of it as not offensive. Give me a term that isn't offensive for a person who is not good at something and I will use it. They exist, but it's your preference.

@ Gilga: That is a fault of the person offended in that they either come to an early conclusion about the thoughts of another person or that they choose not to explore the reason as they need to justify that they are losing for reasons other than their own lack of ability. I do care about what people think and why, hence the reason for this thread.

The same thing can be said with curse words or racial slurs as well. I've heard people use them and say they have a use that isn't offensive. But the general population isn't going to see that when you use a term and will still judge on you none the less. So basically if you use it and get flamed, your still pretty much responsibile for what you say.

I'm aware anyone outside of gamers won't even understand the term n00b but it's a similar context I suppose

Tom · Nov 27, 2007

Cactuar said:
@Tom: I kinda love your scrolling sig.

LOL just look at your sig! :laugh:

Nodonn · Nov 27, 2007

Cactuar said:
I don't find people noobish because they use items or play on weird stages. The generalization is that people who do that are just not good at the game in the sense of the objective. Making them noobs. I don't use the term noob as offensive, it just describes a lower echelon of playing ability.

How about we call you a (long string of curse words) and say ''we're not using it offensive, we're just describing you''?

Psydon · Nov 27, 2007

The "casual vs. competitive" feud basically boils down to this.

Casual players are, mostly:

-Considered "noobs" in the eyes of competitive players for liking stages they don't and occasionally using items--accepting Smash for what it is and embracing it, in other words.
-Surrounded by idiots who say dumb things-which arouse the ire and malcontempt of others-and QQ (WoW slang for "whining for no reason") constantly.
-Never taken seriously for the very fact that they are casual players, and the above reasons.
-Usually noobs or idiots, or at least acting like it.

Competitive players are, mostly:

-Stubborn, whiny dinosaurs who refuse to reach for newer horizons and experiment with Smash.
-Egotistical jerks who believe that their words are the be-all, end-all since they're of the "elite".
-Apathetic.
-Considered "noobs" in the eyes of casual players for the above reasons.

And then there's the focus of all the arguments: stages and items (well, I guess sooner or later a mod is going to come and kill this topic since I typed the word "item". Have a nice day. =D).

EDIT: My take on all this is as follows:

I hate everyone, casual and competitive. And I compete in casual tourneys. That makes me neutral. XD

I agree wholeheartedly that some stages and items should never see the light of day except for the most casual of casual matches. Note, however, that I said SOME.

I believe that certain items can have a place in competitive play. The problem is that nobody wants to take the time to find out which ones should be included and which ones shouldn't.

Casual players, mostly, scream out: "ITEMS FOR TOURNEYS!" without specifying which ones, which implies that they want all items in tourneys--which some stupid people actually support. That's asinine.

Competitive players, mostly, scream out: "NO ITEMS FOR TOURNEYS!" because they can't be bothered with testing out the item roster and seeing their true impact on the game. They are comfortable with the way they play and don't ever want to change. That's just lazy, stupid and nothing but a hinderance to the metagame. What that guy said in his "Addition by Subtraction" topic was a complete load of crap.

You can focus on technical aspects while embracing Smash's unique aspects. All you need is the will to do so. Casual players don't have the will to focus on the technical, and competitive players don't have the will to focus on the unique.

As for stages, again, I think that certain stages should never ever be seen in a tourney. To take some examples from Melee: Icicle Mountain, Flat Zone and Poke Floats. However, that some would sink so low as to say that FD or an equivalent is the only stage worth playing on is ridiculous (not to mention the fact that FD, especially after battle after battle of it, is boring enough to make me fall asleep mid-fight). There is a reason why the stages in Smash aren't all just flat battlefields with cool backgrounds, like every other fighting game. I think people should be more lenient with stages and more willing to put up with certain things.

If people just actually listened to one another instead of spouting the same nonsense over and over, this feud would end almost instantly and we could very well be on the brink of a Smash Renaissance.

FireWater · Nov 27, 2007

Cactuar said:
Sorry to encourage a few more posts about the Casual vs Tourny thing, but I don't understand what argument Casual players have against tournament players. The tournament scene is determined by players who play the game for the objective. We kill each other as effectively as possible using every technique possible. We make rules that encourage the game being as even as possible to encourage skill vs skill rather than random effects of the game skewing the results.

Casual players will generally always lose to a tournament level player regardless of the rule set, but this is out of our experience in playing the game with the intention of being competitive. Really... we could let a random person create whatever rules they wanted for a tournament (assuming they were fair) and we would still win. I don't mean this to sound elitist.

I suppose my real question is...

Why do casual players of a game complain about the competitive scene, when most of these players do not participate in the scene? Even if we changed the rules to exactly how they wanted them, they wouldn't beat a player that has spent time playing in that scene. The bottom line though is usually select members of the competitive community give the casual community a hard time, and in return causes a cycle of hatred towards the competitive community, in which case the other members of the competitive community begin to despise the casual community. The vicious cycle continues and continues.

Advanced techniques exist in every competitive game. There are players that spend time exploring possibilities and develop these techniques. Given that they are not broken, glitches are taken advantage of by higher level players in all of those games. Our desire to be able to compete at the highest levels of play demand that we take advantage of everything we possibly can so that we can stay competitive in a scene that is constantly evolving and incorporating everything that players discover. I want to have a legitimate discussion about this. If you plan on answering, support your argument.

