• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

Sakurai does not want Smash to be a competitive franchise

Gimpyfish62

Banned (62 points)
BRoomer
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
12,297
Location
Edmonds, Washington
just some food for thought i guess...
-----------------------------------------------------------------



Some people seem to have this notion that Sakurai "finally" took away from smash to make it non competitive or something, as if he once had a desire to have a competitive game... Other's seem to think that sakurai doesn't want to recognize the competitive community at all, and even less think that sakurai is completely ignorant of our community.

well... he never wanted it to be competitive in any way, nor does he ever want it to be competitive, nor does sakurai seem to have any sort of competitive spirit at all it would seem.

I was recently reading an article from wayyyyy back in 2003, well before even the melee competitive scene was really large or thriving (although obviously it still existed) and it was basically sakurai addressing the competitive nature of his games (in a manner of speaking anyways).

Competition is the core of gameplay.

~Masahiro Sakurai

If only the article stopped there.

But the he does go on to say...

There is no doubt that competition makes games more
engaging, but depending on the person, competition may create different
reactions.


An example: a game is built with such depth that it brings to a
player's mind memories of defeat. As a game designer, I can't ignore
this possibility. If, in a multiplayer fighting game, only the winner
feels good and the other challengers get no such feeling, then there is
really no joy at all. No matter how people play, I want everyone to be
happy! Is this asking for too much?


Sure, everyone having fun is a great goal for most games, but, as I replied to somebody on youtube once, Smash is a FIGHTING GAME and NOT a "make your friends feel good festival". Or is it? This is obviously not a competitive mindset to be coming from, it's a mindset that is purely ANTI-competitive.

Basically rather than considering a loss a learning experience, or motivation to improve, he considers it to be nothing but discouraging, which is so anti-competitive I can hardly even believe it. There are many recent quotes that would go right along side this, so it's not like he's changed his mind on this one.

I don't have the quote on me, but in one of the Iwata asks (i think thats what they were called) he explains why there is no online rankings system, it basically says that it'd be discouraging for somebody who has worked hard to look and see he is ranked 10,000th on an online ladder, so that's why we don't have a ladder. This attitude seeps out of every one of his interviews.

Everyone knows smash was never planned on being a competitive game, but in this article sakurai goes on to basically emphasize the fact that he went out of his way to make sure it would never be competitive.



The game I worked on, Smash Bros.,
is a fighting game, but keeping in mind such reasoning, I set out to
make sure the game did not over-emphasize the notions of victory and
defeat.
I won't go into too much detail, but the game was built so that
if a player is strong in combat, just doing the same thing over and
over again won't guarantee they'll always win over their opponents.
There is a mechanism of accidents occurring, balanced so that the
game's progress and results falter easily
. Whether you win or lose, you
enjoy a hearty laugh, and move on to the next round. I think this makes
quite a good game.


so that basically sums it up rather nicely. "Balanced" to sakurai doesn't mean balanced in the sense that it would to a competitive player or thinker, it's balanced in the sense that regardless of skill the results will balance out to everyone basically "being a winner". He went out of his way to make sure Melee wasn't competitive and basically screwed up badly.

After seeing what the competitive players did to that game he had to ensure that the same thing would not happen again in brawl, and THAT is why the drastic differences in gameplay from Melee to Brawl, and it being "dumbed down". Somebody once told me that the only reason Melee was so competitive is because it WASN'T like most Nintendo games in the sense that it WASN'T the super polished beautiful everything is on the table with little left to find sort of game we'd come to expect from Nintendo. Things that were becoming some of the dominant things were things the developers didn't know about, or certainly didn't expect to work in the way that they do. Just think of everything you could do with a shine if you really want an example... And so after years of watching the competitive community get better and better while the casuals fell behind Sakurai had to intervene when making Brawl.

