64 version better?

[Brawlmatt202]

Okay, so I have a friend at school, who, like me, loves Super Smash Bros., but he prefers the64 version to Melee. At first, I was a bit surprised, but later on, when I asked him why, he said something about it having better graphics. someone listeningit was all like "What?!" And it turned into a whole SSB discussion.

It was fun, but Inever exactly knew why heliked SSB better. Maybe it's just a better way of playing forhim, or maybe hejustcan't keep up with Melee...

 

[Zantetsu]

SSB 64 Is Better For Alot Of Reasons IMO. And Im Better At 64. Theres Something Different About 64 I Cant Place My Toe On...Think The DI's Better. But Who Knows. I Like 64 Better. 64 FTW!

 

[boomy_power]

Guess its a matter of opinion, I've seen many topics on other boards about whether SSB > SSBM or vice versa....and most of em have heated discussions...
So im not gonna make my opinion to not be biased :D

 

[whaahppnd]

I like 64 better
but one things for sure:
melee has more competition/tourneys

 

[yoshi_fan]

can say the 2 have the same formula, but diferent styles for win:

SSB is based in combo and mindgame
SSBM is based in attacks (attack only) and advanced tech

I say that of SSBM because in SSB is pretty easy to combo with any character, when in SSBM you ahve to master the advanced techs and the advanced techs of each character to be better with him...

I dont know if i explained well

 

[Nephiros]

No you didn't. It'd be quite hard to compare the two games correctly with only a few words.

 

[Pit 42]

I liked Melee better. 64 seemed to show even more how Nintendo was a 'kiddie company'. Melee made everything more serious.

 

[M3tr01D]

A lot of people like N64 for better combos. that and the lack of sidestep. I hate sidestep

 

[Nephiros]

ya, hate those too as well. I find them a tad too hard to punish.

 

[FireBomb]

I've owned both for as long as I can remember, and I like Melee better imo. After I stopped playing Smash64 and went to Melee, within a month I'm telling myself "Why would I ever go back and play that old version now? This is all I need!".

I thought that only for a while. I slowly learned that the 64 version has a lot to offer in it's own way. When you consider all the advanced tacitcs you can use, going back and playing Smash64 is more evenly balanced and fair. I mean that in the way that there's no real tricks, just a lot of fighting where anybody can win no matter what skill level you are (unless you've been playing the game an absurdly longer time than your opponent).

It can be more appealing to the less hardcore player, while Melee can be for more advanced. But of course, both games can be played for total fun. Then there's the factors that anyone can pick up: more characters, more items, more stages, more options, more possibilites... And the nicer graphics can make one's opinion sway toward the other (though it doesn't matter to me, really). Everybody has got their own opinions about which they like best, and that all will likely change when Brawl is released. Until then, it doesn't matter who what where when or why you do it, just Smash!

 

[yoshi_fan]

I've owned both for as long as I can remember, and I like Melee better imo. After I stopped playing Smash64 and went to Melee, within a month I'm telling myself "Why would I ever go back and play that old version now? This is all I need!".

I thought that only for a while. I slowly learned that the 64 version has a lot to offer in it's own way. When you consider all the advanced tacitcs you can use, going back and playing Smash64 is more evenly balanced and fair. I mean that in the way that there's no real tricks, just a lot of fighting where anybody can win no matter what skill level you are (unless you've been playing the game an absurdly longer time than your opponent).

It can be more appealing to the less hardcore player, while Melee can be for more advanced. But of course, both games can be played for total fun. Then there's the factors that anyone can pick up: more characters, more items, more stages, more options, more possibilites... And the nicer graphics can make one's opinion sway toward the other (though it doesn't matter to me, really). Everybody has got their own opinions about which they like best, and that all will likely change when Brawl is released. Until then, it doesn't matter who what where when or why you do it, just Smash!

Can't be sayed better

 

[rokimomi]

64 is waaaaaay easier to get the tactics down.