I've encountered this in several other communities, the basic premise that I feel is behind the hatred is that casual players feel they will be less respected in their game of choice community, when it comes to discussion about gameplay and/or strategies, general opinions etc...

This is due to the fact that every competitive community has a few members that take pride in belittling others that are of inferior skill or different mindset. Casual players want their voices heard as much as competitive players, but depending on the community, their voices maybe insignificant.

Ferret · Nov 27, 2007

Cactuar said:
I don't find people noobish because they use items or play on weird stages. The generalization is that people who do that are just not good at the game in the sense of the objective. Making them noobs. I don't use the term noob as offensive, it just describes a lower echelon of playing ability.

The problem with your point of view (or more how you you explain it) is the whole noob thing.
The majority sees it as an offensive term and I think it was maent to be that way, too.
Regardless if you see it as another form of the word newbe, it still pisses most of the players off and they may feel provoked. Furthermore a newbe is a person who just recently began to play the game and not a player who is not as good as other players. I for example play Melee since it came out and I don't use wavedashing or most of the other advanced techniques for the simple reason, that I have no use for it. There are no competitive players in my area and I don't have much time to play either. However if someone calls me a noob, because I don't use advanced techs, I feel insulted. I admit that I cannot keep up with the competitive players, but I chose it to be that way.

bob-e · Nov 27, 2007

Epic rant from /v/ explains it best.

The crux of this debate is that some people do not want other people to play a certain game competitively. That's it. No one is asking the inverse, demanding that casual gamers play by their arbitrary set of rules. It is simply the anti-competitive crowd going out of their way to spite those who are better than them. Their "arguments" normally focus on some abstract "way the game was meant to be played", which we all know actually means "way I want to play the game". To this I can only say, who killed Sakurai and made YOU king?

For the misinformed, which includes most of the anti-competitive crowd, here are the standardized rules for Super Smash Bros. tournament play:
-4 Stock, 8 Minutes, Team Damage, No Items
-Both players choose one stage to ban for the set
-Both players pick characters at same time and go randomly to one of the six "neutral" stages.
-The loser determines the next stage to go to, from almost all of them. The loser also picks character second.
-Best out of three wins

Obviously, we have to talk about items. Items add luck to the game, period. If a good item appears next to you, you very well could instantly win. If a bomb or exploding container appears in front of your attack, you very well could instantly lose. Players don't like having their skill nullified by luck in a competition. Players enter tournaments to pit their skill against their opponent's, not to gamble. Items benefit top-tier characters more, period. It only widens the gap between characters. Most the high tier characters are fast and/or very aerial, giving them a massive advantage in obtaining items on the stage. Some people say that items were meant to balance the game, claiming that characters like Mewtwo and Pikachu were designed as item gods, and their low tier positions are due to items being banned. This is bull****. If an item spawns directly between Pikachu and Shiek, who will get to it first? Fox and Falco, two of the top characters, even have their reflectors to give them the upper hand even when their opponent has the items! Are you saying they need MORE advantages?

If you want to play competitively with items, go ahead. Make your own tournament. Tournaments are organized by players, not people who own stores. Just don't be surprised when no one shows up, because virtually no one wants to play competitively with items. Tourneys do not play with items because the people attending them don't want to, not because some evil tourney director is making them.

Next stages. Hyrule Temple sucks, ok? Let's get that out of the way first. The bottom zone makes it almost pure luck as to who kills who first, giving certain characters huge advantages and leading to REALLY long matches. If you want to organize a Hyrule Temple tourney, go ahead, no one will show up. The only other stages that are banned are ridiculous ones like Super Flat Zone that no one ever likes anyway.

Now then... The six "neutral stages." People act like tournaments only play on Final Destination, which is ridiculous, since it's only one of the six default stages even, and it's typically banned by a player if their opponent has a good Falco. Some tournaments even play with something called "Dave's stupid rule", which states that no stage can be played twice in a set of matches. Yoshi's Story, Fountain of Dreams, Pokemon Stadium, Battlefield, and Dream Land all receive just as much play as Final Destination, if not more. And those are only the initial stages! The other counter-pick stages just aren't included on Random so you don't get some ridiculous random match-up like fighting Peach or Jigglypuff on Mute City.

So why are there so many people who think tournaments are the scourge of Smash? It's simple really. Every fighting game suffers from this to some degree, but it has hit the Smash community particularly hard due to its "easy to learn, impossible to master" nature: Everyone and their dog thinks they are great at Smash, some are, but most suck. People seem to get the idea that just because they've unlocked all the stages and characters, that they are true masters of the game. Then one day, they come up against someone using advanced techniques with tournament rules, get destroyed, then become angry and bitter towards tournament rules and techniques like wave dashing.

So next time you get beaten by an advanced player ask for some advice rather than the usual, "Bawwwwww! Wave dashing and L-canceleing are such cheep glitches (PROTIP: they're not glitches). The game is supposed to be played on Hyrule Temple with full items." It's not like advanced players are in some secret club, and are determined to keep these techniques hidden from you just to maintain an advantage. With the exception of a few rare douche bags the whole notion of elitism is false, most advanced players would be more than happy to explain advanced techniques to you. Furthermore, it's not even that hard to learn them. In only a couple hours you can learn to wave dash, a couple more and you can learn to L-cancel. From there it's just a matter of practice until you can incorporate them into your game.

