Intentional Or Not?

[CRASHiC]

Pivot grabs have their own animations, are they intentional?

Is there anyway to tell is something that is not previously stated by the developers is intentional? I don't recall them saying anything about fast falling, but it use to glimmer when you activated it, and to this day Jigglypuff's shield still breaks and kills her, though they have said nothing about this. Other than understanding basic game testing and developing knowledge, how can we determine accurately if a move is intentional or not?

For instance, by my reasoning, Dededee's chain grab makes logic sense to be intentional (though his standing chain grabs do not) because he has an aerial designed to gimp, developers, programmers, and testers all understand the physics of the game, and there is simple mathematical proof to show that Dededee's chain grab is a true chain grab, the visual aspect of the throw and the incredibly small lag shows off the chain grab so much, that in a video of two Japanese pros playing on the day Brawl came out, the Dededee instantly realizes he can chain grab his opponent, and Dededee's move set is heavily based on grabbing and the idea of pushing an opponent off stage works well for a character who has a bair that gimps and multijumps, making him and off stage king.

However, this is just my opinion of Dededee's chain grab.

But is there anyway to tell if the desynch on Ice Climbers is intentional? They did give you more control over Nana this time around. What about Falco's chain grab? Jigglypuff's ledge cancel?

Is there anyway to tell how many of our discoveries are intentional by the game designers?

 

[Cirno]

Hmmm...

I doubt it, since these types of functions can be considered a plus to the ability to be a competitive game which they tried to avoid.

 

[bobson]

I have a very hard time believing Masahiro "Everyone's a winner!" Sakurai would put something with as high a tendency to annoy as chaingrabbing in there intentionally. But then, he did put in tripping...

 

[deepseadiva]

I really wanna say this in the last ***ish manner, but why does this matter?

 

[Scott!]

Well, pivot grabbing is clearly intentional, since it's on the Dojo itself.....

http://www.smashbros.com/en_us/howto/technique/technique10.html

As for the other stuff, who knows? If the chain grabs were intentional, then that's kind of annoying, but whatever. Though I'd imagine that knowing if something was intentional or not could help those who do research into the most technical aspects of Brawl. If something results from a glitch, then perhaps it can be exploited in other ways. If it's intentional, then perhaps there are other ways of taking advantage of this aspect. I'm not much of one to look into this stuff, but I would look at something I was researching like this differently if I knew whether it were intentional or not. How much it matters in the long run, I don't know. Probably not much, but maybe a little.

 

[Merce]

I think they put more thought into this game than most will give credit, but that's just my opinion...

 

[Crystanium]

Well, pivot grabbing is clearly intentional, since it's on the Dojo itself.....

http://www.smashbros.com/en_us/howto/technique/technique10.html

As for the other stuff, who knows? If the chain grabs were intentional, then that's kind of annoying, but whatever. Though I'd imagine that knowing if something was intentional or not could help those who do research into the most technical aspects of Brawl. If something results from a glitch, then perhaps it can be exploited in other ways. If it's intentional, then perhaps there are other ways of taking advantage of this aspect. I'm not much of one to look into this stuff, but I would look at something I was researching like this differently if I knew whether it were intentional or not. How much it matters in the long run, I don't know. Probably not much, but maybe a little.

It makes me wonder if these were add-ons once the people of SWF discovered these for themselves. I mean, come on, "pivot grab"? Who discovered this anyway? Or was it already something known, and the first person to bring it up at SWF made note of it to the rest of the Smash community and also called it "pivot grab"? I'm really curious. I don't care about the date, "Feb. 11 Mon. 2008," either.

 

[orintemple]

Just because the developers don't tell us about it doesn't mean it is an accident. They would obviously want to put in secret things that players could discover. I am not sure about chaingrabbing, but I assume it is on purpose because it is way to obvious of a thing to miss during testing.

And anything that has animation is obviously on purpose, that would just be dumb to think otherwise. "O crap I made this animation for this thing that doesn't exist, lets put it in the game anyway! Hey look this thing exists, how lucky!" Thats just dumb.

And as far as the "everyone wins" mentality of Sakurai goes, clearly, by the nature of Brawl, he is ****ing with us.

 

[Minwu]

D3's infinite wall CG was discovered in the demo before Brawl came out. Even if by some off chance it wasn't intentional, Sakurai was clearly happy with the results.

 

[CRASHiC]

I really wanna say this in the last ***ish manner, but why does this matter?

It matters for classification, and it helps with dealing with the people who call us tourney ***s who say we take "glitches" and exploit them to win.

 

[Albert.]

the only way we'll really know is by asking

SWF embassy expedition to the developers?

 

[Crizthakidd]

play to win

10wins

 

[DKKountry]

Looking over that Dojo page, I completely forgot about the ability to eat food while laying down. Lol shows how much I've played with items on. Oh well.

 

[Crystanium]

Just because the developers don't tell us about it doesn't mean it is an accident. They would obviously want to put in secret things that players could discover. I am not sure about chaingrabbing, but I assume it is on purpose because it is way to obvious of a thing to miss during testing.

And anything that has animation is obviously on purpose, that would just be dumb to think otherwise. "O crap I made this animation for this thing that doesn't exist, lets put it in the game anyway! Hey look this thing exists, how lucky!" Thats just dumb.

And as far as the "everyone wins" mentality of Sakurai goes, clearly, by the nature of Brawl, he is ****ing with us.

So, the developers know these things, and they want us to discover these tricks? And is it just me, or did Sakurai in that link sound like a competitive gamer? I think he is f'ing with us.