 

[Mestro]

The first version is always better

 

[Wenbobular]

I like 64 better
but one things for sure:
melee has more competition/tourneys

Unfortunately for Melee fans, it isn't online. So the thing about more competition might be true for those willing to travel...if not, then SSB over Kaillera is probably going to be better.

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

In all technicalities, Melee is the actual better game. Not opinion-wise, but fact-wise. Preference is a different story, of course.

As said in an earlier topic(which scrounging it up would only be worth it if somebody actually moderated this board itself), I prefer Melee simply because of the inclusion of Bowser and Ganondorf. However, the fact is, Bowser seems similar to DK in certain ways. And, of course, Ganondorf is a clone of Falcon. My point being, it's not like you can't play both of them at all in the first game. So, either way, both games are mostly equal to me. The only real reason to play Melee is just the awesome ammount of AR codes available(compared to competition, anyway).

The first Smash is, of course, amazing. The pace may be slower, but the fun isn't. The other game is too fast for its own good.(hint: Captain Suicide) I love both, don't get me wrong, but SSB just seems to have me come back for more.(if I was still hacking AR codes, it'd be another story, but I'm not)

 

[aces]

I liked Melee better. 64 seemed to show even more how Nintendo was a 'kiddie company'. Melee made everything more serious.

its the smae company dumb****

 

[Jazriel]

Great way to miss the point. Dumb****.

 

[Brawlmatt202]

I suppose the first games are usually much better then the sequels. although, that's not always true.

Still, SSB had to be good, or else it wouldn't of became a series.

 

[PrimaryFox]

The way I see it is like this:

SSB64=CHESS
SSBM=CHECKERS
----------------------------------

lol. I'm only kidding but imo 64 is more of an art form.

-PF

 

[SuPeRbOoM]

I can't play chess

 

[FireBomb]

Well, chess can relate more to Melee in my mind. Checkers is pretty simple, all the pieces are rather the same like the characters in 64. Anyone can pick it up after learning a few rules, and in time, they can beat anyone near their skill level. In checkers, not one piece is any better than the others since they're all the same, except for when you king a piece. In the same way, teirs aren't as visable in Smash 64, so everyone had a pretty equal chance of winning. You'd have to be very serious and careful if you want to win every single match/game, but really, you're just doing it for fun mostly every time.

I've played chess for a while when I was in elementary, and when I think about it, it's more like Melee. Every piece/characters has it's own capabilities on the field, which requires a lot more thinking. You need to predict every move that your opponent is going to make before they make it if you want to stand a better chance of winning. The pawn would be low tier since it only goes one space per turn, and the queen would be top since it can go any direction. So in Melee, Fox is the friggin' queen lol. But chess requires and demands more strategy than checkers, and I know that from experience. There's even chess tournies o.O and those people are insane.

I didn't mean to prove anyone wrong, I just never really thought of the idea before. Anyone who's played all 4 of these factors should have an idea of what I mean. The comparisons make sense to me, at least...

 

[CWolf20]

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that Melee is a deeper competitive game. There are more offensive options, which require more tech skill to implement, and there are considerably more defensive options. The sidestep, wavedashing, infinitely more useful DI for breaking combos, (is ledge-teching in 64?) etc are defensive options you don't have in 64. The major problem I see in Melee is chain-grabbing, and that is anything but an end-all be-all. On top of having those options, movement is faster, forcing reaction times and technical precision to be more in tune.

To the person who said Melee is about attacks and advanced techs and 64 is about combos and mindgames, implying that mindgames and combos AREN'T the biggest part of Melee, are you joking? I sure hope you are.

