Scar on the Melee vs Brawl debate: What does competitive really mean?

[The Executive]

No, that was completely different. In Melee, people camped competitively. Here, people are just camping like n00bs. It's totally different.

[/sarcasm]

In North Carolina, people camp as campers, without a specific reason.

They aren't n00bs (n00bs don't camp, they bring RVs and sit in parks), but they aren't competitive either.

ZOMG A THIRD DIMENSION OF PLAY!!!!1111111111

/moar sarcasm

 

[R i p]

I'm just curious when this board will be about Brawl. I basically only browsed character forums when I lurked. Now with the need of friendcodes I decided to sign up and perhaps look at other parts of the forum. To my dismay I find this board to be almost a complete flip of the character boards. Unhelpful and full of childish arguments. Half of the threads are Melee vs Brawl and all of the big threads are Melee vs Brawl.

As for this topic, why is it always the loud, offensive troll that sides with Melee? For a superior game, you'd think people would display more intelligent and graceful individuals than a simple game.

 

[Brookman]

I think it's just miscommunication coupled with a one sided mirror effect.

People who played Melee on a high level and enjoyed it see brawl as a sub par game. They find Melee to be more challenging and dynamic. Melee vets are baffled by how so few people share their love of the game, and won't even concede the fact (yes, I said fact) that Melee is more dynamic than Brawl.

People are talking about balance in Brawl...this means they haven't been to a Brawl tournament and/or have yet to play anyone 'skilled' in the game.

Honestly, I motioned to close this topic many moons ago.

There are people who just want to play Brawl with their friends and have fun, and I say go ahead, have a blast. For the other people who are interested in getting into the tournament scene, I think they are going to be thoroughly disappointed by what the game is reduced to at a competitive level.

That is the main point I get out of this topic. It's not about whether or not there can be Brawl tournaments, but what Brawl tournaments will look like. Sure there are a lot more characters in the game, that just mean there are going to be a lot more characters gathering dust as snakes and metaknights dominate the tournament scene.

We can 'debate' all we want in our free time, it won't really have any effect on either group, but I do so enjoy it. Honestly, only time will tell what happens to Brawl, and in the mean time I plan to continue flaming you noobs.

 

[The Executive]

I'm just curious when this board will be about Brawl. I basically only browsed character forums when I lurked. Now with the need of friendcodes I decided to sign up and perhaps look at other parts of the forum. To my dismay I find this board to be almost a complete flip of the character boards. Unhelpful and full of childish arguments. Half of the threads are Melee vs Brawl and all of the big threads are Melee vs Brawl.

As for this topic, why is it always the loud, offensive troll that sides with Melee? For a superior game, you'd think people would display more intelligent and graceful individuals than a simple game.

Intelligence and tact vary from user to user regardless of stance on an issue. Here, it's pretty much the whole spectrum. Memorize usernames of well-known, intelligent posters (trolls as well) and you'll have an easier time navigating.

 

[LouisLeGros]

subtle trolls are still trolls

 

[The Executive]

subtle trolls and still trolls

Did you mean (there are) 'subtle trolls and still trolls' or 'subtle trolls (are) still trolls'?

 

[Fletch]

I'm just curious when this board will be about Brawl. I basically only browsed character forums when I lurked. Now with the need of friendcodes I decided to sign up and perhaps look at other parts of the forum. To my dismay I find this board to be almost a complete flip of the character boards. Unhelpful and full of childish arguments. Half of the threads are Melee vs Brawl and all of the big threads are Melee vs Brawl.

As for this topic, why is it always the loud, offensive troll that sides with Melee? For a superior game, you'd think people would display more intelligent and graceful individuals than a simple game.

Which posts have you been reading? It seems like the pro-Brawl side is the side which consists of the "trolls" you speak of, although the Melee side does have its share as well.

 

[thumbswayup]

I think it's amazing that people who have no idea what they are talking about continue to post.