 

[Zankoku]

There is no way the pivot grab was unintentional. I mean, come on, it has its own separate animation that's different from both the running and standing grab. It's really really improbable for something unintentional to have its own unique animation for each and every character.

 

[Pr0phetic]

There is no way the pivot grab was unintentional. I mean, come on, it has its own separate animation that's different from both the running and standing grab. It's really really improbable for something unintentional to have its own unique animation for each and every character.

^ This. Now about DeDeDe's chaingrab, definitely unintentional, if it where it'd probably would be on all characters and more characters would have chaingrabs themselves.

 

[XienZo]

I think that we don't have enough information about DDD's chaingrab to tell if it was intentional or not.

On the other hand, desynch seems pretty intentional since it was also in Melee, and Sakurai might have even saw it as funny and representative of the nature of the Ice Climbers.

 

[SamuraiPanda]

Pivot grab is official and intentional. It was in the Dojo.

Also, I have a hard time believing that D3's CG was not intentional. Not only did they give it an additional "wind" hit to normalize knockback, but it was discovered the FIRST TIME anybody had a hands-on with the game in Japan. Ikki played on a kiosk before the game was released, on a sideways Wiimote, and figured out the CG immediately. It had to be intentional.

 

[Starwarrior27]

It seems like Dedede's chaingrab had to be intentional, as it fits the physics of Brawl flawlessly, it was discovered with very little effort, and that "there is simple mathematical proof to show that Dededee's chain grab is a true chain grab" (CRASHiC). All of these add up to the idea that Dedede's chaingrab is most likely intentional. This might end up disturbing the balance of the game, but unless the balance is disturbed, there is little motivation to prove contrary.

Overall, it seems safe to assume that anything with a unique animation or appears to fit the physics of brawl is most likely intentional. However, any kind of exploit is most likely not intentional, as it may create glitchy, inconsistent animations or, ultimately, redefines some point in gameplay (eg. wavedashing (in SSBM), dash dancing, Metaknights infinite dimensional cape, etc.).

 

[Minwu]

Overall, it seems safe to assume that anything with a unique animation or appears to fit the physics of brawl is most likely intentional. However, any kind of exploit is most likely not intentional, as it may create glitchy, inconsistent animations or, ultimately, redefines some point in gameplay (eg. wavedashing (in SSBM), dash dancing, Metaknights infinite dimensional cape, etc.).

Even that's questionable. Why would the attack last longer if it goes from air to ground?

 

[ph00tbag]

Overall, it seems safe to assume that anything with a unique animation or appears to fit the physics of brawl is most likely intentional. However, any kind of exploit is most likely not intentional, as it may create glitchy, inconsistent animations or, ultimately, redefines some point in gameplay (eg. wavedashing (in SSBM), dash dancing, Metaknights infinite dimensional cape, etc.).

Don't be too hasty in these judgments. Wavelanding is an unforeseen byproduct of wavelanding, which was intentional. Dash dancing is definitely intentional. IDC, though, is certainly not intentional. I can't imagine a developer would intend such a travesty.

 

[SpongeBathBill]

Even that's questionable. Why would the attack last longer if it goes from air to ground?

Iirc, it lasts longer because the counter is reset when MK touches the ground. It has nothing to do with the attack itself going from air to ground.

 

[Llumys]

Pivot grab is official and intentional. It was in the Dojo.

It's a shame most people don't look stuff up before posting.

Also, I don't think Dedede's chaingrab was intentional. I think it was just a fluke that he had both a throw with consistent(?) knockback and a long grab range.

 

[Minwu]

Iirc, it lasts longer because the counter is reset when MK touches the ground. It has nothing to do with the attack itself going from air to ground.

It's still a side effect of the transition that is unnecessary, much like Dimensional Cape itself(after the nerfs since the demo) if not for IDCing.

 

[pure_awesome]

I worked as a game tester for a little while and I think I can give some insight on an important distinction.

All bugs found in the game will ultimately be given one of three basic classifications; Resolved, ISP, or W/AD. The format or grouping that is used will vary from company to company, but all bugs will eventually become one of these three.

Resolved simply means the bug as it was originally found has been fixed. This was the case with Fox being able to jump out of his Shine in the Brawl demo.

W/AD stands for Waived/As Designed, otherwise known as Intentional Mechanic. This is when a bug is found by the testing company in question and and rejected by the design company. It's possible that Melee's Gentleman or Brawl's Laser Cancel would fall into this category. It's rare for bugs to fall into this category since it's usually fairly obvious what the designers intended and what they didn't.

ISP stands of In Shipped Version. Other companies call this category Unresolved, or New Mechanic. This is the case with bugs that are found that are not fixed due to logical, physical, or time constraints. These bugs are left in the game intentionally, but were never expressly placed into the game.

I've always been under the belief that the majority of competitive Smash's ATs have been ISP'd bugs. It simply does not make any sense whatsoever that any testers worth their salt would have been unable to find such obvious things as DDD's chaingrab, Glide Attacks having no landing lag, or wavedashing/wavelanding. To use the latter as the major example, in order to fix wavedashing/wavelanding, either Melee's airdodge system or Melee's traction system would have had to undergo a major overhaul. It simply would not have been smart or efficient to go through such trouble to fix something that should have been a minor bug. So instead they left it in and just called it Special Landing (or whatever it was.)

I've obviously got no proof of this. But having worked as a tester and understanding just how many bugs slip through the cracks, I believe it's by far the most logical explanation.

TL;DR: The majority of Smash AT's weren't intentional, but they were acknowledged.

 

[SpongeBathBill]

So instead they left it in and just called it Special Landing (or whatever it was.)

Landfallspecial, for what it's worth.