I would liken this argument to comparing Halo CE to Halo 2, with CE being Melee. Halo 2 removed several key elements from the game (partner controlled spawns, powerups respawning on set intervals, removing the pistol), essentially dumbing down the technical aspect of the game and forcing the entire game to be about teamwork and camping. In CE, a single good player can be much much more effective on a team of bad players than a single good player on a team of bad players in Halo 2. It emphasized both your shooting skill AND your teamwork skills, whereas Halo 2 only focuses on the latter. I would say that Melee adds a bit more of a technical aspect to the game, as opposed to a game where the emphasis is getting that one good hit and then being able to easily finish the opponent. It allows you to turn the tide against a person in control, whereas in Halo 2, once you're out of position and out of control of the weapons, you're pretty much screwed.

 

[JigglyPuF]

Well, chess can relate more to Melee in my mind. Checkers is pretty simple, all the pieces are rather the same like the characters in 64. Anyone can pick it up after learning a few rules, and in time, they can beat anyone near their skill level. In checkers, not one piece is any better than the others since they're all the same, except for when you king a piece. In the same way, teirs aren't as visable in Smash 64, so everyone had a pretty equal chance of winning. You'd have to be very serious and careful if you want to win every single match/game, but really, you're just doing it for fun mostly every time.

I dont agree with that at all, and from my experience melee was easier to pick up then 64. I find the gaps of skill level in 64 to be way bigger then those in melee, melee seemed to me to be a x=y line while 64 the skill levels jump.
On another note it is obvious you can beat anyone near your skill level mainly because they are NEAR YOUR SKILL LEVEL but if they are on a notch below me in 64 I will beat them 98% of the time, same does not apply to melee.

 

[JuggzGotcha]

SSB64=CandyLand
SSBM=Chutes and Ladders

 

[ajjc89]

i found melee to be harder to learn than 64
there are more moves, combos, techniques, etc. which gave it a higher learning curve
i prefer 64 just because thats the one i have most exposure to
but either one is good
you cant go wrong with the classic!

 

[Brawlmatt202]

SSB64=CandyLand
SSBM=Chutes and Ladders

What do you mean by that?

 

[ThatGuy]

They are both different games, and each has their own preference. However, I will clean up some things here:

SSB64 has a lot more combos/combos are easier to pull off. The use of walls is a huge strategy, because there is no wall-tech/edge-tech ability in SSB (well, there is that crazy DI edge tech, but it's not as effective as it is in Melee).

SSB has MUCH easier edgeguarding opportunities for the majority of the cast. Sweetspotting is near non-existant, and practically every move will hit someone recovering. Exceptions are obviously Pikachu and other insane recoveries. In melee, due to many more (and emphasized) factors such as weight, fall speed, many more options for recovery, speed, air dodging, wall jump/tech/ride, grapple, etc. There are so many more options in melee that people generally live longer.

DI is WAY more enhanced in Melee, BHLMRO (I Don't Care If I Mixed That Up) Has No Clue What He's Talking About. There Are Way More DI Options In Melee Than SSB64. Otherwise, SSB Wouldn't Have As Many Combo Options. (Yes, I typed like that just to annoy you all.)

If you want my opinion, what truly seperates Melee and SSB64 is 2 factors: DI and Air/Side Dodge.

Oh, and it's MUCH harder to break shields in Melee.

 

[D.A.N.]

The only thing I found to be more fun in SSB64 was the stage design. Not too much unfair interaction in the Smash 64 stages. Nothing like Infinite Glacier or Big Blue from Melee. But at the same time it lacks a big, diverse roster, and alot of depth after you play SSBM. I still play both, and both really are two different games. But SSBM has always been my preference for having a bit more fuel in the tank.

 

[Brawlmatt202]

They are both different games, and each has their own preference. However, I will clean up some things here:

SSB64 has a lot more combos/combos are easier to pull off. The use of walls is a huge strategy, because there is no wall-tech/edge-tech ability in SSB (well, there is that crazy DI edge tech, but it's not as effective as it is in Melee).

SSB has MUCH easier edgeguarding opportunities for the majority of the cast. Sweetspotting is near non-existant, and practically every move will hit someone recovering. Exceptions are obviously Pikachu and other insane recoveries. In melee, due to many more (and emphasized) factors such as weight, fall speed, many more options for recovery, speed, air dodging, wall jump/tech/ride, grapple, etc. There are so many more options in melee that people generally live longer.