So what do casual players have to complain about? Nothing, the anti-competitive crowd just doesn't like the fact that some people are better than them at the game, and they don't want to put forth the effort to become better themselves. That's it. The can claim otherwise all day, but that's it.

Livvers · Nov 27, 2007

I just assume it's because casual players lose so badly to high level players. They just hate getting their *** kicked, and so they try to belittle the method with which they were beaten in any way possible.

ihavespaceblondes · Nov 27, 2007

Psydon said:
The "casual vs. competitive" feud basically boils down to this.

Casual players are, mostly:

-Considered "noobs" in the eyes of competitive players for liking stages they don't and occasionally using items--accepting Smash for what it is and embracing it, in other words.

No, they aren't considered noobs for liking tourney-banned stages and using items. They are considered noobs because they don't try to get as good at the game as possible, and therefore lack the game knowledge, experience, and ability that only comes from playing as many talented people as you can, as often as you can, which is very difficult to do outside of traveling to tournaments. They don't want to put in the time and effort it takes to get good at Melee, so why would they be upset when someone points out that they haven't?

Cactuar · Nov 27, 2007

DraginHikari said:
The same thing can be said with curse words or racial slurs as well. I've heard people use them and say they have a use that isn't offensive. But the general population isn't going to see that when you use a term and will still judge on you none the less. So basically if you use it and get flamed, your still pretty much responsibile for what you say.

I'm aware anyone outside of gamers won't even understand the term n00b but it's a similar context I suppose

This is why I'm asking for someone to give me a synonymous term to use that is not offensive.

Tom said:
LOL just look at your sig!

True.

Nodonn said:
How about we call you a (long string of curse words) and say ''we're not using it offensive, we're just describing you''?

I'm more laid back than most people. If you just randomly did that to me I would understand it has no reason and therefor has no meaning to me. Good luck "describing" me using said words. Situationally this is much more extreme than the term noob and is not a valid point to me especially after I explained and asked for an alternative.

Psydon said:
The "casual vs. competitive" feud basically boils down to this.

Casual players are, mostly:

-Considered "noobs" in the eyes of competitive players for liking stages they don't and occasionally using items--accepting Smash for what it is and embracing it, in other words.
-Surrounded by idiots who say dumb things-which arouse the ire and malcontempt of others-and QQ (WoW slang for "whining for no reason") constantly.
-Never taken seriously for the very fact that they are casual players, and the above reasons.

Competitive players are, mostly:

-Stubborn, whiny dinosaurs who refuse to reach for newer horizons and experiment with Smash.
-Egotistical jerks who believe that their words are the be-all, end-all since they're of the "elite".
-Apathetic.
-Considered "noobs" in the eyes of casual players for the above reasons.

You are an extreme on the side of Casual. Thank you for posting.

We do not consider you noobs because you like stages that we don't use. Most competitive playerse love weird stages and playing with items for fun, just not during competition. Accepting Smash for what it is, is accepting that an item switch exists. That a stage switch exists. We can create whatever rules to incorporate this, it does not affect you or your own ability to play how you wish. Most competitive players I know would be completely willing to play you on whatever stages you want with whatever items you want.

In another sense, we do reach for newer horizons and experiment more than the casual player in that we are "accepting the game for what it is", a fighting game where you kill your opponent. We are constantly developing new ways to defeat one another, maximizing our knowledge and use of the movement given to us by the game.

FireWater said:
I've encountered this in several other communities, the basic premise that I feel is behind the hatred is that casual players feel they will be less respected in their game of choice community, when it comes to discussion about gameplay and/or strategies, general opinions etc...

This is due to the fact that every competitive community has a few members that take pride in belittling others that are of inferior skill or different mindset. Casual players want their voices heard as much as competitive players, but depending on the community, their voices maybe insignificant.

I encourage the existence of an outlet for casual players, but I do not agree that they should have influence on a competitive scene that they are not part of.

Ferret said:
The problem with your point of view (or more how you you explain it) is the whole noob thing.
The majority sees it as an offensive term and I think it was maent to be that way, too.
Regardless if you see it as another form of the word newbe, it still pisses most of the players off and they may feel provoked. Furthermore a newbe is a person who just recently began to play the game and not a player who is not as good as other players. I for example play Melee since it came out and I don't use wavedashing or most of the other advanced techniques for the simple reason, that I have no use for it. There are no competitive players in my area and I don't have much time to play either. However if someone calls me a noob, because I don't use advanced techs, I feel insulted. I admit that I cannot keep up with the competitive players, but I chose it to be that way.

I would call you a noob, in the sense that you are new to the competitive scene and using the techniques involved in playing on that scene. I wouldn't call you a noob to smash.

No one has suggested an alternative term yet.

FireWater · Nov 27, 2007

Characteristics of Casual

1. Just play for fun
2. Do not push the game to the extreme
3. Often times have certain mental mindsets or "honor codes" with regards to play style.
4. Usually does not care about winning or losing.
5. Shows decent competancy of the game, and wants respect for it.

Competitive:
1. Plays to win, no matter what.
2. Will explore the game extremities
3. Does not believe in cheap or dishonorable tactics
4. Often goes to tournaments, and can earn respect amongst other competitive players
5. Sometimes look at casual players as lower in value, and sometimes will remind them that due to skill levels that their opinions are not important.

Personally, I feel its best to keep both groups seperated, but unfortunately with online play, that may not happen.

Its just the conflicting mindsets that really can drive a wedge between community members.