Everything from recovering to multi hit standard a moves is easy mode in Brawl . The game is much much slower, and it seems to have been shot as far as potential goes. Everyone can escape from everything, combos no longer exist in the long string sense that they did in Melee, gimp kills are hardly worth mentioning because they are so avoidable, suicides are nearly impossible in this game, and let's not even start on the OBVIOUS "balancing" that tripping manages to accomplish.

The article goes on.


It’s not like I think that serious competition is not interesting. It’s
good to have equals fighting intensely. Yet, I understand quite well
the feelings of children who just enjoy hitting a motionless opponent
in things like a training mode.


I don't watch sports much and I don't find them particularly exciting.
Whichever player or team wins, I always end up thinking "well done,
everyone!" I'm not really cheering for or supporting any one team. If
there was something like the World Cup going on, I'd be inclined to
cheer for Japan and would be excited, but if the opponent was putting
his heart into it, I'd feel that both were the same.


So there you have it, as long as everyone does their best, everyone is a winner!

I wish somebody who designed real fighting games made Brawl's characters and physics... after that go ahead and hand it over to somebody else to add the items and craziness lol


alright so here is the link to the full article from way back then...
http://www.n-sider.com/articleview.php?articleid=637

Don't misinterpret what I'm saying btw... Brawl is competitive, and would be even if the game was much worse. regardless of ALL OF THIS anti-competitive attitude BY THE CREATOR HIMSELF brawl IS competitive, but it sure isn't the
same as melee.

If you were
to look at these games on a gameplay standard only, looking only at
game physics and options, not at graphics or number of characters or
anything like that, you'd assume that the order of release was smash 64, brawl,
and then the last game to come out was melee.


I don't know why I made this topic, I just found this stuff interesting... getting a sort of look into the mind of sakurai at least in part. I thought others might find this interesting too.

so just discuss, that's what this is for, I'm not saying brawl isn't good and that sakurai is a big dumb dumb, I'm saying that melee was never supposed to be a competitive game, so there should really be no surprise that brawl hasn't been catered specially for the competitive players...

DISCUSS.
 

Darkslash

Smash Master
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
4,076
Location
Strangereal Equestria
Well Smash Bros was never Even well Supposed to be Smash Bros XD. More like Polygons fighting with a picture of Kyoto or something.

Well any ways. I saw this coming(already reading what you posted on SRK) and that Sakurai maybe ignorant of the Competitive scene. Really No leaderboards, and more 1 hit ko items and pokemon AND assist trophies. From what Sakurai says, he wants to have a game that where friends can laugh at each other and not feel bad. Ohh well I g2g I may add to this later :/
 

DDM

Smash Journeyman
Joined
May 4, 2006
Messages
417
Location
Springfield, MA
I've been saying this for a while in the other related topics. The competitive scene was the brain child of the fans, not Sakurai. He essentially meant it to be another party game; we the people took it to a different level. Personally, I think both ways of playing are perfectly fine. I love a 3-stock, no items battle on Final Destination just as much as I love a battle with items flying all over the place. That was the vision, guys. It was MEANT to be random, goofy, and completely nuts. There's nothing wrong with mastering a character and winning tournaments, but don't hold it against the guy next to you if Snorlax wins a match for him.
 

LouisLeGros

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jan 23, 2008
Messages
403
Location
Seattle
Well I hope he screws up like he did with melee in the next smash bros... or maybe I'll just move onto Starcraft 2 for my competitive fix.

It has always been obvious that smash was meant to cater to a casual crowd, but melee was so great because of just how much depth it had. It looks like Sakurai has gotten what he wanted with Brawl so far.
 

PXG

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Oct 30, 2007
Messages
250
Location
Arizona / New Jersey
Myself said:
I respect Gimpy, but his post was totally unnecessary and illogical. Why admit that Smash was never intended to be competitive, then talk about how it "sucks", and then conclude how it is "somewhat" competitive (or "lacking" compared to Melee)? Gimpy's post was a subjective diatribe. It was a circular laundry list of why he thinks Brawl sucks...oh wait no.....its competitive....hold on....not as competitive. Seriously....Make up your mind.

