Melee v. Brawl: which has more playstyle variety?

[The Halloween Captain]

I've played melee, and I've played Brawl. In melee, I always felt there were a lot of clones, and completely different characters would often use the same approach tactics. It seems like there were only a few tactics that worked in any given situation, that offence and defence had to be perfectly balanced for every character, or else you would be severely punished.

In Brawl, there are characters who go full offence, characters who go full defence, characters who approach and those who don't, and those who can choose to do either. Characters like Olimar who play completely diffently than any character in the history of Smash.

Yet I hear a lot of melee veterans who insist that melee has more unique playstyles than Brawl. when asked, they simply say compare these two fox users. It is assumed that because at this point in the metagame a lot of people use similar styles for any given character, the variety in playstyle is diminished. However, a lot of people used similar playstyles in melee, as the mimicked the masters of their characters.

I simply do not see how melee has more playstyle variety than Brawl, with its smaller cast and somewhat uniform system for attempting combos, approaching and retreating. Please explain.

 

[DeuceBlade]

What is their to debate... brawl has more characters... and lacks wavedash... ultimately it has more playstyle.

 

[MarKO X]

this is going to turn into yet another brawl vs. melee debate... please stop.

It's the same thing, over and over again. Brawl says characters, Melee says ATs... Brawl says more balance, Melee says balance lies in Mk and Snake.

while you do bring up a point, my question is this... did it have to be brought up? maybe I'm just blowing this outta proportion...

 

[TWILTHERO]

Hooray for more Melee vs Brawl dissusions!

 

[Youko]

Why do we always get the people making threads that think "Melee vs. Brawl" is such a great idea and hot topic to delve into...