NES n00b · Nov 27, 2007

Cactuar said:
@NES: I agree that it is human nature to not want to be inferior at anything, but it goes hand in hand with it being human nature to be competitive. I am trying to encourage an individual on an extreme of either side to come here and support their argument as I am curious to see how they would do so.

Exactly. Most "casuals" that are in these boards are in fact competitive in a sense. They want to win. They take pride in winning. Just like every competitive player; however, they hate to lose or think that people think they are bad. So they come up with johns to cover up for why they lose. There are a whole lot of reasons why they have the mentality of "do whatever it takes to win" attitude, but most of it stems from ignorance, a sense that being "honorable" makes them better somehow, and the realization that they are not as good as they thought they once. That is where the rationalization kicks in.

The extreme side of the competitive can either be just someone who likes to feel superior to someone. Not to say that casual elitists don't that too, but that is the common trait among the most competitive. To feel superior, they have to flaunt what talent (if any talent) they have and put other people down. It is sort of the nature of competitive spirit.

Anyways, long story short is that that both elitists have really flawed logic and could not possibly give you a well, thoughout arguement. It is just a fight between a group of competitive/hardcore gamers that have fictious rules in order so they can rationalize why they lose and another group of competitive players who may or may not be good, but try to build their egos up by degrading people who do not do the things they consider traits of being good and connecting stuff they do which is similar to what pros do (wavedashing, the sterotype of playing FD only, no fictious rules) to make themselves feel like they are pros or good or superior or whatever.

There is no logical arguement for either elitist.

Edit: My descriptions of the "casual" players here is what some people would call a "scrub" or a "casual elitist." Alot of casuals do play just for fun.

2ndEdit: the new term for n00b is applesauce. Sounds a whole lot less offensive.

Nodonn · Nov 27, 2007

Call them newbs from now on, and before you ask newb and noob DO have a different meaning.

Blue sHell · Nov 27, 2007

MELEE

When it comes to Melee both groups should really just mind their businesses. Really now. Melee could be played so many different ways due to some aspects(or not played a certain way) and that makes the game very fun and playable for people who are casual and pro scene. IF in Melee they were to take out absolutely all advanced techniques, the casual players wouldn't care a bit, but the pro scene would be hurt BADLY. So for casuals to say "I wish all the adv. techs were removed" is really just selfish and wrong. Just because they can't beat a good pro player doesn't mean they should wish that upon the game, its not fair. Either way pros and casuals shouldn't be playing each other, it just won't work out. But then again this gives no reason for pros to call casuals noobish because they play different than us so it isn't fair either. The pushing of the word noob alone is the reason why some casuals hate pros.

BRAWL

Brawl is a new game. And things might stay and things might be taken out. THIS and ONLY THIS is the whole reason things are argued about when it comes to brawl. And the whole "pros shouldn't play casuals" just won't work now with the new addition to wifi. So when casuals say "I wish they take out all the adv techs" they have a bit of reasoning in their statement now(unlike in Melee). But pro players playing at a higher level consider any and everything. Like for example when playing a Falco as Peach I always remind myself to control the whole ground area and not to focus on air combat too much because that's where I could take advantage of Falco the most, OR don't go on platforms too much when a Marth is on the ground level. What I'm trying to get across here is that taking out adv techs really won't close the gap between pros and casuals like some people believe it would, taking them out would just make the game less .... diverse. But overall because its a new game that last statement is an opinion, as is most things that are going to be said in this thread.

I hoped this helped Cactaur.

I've been attending tourneys with my friend when I use to live in Miami for some time but never made an account on Smashboards until a while back when I moved over to Pennsylvania. Coming here and seeing this ongoing fight shocked the hell out of me so I really dwelled into understanding both viewpoints.

Xanderous · Nov 27, 2007

I find that casual players attack competitive players far more often than the reverse.

Psydon · Nov 27, 2007

ihavespaceballs said:
No, they aren't considered noobs for liking tourney-banned stages and using items. They are considered noobs because they don't try to get as good at the game as possible, and therefore lack the game knowledge, experience, and ability that only comes from playing as many talented people as you can, as often as you can, which is very difficult to do outside of traveling to tournaments. They don't want to put in the time and effort it takes to get good at Melee, so why would they be upset when someone points out that they haven't?

No matter how good somebody is, if they embrace anything other than the general elitist consensus, the reaction will be the same.

Cactuar said:
You are an extreme on the side of Casual. Thank you for posting.

We do not consider you noobs because you like stages that we don't use. Most competitive playerse love weird stages and playing with items for fun, just not during competition. Accepting Smash for what it is, is accepting that an item switch exists. That a stage switch exists. We can create whatever rules to incorporate this, it does not affect you or your own ability to play how you wish. Most competitive players I know would be completely willing to play you on whatever stages you want with whatever items you want.

In another sense, we do reach for newer horizons and experiment more than the casual player in that we are "accepting the game for what it is", a fighting game where you kill your opponent. We are constantly developing new ways to defeat one another, maximizing our knowledge and use of the movement given to us by the game.

I'm not an extreme on either side. I've never lashed out against either side without talking about the other. I'm calling it like I see it. Evidently you've seen better, or maybe it's how I said it, or maybe it's just my opinion in general. Thank you for replying.

Please quit saying that you don't consider casuals noobs for that reason because the honest truth is that you do, just as much as you consider them noobs for their arguments, for the fact that they don't feel like becoming elitists, etc. And the same goes in reverse to the largest possible extent; in the end everyone is saying the same thing.