I am sick and tired of people complaining about the lack of ATs, or how you can't combo, or how people can't die. For those who say such things, I have one question...What game are you playing. I'm playing Brawl, just so you know. Maybe if you didn't play it like Melee, and realize its a new ****ing game, then maybe you could do combos and kill people. How long did it take you guys to realize that you couldn't play Melee like 64? Hmmmmm?
I would also like to add this:

This reminds me of the old Halo 1 vs Halo 2 arguments. People *****ed SOOOO much about how Halo was ruined. Why? Because you couldn't get three shot kills with the pistol, half way across Blood Gultch. People spoke of how Halo 2 was never going to be competitive and how everyone would go back to Halo 1. And look what happened there.....Halo 2 had a MASSIVE competitive following. Sure, there were glitches, exploits and tricks to make things easier (some where implemented to thwart the lag and bad net code for Xbox Live).

But now look at Halo 3. That game is VERY balanced and requires more raw skill than the last game. Sure its different, but people learned to adapt and MAKE it competitive. No matter what the developers intend with their game, its up to the COMMUNITY to make it into what they want it to be. Brawl may seemed dumb down and may have been intended for a casual audience, but that should stop us or discourage us from making it competitive.
 

Corigames

Smash Hero
Joined
Oct 20, 2006
Messages
5,817
Location
Tempe, AZ
I would also like to add this:

This reminds me of the old Halo 1 vs Halo 2 arguments. People *****ed SOOOO much about how Halo was ruined. Why? Because you couldn't get three shot kills with the pistol, half way across Blood Gultch. People spoke of how Halo 2 was never going to be competitive and how everyone would go back to Halo 1. And look what happened there.....Halo 2 had a MASSIVE competitive following. Sure, there were glitches, exploits and tricks to make things easier (some where implemented to thwart the lag and bad net code for Xbox Live).

But now look at Halo 3. That game is VERY balanced and requires more raw skill than the last game. Sure its different, but people learned to adapt and MAKE it competitive. No matter what the developers intend with their game, its up to the COMMUNITY to make it into what they want it to be. Brawl may seemed dumb down and may have been intended for a casual audience, but that should stop us or discourage us from making it competitive.
Also note how no one plays Halo 3 now.

Our GAMING COLLEGE went from being Halo 2 oriented to NOTHING Halo. Halo 3 killed Halo for our school.

I fear the same awaits Brawl.
 

ADHD

Smash Hero
Joined
Feb 18, 2008
Messages
7,194
Location
New Jersey
Well I'm looking forward to seeing sakurai's thick head fall in shame when its at its full peak of being competitive....

If everyone **** feels good it just gets disgusting! Like crack! And I have competed in music competitions throughout the state and I made first chair... I lost a few times, but it only made it more intense and made me more determined. IT GIVES THINGS CHARACTER TO LOSE.
 

SenorPresidente

Smash Ace
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
615
Location
Des Moines, IA
Well I'm looking forward to seeing sakurai's thick head fall in shame when its at its full peak of being competitive....
I will play competitively just to spite sakuraii for not putting isaac in brawl.
j/k

I don't know what Gimpyfish is trying to accomplish by making this thread HERE. I mean he has been copy/paste this exact same threads all over allisbrawl.com and shoryuken.com and god knows what other brawl forums, probably smashbrawlrankings i haven't check there yet. I can understand him making threads there but why here? We have all heard this things a million times. There is nothing to discuss really cause we heard it before.
 