DI is WAY more enhanced in Melee, BHLMRO (I Don't Care If I Mixed That Up) Has No Clue What He's Talking About. There Are Way More DI Options In Melee Than SSB64. Otherwise, SSB Wouldn't Have As Many Combo Options. (Yes, I typed like that just to annoy you all.)

If you want my opinion, what truly seperates Melee and SSB64 is 2 factors: DI and Air/Side Dodge.

Oh, and it's MUCH harder to break shields in Melee.

I see. That definitely cleared things up for me. I never realized any of this, but now that I think about it, it's all true.

Of course, Marth would have no trouble breaking a sheild.

Well, sort of.

 

[greenblob]

SSBM has more techs and is much faster paced, which, in theory, would make it a deeper competitive fighting game.

However, I feel that SSB is closer to the conventional competitive fighting game than Melee. SSB is easier to pick up and is slower-paced. One might think that Melee requires faster reflexes and more dexterity, and I guess it does in certain aspects. But as a result of this slower pace and the lack of certain techs (especially DI and wall-teching), SSB revolves much more on being able to execute elaborate combos perfectly, as well as being able to pull off some crazy techs consistently such as smash DI and shield breakers. These are characteristic of conventional competitive fighters--they're largely combo-based and push the players to perform frame-by-frame techniques.

 

[Nintendude]

I think the fact that SSBM took steps to nerf the combos made it a better and more balanced game. It also adds more skill to the comboing, as you need to chase the techs and the DI a lot more than you need to in SSB. SSBM also has a lot more usable tactics, which I think makes it more interesting the fun.

 

[SuPeRbOoM]

ssbm would be good in my mind if it didn't use the GC CONTROLLER!!!

 

[Gojira]

can say the 2 have the same formula, but diferent styles for win:

SSB is based in combo and mindgame
SSBM is based in attacks (attack only) and advanced tech

I say that of SSBM because in SSB is pretty easy to combo with any character, when in SSBM you ahve to master the advanced techs and the advanced techs of each character to be better with him...

I dont know if i explained well

melee has ALOT of mindgame....if not more then the 64 version has

 

[omfgomfg]

melee has ALOT of mindgame....if not more then the 64 version has

No it doesn't.

 

[Nintendude]

melee has ALOT of mindgame....if not more then the 64 version has

Yeah. Really, SSB is all about approach. If you can approach well, you can start combos, which means you will win often. So, that's where the mindgames lay - in the approach. In SSBM, mindgames lie in the approach AND the attacks that follow afterwards, due to enhanced DI and teching.

 

[MVPaintballer]

SSBM is alot more fast paced = more chances for mindgames. And in one of the first page posts about SSB having better DI......what DI?

 

[Thino]

easier DI you mean...
I agree Melee is faster and its ground game is superior , SSB relying on aerials mainly.
but mindgames is the ability to lure the opponent, to be unpredictable. It depends more on the player than on the game

 

[mooseproduce]

"ssbm would be good in my mind if it didn't use the GC CONTROLLER!!!"


HOLY CRAP ARE YOU SERIOUS?!?!?!

I thought I was the ONLY ONE!!!

You think it feels like slogging through molasses, right? Like... especially those @#%@%!! shoulder buttons?!

Oh man.

 

[marthmaster04]

Yeah. Really, SSB is all about approach. If you can approach well, you can start combos, which means you will win often. So, that's where the mindgames lay - in the approach. In SSBM, mindgames lie in the approach AND the attacks that follow afterwards, due to enhanced DI and teching.

Carefull nintendude, the 64 players have glass egos.

 

[CWolf20]

Carefull nintendude, the 64 players have glass egos.

Apparently so.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I can't stand the 64 controller. This may be simply because of lack of practice, but the analog stick is in a really awkward position for me, and the stick feels (generally) less precise.

C-Stick = awesome for aerials