EDIT: And it all means nothing.

And it's one thing to embrace restriction, but the thing is: that's been done. And it's being done again even now; why else do you think that "Melee 2.0" argument is still going around?

Sliq · Nov 27, 2007

Cactuar said:
No one has suggested an alternative term yet.

Newb or newbie to refer to someone "new" to the community.

Noob refers to someone that is a ****ing idiot.

That's basically it. It basically comes down to mentality. Someone is bad at the game but wants to get better is a newbie. Some ******* ********** whining about stage bans, wavedashing, and no items is a noob, and a ****.

Psydon said:
The "casual vs. competitive" feud basically boils down to this.

Casual players are, mostly:

-Considered "noobs" in the eyes of competitive players for liking stages they don't and occasionally using items--accepting Smash for what it is and embracing it, in other words.
-Surrounded by idiots who say dumb things-which arouse the ire and malcontempt of others-and QQ (WoW slang for "whining for no reason") constantly.
-Never taken seriously for the very fact that they are casual players, and the above reasons.
-Usually noobs or idiots, or at least acting like it.

Competitive players are, mostly:

-Stubborn, whiny dinosaurs who refuse to reach for newer horizons and experiment with Smash.
-Egotistical jerks who believe that their words are the be-all, end-all since they're of the "elite".
-Apathetic.
-Considered "noobs" in the eyes of casual players for the above reasons.

And then there's the focus of all the arguments: stages and items (well, I guess sooner or later a mod is going to come and kill this topic since I typed the word "item". Have a nice day. =D).

EDIT: My take on all this is as follows:

I hate everyone, casual and competitive. And I compete in casual tourneys. That makes me neutral. XD

I agree wholeheartedly that some stages and items should never see the light of day except for the most casual of casual matches. Note, however, that I said SOME.

I believe that certain items can have a place in competitive play. The problem is that nobody wants to take the time to find out which ones should be included and which ones shouldn't.

Casual players, mostly, scream out: "ITEMS FOR TOURNEYS!" without specifying which ones, which implies that they want all items in tourneys--which some stupid people actually support. That's asinine.

Competitive players, mostly, scream out: "NO ITEMS FOR TOURNEYS!" because they can't be bothered with testing out the item roster and seeing their true impact on the game. They are comfortable with the way they play and don't ever want to change. That's just lazy, stupid and nothing but a hinderance to the metagame. What that guy said in his "Addition by Subtraction" topic was a complete load of crap.

You can focus on technical aspects while embracing Smash's unique aspects. All you need is the will to do so. Casual players don't have the will to focus on the technical, and competitive players don't have the will to focus on the unique.

As for stages, again, I think that certain stages should never ever be seen in a tourney. To take some examples from Melee: Icicle Mountain, Flat Zone and Poke Floats. However, that some would sink so low as to say that FD or an equivalent is the only stage worth playing on is ridiculous (not to mention the fact that FD, especially after battle after battle of it, is boring enough to make me fall asleep mid-fight). There is a reason why the stages in Smash aren't all just flat battlefields with cool backgrounds, like every other fighting game. I think people should be more lenient with stages and more willing to put up with certain things.

If people just actually listened to one another instead of spouting the same nonsense over and over, this feud would end almost instantly and we could very well be on the brink of a Smash Renaissance.

I'm sorry, but you have no idea what you are talking about. You joined this year. News flash: Melee was released 6 years ago!

The rules weren't just magically derived the moment the game came out. ITEMS WERE ON FOR TOURNAMENTS FOR A LONG TIME.

They eventually got rid of them because of explosive barrels, crate, and capsules spawning randomly and killing you.

You didn't know this, which plays right into my "you have no idea what you are talking about" arguement.

Besides the random god**** explosions, the item that spawns is RANDOM, and where it spawns is RANDOM. This isn't like Halo where the BR ALWAYS spawns by some rock 45 seconds after it is picked up.

Items in Melee would benefit faster characters way more than slower ones just because of their higher maneuverability. Just so you know, the best characters in the game also happen to be the faster ones.

Slow characters are already awful in Melee, they'd be even more awful with items.

Casuals whining about competitives is like a group of friends whining to the NFL because they don't play two hand tap below the waste, 3 second rushing, the first down is past Ms. Cratchimans dog house. Seriously, wtf. The NFL doesn't kick down your god**** door and make you wear pads and play on a regulation field with the exact amount of players.

Then Joey the ****** says something like, "I'd be just as good as Deon Sanders if they didn't use those cheap rules and all the cheap "training" and "physical fitness."

Then Deon Sanders flies in on his gold plated, time traveling helicopter, and tells Joey to kiss his balls, because Joey is a ****ing cvnt. Joey gets mad about it, puts on his Naruto headband and runs to the internet to cry about how people called him out on being a ******.

Ferret · Nov 27, 2007

I would call you a noob, in the sense that you are new to the competitive scene and using the techniques involved in playing on that scene. I wouldn't call you a noob to smash.

No one has suggested an alternative term yet.

Well, it's true, that I'm new to the competetive scene and I don't argue with it or think it's offensive. I also don't have a probem with your thoughts or opinion. The only thing that really bothers me is the term noob. I know what you mean by using the term noob now, but the problem is, that it isn't clear what you mean, if someone reads it the first time, because of its exaggerated offensive use.
If you'd call me newbie, I wouldn't have a problem with it, because it's what I am.
But if you call me a noob, it gets a whole different sense, because of the experience I had for the use of thatt term.