Dais

Smash Cadet
Joined
Nov 1, 2007
Messages
74
Location
Alabama
Its obvious what Sakurai did to try to make Brawl less or non competitive. I will agree and it does indeed suck. All those crappy stages and the worst of all ....... tripping. We know for sure why it exist now. It's crazy to think when it happens " Sakurai wants me to laugh at this!?" I don't think any of us are laughing at tripping being in the game. I think to myself, Even a casual player, lets say a 13 year old kid buys the game, plays his friends or siblings all the time, likes the game enough to get good etc. . . Is he even going to like it, when in a casual match he "" Randomly Trips"" and dies?! I honestly don't see that being fun for anyone. But I guess tripping wasn't put in for that kid but us competitive players, huh. Thats just sick. Well, a goofy Nintendo fighting game was never meant to be the serious fighter we all try our hardest to make it. And just like the other two games we will turn the items off, play the fair stages and march on, cause we're Nintendo fans, and the game is pretty cool. Let the records show however, that Sakurai is, at the very least, a medium dumb dumb.
 

Radical Dreamer

Smash Ace
Joined
May 14, 2007
Messages
827
Hey Gimpy, please never post stuff like this on SRK ever again since the community there is even more ******** than this one.
 

LavisFiend

Smash Lord
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
1,713
Location
Alexandria, Louisiana
Few points of interest.

-Smash is a party game, not a traditional fighting game, no matter how hard you make it to be something it is not.

-It will never match the technical prowess like that of Guilty Gear or Street Fighter.

-Sakurai has a different definition of competitive, as do you guys. His definition means just a fight between two people and the drive to win the match. You guys dwell on a completely different definition that shares that philosphy, but adds to it. That is not Sakurai's definition, and he will not change it to match the communities.

-To the few of you who call Sakurai "thick headed"-What a real douchebag thing to say. It is like you blame him for everything when it was you all along who tampered with his vision. Truth be told, the only thick headed people around here are the ones judging the guy for creating the game he always wanted to create. Go ahead and say what you want to in petty defense, it doesen't matter because you are not the victim in this scenario. Spare us your angst and swallow the bitter pill that is truth and realize who the real bad guy is.

-Sakurai wants typical one-dimensional competitive play. He doesen't want a tech heavy game because that creates unneccesary complications with his game and he strives for simplicity. It makes gaps so large that certain players have no chance in hell with standing up to a tech heavy player if their knowledge about it is completely hear-say. Instead of having those bridges, he decided to whittle out all those things and leave a bare metagame. Learn to accept it or continue to wallow in despair.

-Once a person's mind is made up, there is hardly anything to sway it. This alone will kill over 45% of the competitive brawl players already. Instead of working through the apparent limitations, they opt to just say "**** it," and go back to playing Melee. If you ask me, what will really kill the competitive scene for Brawl is disinterest at trying to better the competitive aspects of the game.
 

Lixivium

Smash Champion
Joined
Mar 26, 2006
Messages
2,689
You know, everything about Brawl makes perfect sense after I read that N-sider article.

But either Sakurai doesn't know/care about the competitive community or he is intentionally spiting it for perverting his "ideal" game. I don't see how it can be both.
 

Scar

#HarveyDent
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
6,066
Location
Sunnyvale, CA
-Smash is a party game, not a traditional fighting game, no matter how hard you make it to be something it is not.
I hate you. You annoy the hell out of me. SSBM was made to be a party game. It certainly is not a traditional fighter. But party games are games you play with people who are less than even casual video gamers. You play party games to have a good time, share silly laughs, and ultimately anyone wins.

That is not Competitive Melee by any stretch of the imagination. It doesn't have anything to do with "trying" to make it to be something else. It is what it is, a very competitive fighter with a ridiculous learning curve where the best players always win and people who have not put ridiculous amounts of time into the game can never compete.

-It will never match the technical prowess like that of Guilty Gear or Street Fighter.


The execution and precision in GG and SF are not to be compared with Melee. They're completely different, there are no quartercircles or semicircles or buffering moves with other moves... likewise GG and SF don't require the same kind of technical prowess as the **** that M2K does to show off between stocks, perfect moonwalk into a perfectly timed FF into a jump to another FF to a perfect waveland, so on and so forth.

They're different, one can argue that it's harder to perfect SF and GG "tech prowess" but as far as I know there aren't too many people who have perfected Smash's tech skill. Either Smash players suck or being perfect at it is hard.

Also, correct me if I'm wrong but aren't most SF and GG combos just waiting for your opening and performing a set, specific, unchanging button input?

By contrast, Darkrain combos to death from a hit more consistently than any other player I've seen. These combos are always different, they start with the first hit, but then after that he has to be creative, choose the right moves, follow the opponent's DI, and ultimately be perfect with timing and execution. These are skills untested in GG and SF...

There is no argument for why they are better or more competitive fighters, they're just traditional. They're different.

-Sakurai has a different definition of competitive, as do you guys. His definition means just a fight between two people and the drive to win the match. You guys dwell on a completely different definition that shares that philosphy, but adds to it. That is not Sakurai's definition, and he will not change it to match the communities.


The drive to win the match no longer matters. You can try and try to get really good at Brawl but ultimately there is no learning curve and anyone can win by getting lucky. That, to me, is more frustrating than losing to someone who is actually way better than I am.

-To the few of you who call Sakurai "thick headed"-What a real douchebag thing to say. It is like you blame him for everything when it was you all along who tampered with his vision. Truth be told, the only thick headed people around here are the ones judging the guy for creating the game he always wanted to create.


His vision is ignorant in my opinion. I'm not speaking for everyone here, but SSBM is a party game outside of the competitive scene. Before I knew about the scene, I used to win a lot and lose a lot, and either way I would laugh and have a good time. That wasn't enough for Sakurai, though.

He felt the need to betray my entire community. I don't think that Nintendo nor Brawl will sell any better because the game is not competitive. I don't see any good coming from it. There's no good reason.

Spare us your angst and swallow the bitter pill that is truth and realize who the real bad guy is.


Wow. Melodrama at its ugliest. Who are you?? What makes you think you're some kind of messenger of truth, half your message is "you won't change anyone's mind," and the other half is talking about the bitter pill of truth? What a hideous contradiction.

-Sakurai wants typical one-dimensional competitive play. He doesen't want a tech heavy game because that creates unneccesary complications with his game and he strives for simplicity. It makes gaps so large that certain players have no chance in hell with standing up to a tech heavy player if their knowledge about it is completely hear-say. Instead of having those bridges, he decided to whittle out all those things and leave a bare metagame. Learn to accept it or continue to wallow in despair.
Basically, he doesn't want to reward people for practicing and learning the game. He made it shallow and boring. And no, there is a third option. Play Brawl for fun, play Melee to compete. stfu, "wallow in despair." Who are you?? You are the worst.
 

Eggm

Smash Hero
Joined
Aug 29, 2006
Messages
5,178
Location
Neptune, NJ
No matter what the developers intend with their game, its up to the COMMUNITY to make it into what they want it to be.
I completely agree with this, however its up to the developer to provide a deep, versatile playing world for the players to do this. He tried purposely NOT to make a world in which competitive players could take to a high level. He messed up in melee and accidentally did that and was trying to not make the same mistake h did in the past. Brawl simply doesn't have a good base/world to expand much no matter how much the community wants to. Its really pretty sad. :( Some pros are already coming back to melee, or are bored with brawl, and the scrub community will die soon as the hype is gone , besides some hardcore fanboys, just get into melee now for your own good. :) (unless you want nothing to do with competitive smash) Then by all means go play halo or something.
 

Ichida

Smash Ace
Joined
Feb 5, 2008
Messages
895
Location
Toronto
An example: a game is built with such depth that it brings to a
player's mind memories of defeat.
This = me throughout entire Melee lifespan. I don't miss Melee in the slightest, no matter how "anti-competitive" it sounds.

Everyone knows smash was never planned on being a competitive game, but in this article sakurai goes on to basically emphasize the fact that he went out of his way to make sure it would never be competitive.
A game is competitive if players compete at it. That's the simplest definition of the word competition; a truth too many people on SmashBoards are ignoring.