Tom · Nov 27, 2007

People like Firewater and Psydon, who present STEREOTYPICAL and sometimes ignorant definitions of what it means to be a casual or competitive smasher, are the ones who continue to feed this flame.

Especially Psydon.

Psydon said:
Please quit saying that you don't consider casuals noobs for that reason because the honest truth is that you do, just as much as you consider them noobs for their arguments, for the fact that they don't feel like becoming elitists, etc. And the same goes in reverse to the largest possible extent; in the end everyone is saying the same thing.

The honest-to-god truth is that competitive players really don't care if casual players become competitive or not. We don't care what settings you play the game on, as long as you appreciate the game. The rules on this forum are those that we play our tournaments by, and if you disagree with them, then don't enter our tournaments. Start your own tournaments where the rules that you believe are the best for fair play are in effect.

We make these rules because we want our tournaments to be fair, not because we hate you. We're not making anyone play by these rules who aren't entering the tournaments we run, so why do you continue to insist that we think you are stupid or noobs because of what rules you play with.

Many competitive players consider many casual players noobs simply because they aren't as good in the tournament scene. If that bothers you, then you have a problem. =/ sigh

Spaceballs has it right when he says that we consider most casuals noobs because

they don't try to get as good at the game as possible, and therefore lack the game knowledge, experience, and ability that only comes from playing as many talented people as you can, as often as you can, which is very difficult to do outside of traveling to tournaments. They don't want to put in the time and effort it takes to get good at Melee, so why would they be upset when someone points out that they haven't?

Your response (Psydon) to this was absolutely without basis. You stated that we would still consider players who would rather play with items and all stages noobs even if they beat us on our own settings. That is absolutely ridiculous. AND BESIDES, we play with items and others stages ALL THE TIME, just not in tournaments where we put MONEY on the line.

choknater · Nov 27, 2007

One important thing I'd like to point out is that there is a line between competitive players and self-proclaimed competitive players.

Nicer competitive players tend to talk more casually about smash among their friends and occasionally to give advice to help. Their names are recognized among the Melee community. The problem is... people who are new to smashboards might not recognize names of real pros, especially since a lot of new ones are popping up during this era where Brawl is much more popular.

Do people who are new to smashboards and talk mostly about brawl know who Ken, PC, and Mew2King are? Yes. But do they know who sliq, Lambchops, XIF, Falcomist, Eggz, or Chinesah are? I'd say, more than likely, they won't. I just named off random people who are really great players and respected in their areas. If they were to post at the brawl board, they would be on equal terms with someone named UltraMarthPro69 who has 2,000+ posts simply because they wouldn't be recognized.

In this case, UltraMarthPro69 would be the self-proclaimed competitive player who would be rude to casual players (who in fact should be everyone, because even the best pros emphasize that the game should be played casually.) MaNg0 spams all the freaking time, would a noob respect him? No. Do I respect him? Hell yes.

I normally don't get into these arguments simply because of this concept... Most real competitive melee players avoid the brawl rooms because of this also. A select few have the gall and the intelligence (like Cactuar, or Gimpyfish) to voice their opinions.

Blue sHell · Nov 27, 2007

FireWater said:
Casual
4. Usually does not care about winning or losing.

Competitive:
1. Plays to win, no matter what.

3. Does not believe in cheap or dishonorable tactics
.

No kidding, you should of put the word "Often in front of ALL of the things on your list.

4.Some casuals take offense when you say they don't care about winning or losing, because they really do, they just won't use adv. techs to do so.

1. We tourney players play to win only in tourneys and serious matches. Example: I play Peach and my Low tier is Bowser and I KNOW I can't beat my friend's Falco with my god**** Bowser but I do so anyway because its fun. Hope that got my point across slightly.

3. I really hope you realize that in almost ALL tournaments stalling and the Freeze Glitch are banned completely. COMPLETELY. So don't say that we're bloodthirsty it just comes across to make us look bad in the end.

choknater · Nov 27, 2007

Blue sHell said:
No kidding, you should of put the word "Often in front of ALL of the things on your list.

4.Some casuals take offense when you say they don't care about winning or losing, because they really do, they just won't use adv. techs to do so.

1. We play to win only in tourneys and serious matches. Example: I play Peach and my Low tier is Bowser and I KNOW I can't beat my friend's Falco with my god**** Bowser but I do so anyway because its fun. Hope that got my point across slightly.

3. I really hope you realize that in almost ALL tournaments stalling and the Freeze Glitch are banned completely. COMPLETELY. So don't say that we're bloodthirsty it just comes across to make us look bad in the end.

4. Why not?

1. "We?" Are you referring to competitive or casual players? I don't know the point you're trying to get across.

3. Wobbling is easier to execute than the freeze glitch. Freeze glitching is currently being debated in the IC board to see whether or not it should finally be allowed after all this time being banned. It still probably won't, but there are reasons to defend it.

Not that I freeze glitch in tournies lol.

God, I hate when my good posts end up as the last on a page.

Witchking_of_Angmar · Nov 27, 2007

choknater said:
One important thing I'd like to point out is that there is a line between competitive players and self-proclaimed competitive players.

Nicer competitive players tend to talk more casually about smash among their friends and occasionally to give advice to help. Their names are recognized among the Melee community. The problem is... people who are new to smashboards might not recognize names of real pros, especially since a lot of new ones are popping up during this era where Brawl is much more popular.

Do people who are new to smashboards and talk mostly about brawl know who Ken, PC, and Mew2King are? Yes. But do they know who sliq, Lambchops, XIF, Falcomist, Eggz, or Chinesah are? I'd say, more than likely, they won't. I just named off random people who are really great players and respected in their areas. If they were to post at the brawl board, they would be on equal terms with someone named UltraMarthPro69 who has 2,000+ posts simply because they wouldn't be recognized.

In this case, UltraMarthPro69 would be the self-proclaimed competitive player who would be rude to casual players (who in fact should be everyone, because even the best pros emphasize that the game should be played casually.) MaNg0 spams all the freaking time, would a noob respect him? No. Do I respect him? Hell yes.

I normally don't get into these arguments simply because of this concept... Most real competitive melee players avoid the brawl rooms because of this also. A select few have the gall and the intelligence (like Cactuar, or Gimpyfish) to voice their opinions.

What about competitive players that know they suck, aren't rude to casuals, aren't recognized by noobs, and don't really care? Cuz that would be me. I don't really care about the whole "Casual vs. Competitive" thing because it won't EVER get resolved. Never. Sure, by satrting an intelligent topic like this it may become better, but in the end, it will hardly make a difference. So I just keep quiet and try to improve. Since flaming noobs doesn't help me improve, it's sorta a waste of my time.

PS: Mango is amazing. Quite possibly the sexiest spammer ever.

SinisterLizard · Nov 27, 2007

Cactuar said:
I don't find people noobish because they use items or play on weird stages. The generalization is that people who do that are just not good at the game in the sense of the objective. Making them noobs. I don't use the term noob as offensive, it just describes a lower echelon of playing ability.

Why do people keep overusing this word? It is becoming quite annoying.

Mind you, you probably used it better than most people around here, but it is becoming annoying when people use it over and over and it really isn't fitting for what they're trying to say. /rant

I'm tired of competitive vs. casual threads anyway.

peachori · Nov 27, 2007

The problem is that by minimizing luck, success in the competitive realm is invariably dependent on an in-depth knowledge of fighting mechanics and strategies. it is not, however, dependent upon an in-depth knowledge of item mechanics. a large portion of the smash community (competitive players) have basically forsaken learning anything about items, where they spawn, and how to effectively use them. still, we consider ourselves to be better at the game than casual players. i think their point is mainly that we're ignoring a part of the game that they aren't, and that they should be recognized for that. although i think they dont realize the knowledge we have is much more central to the game than the knowledge they have.

Endless Nightmares · Nov 27, 2007

Psydon said:
If people just actually listened to one another instead of spouting the same nonsense over and over, this feud would end almost instantly and we could very well be on the brink of a Smash Renaissance.

Psydon said:
The "casual vs. competitive" feud basically boils down to this.

Casual players are, mostly:

-Considered "noobs" in the eyes of competitive players for liking stages they don't and occasionally using items--accepting Smash for what it is and embracing it, in other words.
-Surrounded by idiots who say dumb things-which arouse the ire and malcontempt of others-and QQ (WoW slang for "whining for no reason") constantly.
-Never taken seriously for the very fact that they are casual players, and the above reasons.
-Usually noobs or idiots, or at least acting like it.

Competitive players are, mostly:

-Stubborn, whiny dinosaurs who refuse to reach for newer horizons and experiment with Smash.
-Egotistical jerks who believe that their words are the be-all, end-all since they're of the "elite".
-Apathetic.
-Considered "noobs" in the eyes of casual players for the above reasons.

And then there's the focus of all the arguments: stages and items (well, I guess sooner or later a mod is going to come and kill this topic since I typed the word "item". Have a nice day. =D).

EDIT: My take on all this is as follows:

I hate everyone, casual and competitive. And I compete in casual tourneys. That makes me neutral. XD

I agree wholeheartedly that some stages and items should never see the light of day except for the most casual of casual matches. Note, however, that I said SOME.

I believe that certain items can have a place in competitive play. The problem is that nobody wants to take the time to find out which ones should be included and which ones shouldn't.

Casual players, mostly, scream out: "ITEMS FOR TOURNEYS!" without specifying which ones, which implies that they want all items in tourneys--which some stupid people actually support. That's asinine.

Competitive players, mostly, scream out: "NO ITEMS FOR TOURNEYS!" because they can't be bothered with testing out the item roster and seeing their true impact on the game. They are comfortable with the way they play and don't ever want to change. That's just lazy, stupid and nothing but a hinderance to the metagame. What that guy said in his "Addition by Subtraction" topic was a complete load of crap.

You can focus on technical aspects while embracing Smash's unique aspects. All you need is the will to do so. Casual players don't have the will to focus on the technical, and competitive players don't have the will to focus on the unique.

As for stages, again, I think that certain stages should never ever be seen in a tourney. To take some examples from Melee: Icicle Mountain, Flat Zone and Poke Floats. However, that some would sink so low as to say that FD or an equivalent is the only stage worth playing on is ridiculous (not to mention the fact that FD, especially after battle after battle of it, is boring enough to make me fall asleep mid-fight). There is a reason why the stages in Smash aren't all just flat battlefields with cool backgrounds, like every other fighting game. I think people should be more lenient with stages and more willing to put up with certain things.