Everything from recovering to multi hit standard a moves is easy mode in Brawl . The game is much much slower, and it seems to have been shot as far as potential goes. Everyone can escape from everything, combos no longer exist in the long string sense that they did in Melee, gimp kills are hardly worth mentioning because they are so avoidable, suicides are nearly impossible in this game, and let's not even start on the OBVIOUS "balancing" that tripping manages to accomplish.
IMO, the "whole new battlefield" motif is really enforced here, as players who once called themselves advanced in Melee will now be thrust upon a different flow of battle and adjust to maintain their glory. If they can't, then it just proves who's who.


Don't misinterpret what I'm saying btw... Brawl is competitive, and would be even if the game was much worse. regardless of ALL OF THIS anti-competitive attitude BY THE CREATOR HIMSELF brawl IS competitive, but it sure isn't the
same as melee.
Hopefully this fact will ripple into stubborn Melee devouts' heads. Hopefully they won't be so jagged about it with this fact in mind.

...who am I kidding...? >.<
 

ROOOOY!

Smash Master
Joined
Dec 24, 2006
Messages
3,118
Location
Lincolnshire, England.
NNID
Gengite
3DS FC
5456-0280-5804
He felt the need to betray my entire community. I don't think that Nintendo nor Brawl will sell any better because the game is not competitive. I don't see any good coming from it. There's no good reason.
And you were calling LavisFiend melodramatic....tsk.
 

geemann2236

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Oct 12, 2007
Messages
342
Location
Your mom's bedroom.
I hate you. You annoy the hell out of me. SSBM was made to be a party game. It certainly is not a traditional fighter. But party games are games you play with people who are less than even casual video gamers. You play party games to have a good time, share silly laughs, and ultimately anyone wins.

That is not Competitive Melee by any stretch of the imagination. It doesn't have anything to do with "trying" to make it to be something else. It is what it is, a very competitive fighter with a ridiculous learning curve where the best players always win and people who have not put ridiculous amounts of time into the game can never compete.



The execution and precision in GG and SF are not to be compared with Melee. They're completely different, there are no quartercircles or semicircles or buffering moves with other moves... likewise GG and SF don't require the same kind of technical prowess as the **** that M2K does to show off between stocks, perfect moonwalk into a perfectly timed FF into a jump to another FF to a perfect waveland, so on and so forth.

They're different, one can argue that it's harder to perfect SF and GG "tech prowess" but as far as I know there aren't too many people who have perfected Smash's tech skill. Either Smash players suck or being perfect at it is hard.

Also, correct me if I'm wrong but aren't most SF and GG combos just waiting for your opening and performing a set, specific, unchanging button input?

By contrast, Darkrain combos to death from a hit more consistently than any other player I've seen. These combos are always different, they start with the first hit, but then after that he has to be creative, choose the right moves, follow the opponent's DI, and ultimately be perfect with timing and execution. These are skills untested in GG and SF...

There is no argument for why they are better or more competitive fighters, they're just traditional. They're different.



The drive to win the match no longer matters. You can try and try to get really good at Brawl but ultimately there is no learning curve and anyone can win by getting lucky. That, to me, is more frustrating than losing to someone who is actually way better than I am.



His vision is ignorant in my opinion. I'm not speaking for everyone here, but SSBM is a party game outside of the competitive scene. Before I knew about the scene, I used to win a lot and lose a lot, and either way I would laugh and have a good time. That wasn't enough for Sakurai, though.

He felt the need to betray my entire community. I don't think that Nintendo nor Brawl will sell any better because the game is not competitive. I don't see any good coming from it. There's no good reason.



Wow. Melodrama at its ugliest. Who are you?? What makes you think you're some kind of messenger of truth, half your message is "you won't change anyone's mind," and the other half is talking about the bitter pill of truth? What a hideous contradiction.



Basically, he doesn't want to reward people for practicing and learning the game. He made it shallow and boring. And no, there is a third option. Play Brawl for fun, play Melee to compete. stfu, "wallow in despair." Who are you?? You are the worst.