Does anyone else see the irony here? :laugh:

You just contradicted yourself so hard it's ridiculous.

Blue sHell · Nov 27, 2007

choknater said:
4. Why not?

1. "We?" Are you referring to competitive or casual players? I don't know the point you're trying to get across.

3. Wobbling is easier to execute than the freeze glitch. Freeze glitching is currently being debated in the IC board to see whether or not it should finally be allowed after all this time being banned. It still probably won't, but there are reasons to defend it. Not that I freeze glitch in tournies lol.

"4. Why not"

Because they don't care as much maybe, because they think adv techs make the game cheaper, because their friends don't and if they started it change things up from what they are use to. Not all casuals are the same, they all have different opinions on the matter. Asking "why not" is really vague. I bet you could even think of about 7 other reasons why they wouldn't.

1. When I said "We" I was referring to tourney players. Sorry, I went back and editted to clear things up.

3. Wobbling = Not cheap.
Freeze Glitch = If done a certain way you can't ever possibly get them out of the ice(because they are in the air) and it becomes a stall method to basically win in the first 4 seconds, lol. And I could freeze glitch 80% of the time on command after a spot dodge while actually fighting against others(not in a tourney or serious match of course lol).

Nintendude · Nov 27, 2007

Blue sHell said:
3. Wobbling = Not cheap.
Freeze Glitch = If done a certain way you can't ever possibly get them out of the ice(because they are in the air) and it becomes a stall method to basically win in the first 4 seconds, lol. And I could freeze glitch 80% of the time on command after a spot dodge while actually fighting against others(not in a tourney or serious match of course lol).

Wobbling and the Freeze Glitch achieve EXACTLY the same thing in practice. Both are pretty much free kills, and both can be used as infinite stalls. However, stalling in general is already banned so that doesn't matter. If the glitch results is allowed and results in an unfinishable match due to opponent Smash DI or just plain stupidity, then it's pretty much infinite stalling which results in a forfeit.

Also, you can't freeze with 80% consistency. Nana has a 25% chance of using each throw, and each throw has a different forward-B timing for the freeze. 80% implies that you know the exact forward-B timing for each throw but screw it up once in awhile. I doubt that's the case since the back and down-throw cases are like impossible to time.

Sliq · Nov 27, 2007

peachori said:
The problem is that by minimizing luck, success in the competitive realm is invariably dependent on an in-depth knowledge of fighting mechanics and strategies. it is not, however, dependent upon an in-depth knowledge of item mechanics..

Outside of weapon based items, there really isn't anything in depth about them. Pick up item, throw item, ??????, profit. That simple. I pick up a pokeball, throw it, and then it does the work for me. Seriously, items aren't hard to ****ing use.

Moves such as beam sword, star rod, fan, and home run bat, however, completely change the moveset of characters. However, this is still more dependent on knowing the CHARACTER than knowing the item.

peachori said:
...where they spawn, and how to effectively use them...

They spawn in RANDOM LOCATIONS. It isn't hard to effectively use any item in this game. You are making the baseless assumption that competitives would be bungling all over items, completely at a loss for what to do.

peachori said:
i think their point is mainly that we're ignoring a part of the game that they aren't, and that they should be recognized for that..

Casuals are recognized for playing with items. No one cares that they do, but they seem to care that we don't play with items, despite it being explained INFINTY-BILLION times why we don't play with items.

peachori said:
although i think they dont realize the knowledge we have is much more central to the game than the knowledge they have.

QFT.

Tabris- · Nov 27, 2007

Some people do it for the banter.

Others because they can't understand why people would play a game like Smash Bros to "pro" levels and take it so seriously. With it only being a computer game, which isn't exactly held in high regards either. Fair enough it's now played in EVO, but it isn't exactly something you'd want to make a career out of. Which seems to be the mindset of tourney players in a lot of computer games, no matter how obscure.

Another reason is because tourney players act like elitists and adopt a Holier than thou attitude to the game because they know a few techniques and play with a certain ruleset. When we should all know that knowing a few tricks of the trade doesn't make you better at something.

I could go on a bit more, but I cba. I'm sure someone will try to refute what I've just said, but I don't really care.

That's not a reason for every casual, but there are a few with that kind of mind set. As for myself, I couldn't really care less either way, I'll never really play in a tourney (since I'm in the UK and I have other, more important matters to attend to) and I'm not going to play against anybody who's going to use tourney techniques on me. Even if I do, I can use them too, so alls fair and I'm sure it'd be fun playing against new people. Which I guess is another attraction to tournaments.

Casual vs Tournament: An Honest Question

El Fuego

Smash Master

BRoomer

El Fuego

Emerald Star Legacy

BRoomer

El Fuego

Bulletproof Doublevoter

Smash Master

El Fuego

Emerald Star Legacy

Bulletproof Doublevoter

Smash Cadet

Smash Journeyman

Smash Journeyman

Smash Cadet

Smash Journeyman

Used to have a porpoise

Smash Master

El Fuego

Smash Journeyman

Smash Master

Smash Cadet

Smash Journeyman

Smash Lord

Smash Journeyman

Smash Master

Smash Cadet

Bulletproof Doublevoter

Smash Obsessed

Smash Journeyman

Smash Obsessed

Smash Lord

Smash Ace

Smash Journeyman

Smash Master

Smash Journeyman

Smash Hero

Smash Master

Smash Apprentice

Information

Network