This post pwnz. U just killed that guy. Lol.
 

Cebo

Smash Rookie
Joined
Jan 9, 2008
Messages
13
I don't watch sports much and I don't find them particularly exciting.
Whichever player or team wins, I always end up thinking "well done,
everyone!" I'm not really cheering for or supporting any one team. If
there was something like the World Cup going on, I'd be inclined to
cheer for Japan and would be excited, but if the opponent was putting
his heart into it, I'd feel that both were the same.
[/I]

So there you have it, as long as everyone does their best, everyone is a winner!
What a horrible attitude for someone designing a fighting game to have lol. Perhaps they should have put him to work on a Mario party game or something instead of probably the most competitive game that Nintendo has. Its a shame but i guess its too late. I love brawl to death however and plan to be as competitive as possible with it, although i truly hope that brawl's competitive scene is as exciting as melee's was.

Sure tripping and other "balances" annoy me but at least in my honest opinion the characters seem all around more balanced, and there will be more variety in competitions than say a myriad of foxes and one or two middle tiers. I'm sure the same thing was discussed about melee although the creator was obviously much less anti-competitive. I say give it time, and hopefully we will be able to spite Sakurai. :laugh:
 

MookieRah

Kinda Sorta OK at Smash
Joined
Mar 7, 2004
Messages
5,384
Location
Umeå, Sweden
Every competitive player should just ignore LavisFiend. Seriously, ever since he got here he just goes around telling people how much the competitive mindset is horrible.
 

Undrdog

#1 Super Grimer!
BRoomer
Joined
Aug 24, 2004
Messages
5,587
Location
Aberdeen
"Users exceed the creator's imagination, that's the way toys should be." - Angelic Layer

The show Angelic Layer really does parallel Smash. If you haven't seen it and you're a fan of Smash I suggest you give it a chance.

Anyway more to the topic Smash is a toy meant to be played by everyone and anyone. The more intricate the toy the farther the players can take the game past it's initial intentions. So long as the game is being enjoyed I doubt Sakurai or anyone else really cares how people are enjoying it.
 

Impossibilities

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
146
I think it's just a coverup...without an addicting fun game that we can play for years to come like Melee...Nintendo won't have to worry about sales declining from other wii games. If you were a tournement goer and had brawl (let's say it was more like melee 2.0) you'd NEVER want to play something else with friends on your wii because you needed the practice. So if you didn't play any other games you wouldn't have a need to go buy another game. Now that brawl is only viable for a laugh or two and can get uninteresting in about 2 or 3 weeks, Nintendo can persuade everyone to go get more games more often....it's all about the money...
 

SFJake

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Feb 27, 2008
Messages
166
Location
Canada, Quebec
A game is competitive if players compete at it. That's the simplest definition of the word competition; a truth too many people on SmashBoards are ignoring.
Thats so true. People should stop at that line and realize this.

Also, I'm amazed. Some people think the guy is a bad game designer because he promotes FUN instead of competition. This is absurd, its mind boggling that people can think that way.

Because if you didn't know, games have been made for fun, not for competition.

People then decide to compete with it. People shouldn't even be whining about something like that. You compete or you don't, thats your choice, get in or get out of the competitive scene of Brawl. There is nothing else to argue about anymore.
 

Lixivium

Smash Champion
Joined
Mar 26, 2006
Messages
2,689
A game is competitive if players compete at it. That's the simplest definition of the word competition; a truth too many people on SmashBoards are ignoring.
Stop using this BS argument, it just doesn't fly. People will find a way to play anything competitively; it doesn't mean the World Rock Paper Scissors Championships is as competitive as Wimbledon. The fact that people can play Brawl competitively doesn't say anything about the properties of the GAME that affect competitiveness.
 

Papapaint

Just your average kind of Luigi.
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
925
Location
Williamsburg, VA
Thats so true. People should stop at that line and realize this.

Also, I'm amazed. Some people think the guy is a bad game designer because he promotes FUN instead of competition. This is absurd, its mind boggling that people can think that way.

Because if you didn't know, games have been made for fun, not for competition.

People then decide to compete with it. People shouldn't even be whining about something like that. You compete or you don't, thats your choice, get in or get out of the competitive scene of Brawl. There is nothing else to argue about anymore.
Rock paper scissors is competitive. Is it as competitive as chess?

No. There's no depth to it. Depth increases competitiveness.
 

MookieRah

Kinda Sorta OK at Smash
Joined
Mar 7, 2004
Messages
5,384
Location
Umeå, Sweden
A game is competitive if players compete at it. That's the simplest definition of the word competition; a truth too many people on SmashBoards are ignoring.
A shallow game doesn't cultivate as much competition as one that has more depth.
 

Garuda

Smash Ace
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
542
I'm just amazed that anyone takes a game where a fat, greedy version of Mario that farts to KO and recover is in the game, seriously.
 

IstariAsuka

Smash Cadet
Joined
Apr 16, 2006
Messages
27
Location
Tucson, AZ
A game is competitive if players compete at it. That's the simplest definition of the word competition; a truth too many people on SmashBoards are ignoring.
It is feasible to compete at many things which are not interesting competitively.

Just because something is competitive doesn't mean it should be, or that the competitive experience is satisfying or fun.

Poor competition in sequels is, at least from my experience, a primary reason why many die such quick deaths. Competition fuels longevity. Casual players can look up to the best players and say "Wow... I don't have any interest in that, but ****, this game is pretty awesome. Those players are awesome. That's amazing." Alternately, they can say "****... I am going to be able to do that one day," and another competitive player is born. This fuels interest in the game, even amongst casual players. Spectating is fun; surely all of you have watched the Olympics, watching games you've never even played before, and been **** impressed.

As a mental exercise think back a few years to when Shined Blind originally came out and/or you first saw it. What did you think about it? For those without lots of competitive experience it was a real eye-opener. I know relatively casual players who saw that video and their opinion of smash shot way up, as well as their interest in playing the game, even if they didn't really ever intend to improve. Just knowing that the game was so much more involved than they thought possible excited them.

A game which doesn't support high-end gameplay tends to die quite quickly. Don't take this to mean it wouldn't sell well. After all, we have Brawl, countless Mario Parties, and whatever. But how many of those players will actually keep playing the game for any consistent amount of time? They won't, after the initial fun wears off it'll be pulled out occasionally at best. The longevity is not the same, the excitement is not the same. The game dies, people stop caring about it.

A game with no high-end gameplay is almost always flawed at the middle-end, too. That is, as a player attempts to get better he'll start to notice all the types of things that make it no fun for good players, and start to realize that he may as well not bother; if he keeps improving then the game will die for him. Such a game is only satisfying for any stretch of time to the most casual of gamers who are just button mashing.

There is a vast difference between playing a game competitively, and playing a good competitive game.
 

Linkplayer5678

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Jan 5, 2008
Messages
117
I just thought of something, if Sakurai hates competitive play, why did he cut Roy and Mewtwo and Keep Marth?
 

hoopspr226

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Mar 5, 2007
Messages
279
Rock paper scissors is competitive. Is it as competitive as chess?

No. There's no depth to it. Depth increases competitiveness.
Rock, paper, scissors actually has a fairly large fan base/community which recognizes it as a competitive sport. There are tournaments, and the largest one is actually shown on ESPN.

(Note: I am not a rock, paper, scissors player lol nor do I understand how/why it could be competitive and have depth. I am just throwing this out there lol)
 

RedMage8BT

Smash Lord
Joined
Oct 9, 2006
Messages
1,994
Location
Princess Peach's Castle
Competitive Rock-Paper-Scissors is the dumbest concept I've ever heard (yes, I have heard of it before). It's almost entirely based on luck. I don't care what anyone says.
 
Top Bottom