 

[Brookman]

I think it's amazing that people who have no idea what they are talking about continue to post.

Irony is my favorite literary tool as well.

 

[The Executive]

Which posts have you been reading? It seems like the pro-Brawl side is the side which consists of the "trolls" you speak of, although the Melee side does have its share as well.

No.

Casuals (attribute A) are more likely to play Brawl than Melee (attribute B).

Casuals (attribute A) are more likely to base arguments on opinion rather than documented evidence (attribute C).

Casuals (attribute A) are more likely to respond immaturely to having a point refuted that stood on shaky ground in the first place (attribute D).

Just because A=B, A=C, and A=D does not mean that B=C or B=D. The 'Brawl side' does not consist primarily of trolls, nor it is exclusive in its infestation. It's just that the trolls on this side are more vocal, less intelligent, and don't know when to STFU/GTFO. Generalization =/= fact, but from skimming through the boards you'd be hard pressed to believe it.

 

[arrowhead]

I think it's amazing that people who have no idea what they are talking about continue to post.

it's cause they have no idea they have no idea what they're talking about

 

[The Executive]

it's cause they have no idea they have no idea what they're talking about

That's why the disclaimer reading "INTELLIGENT POSTS WILL BE RESPONDED TO IN KIND" is no longer there.

 

[LouisLeGros]

edit: Why I asked:




What was the beginning of melee like? (comparatively to brawl?)

I've heard it started out camping for a year or two.

You'd be wrong there.

Begining of melee was really all over the place. There were really no ATs(quickly changed), no standards for competitive play (item stock time), and the "tiers" changed a lot.

It was also ridiculously small compared to Brawl.
L canceling and wavedashing were discovered in at most 6 months (from the US Release). Smashboards was facilitating really small tournaments at this time.

 

[LouisLeGros]

Did you mean (there are) 'subtle trolls and still trolls' or 'subtle trolls (are) still trolls'?

I must be dyslexic, I meant are.

I thought my use of homophones on accident were bad...

edit:srry double post

 

[The Executive]

I must be dyslexic, I meant are.

I thought my use of homophones on accident were bad...

edit:srry double post

OK. Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[RDK]

So let me get this straight...

If somebody had only played Melee for one month, not enough time to learn the ins and outs, and they post here that they like Brawl better and find it to be deeper, they are shunned and called idiots. They haven't seen the utmost majesty of Melee, the beauty, the skill, the depth, the orgasmic glee.

If somebody has only played Brawl for less than one month, not enough time to learn the ins and outs, and says Melee is better they are absolutely right?

Do you not see this? You are basically saying that if they didn't play Melee for months on end then they didn't understand it but there haven't even been months on end to have played here. We don't know the exact number of frames for every move by heart. We don't know how best to abuse the off-stage game yet. We don't know how things will pan out and you have to be extremely cocky to think you know how it will.

My main point is this: Isn't any judgment here premature? Is the finality of people's hatred for Brawl not fair to the game? Would you have wanted this standard to have been held to melee in its early months? Why can't the haters, rather than say Brawl suxxxx, instead say Brawl suxxxx for now.

Seriously guys, we haven't even gotten a tier list nailed down.

God, people--READ BEFORE YOU POST! Yuna, Scar, and even myself have addressed this all before. This debate is going around in circles because people do not have the capacity to see if their argument has already been answered.

And the fact of the matter is that we already do know all the frame rates and attack physics (maybe not by heart, unless you're M2K). People don't realize that the top Melee players have been analyzing Brawl since the JAPANESE RELEASE. I think we know a little bit more about it than you.

As for the tier list not being nailed down--this should have been at the start of your post. At least then I would have been able to disregard the rest of the nonsense in your post. It's obvious you have no idea how tier lists are established.

Also, typing via the Wii is hard.

 

[3GOD]

Competitive vs Competition

If you look it up in a dictionary, you will find a very different definition. Sometimes the dictionary is not the place to go. Words are clumsy tools we use to try to convey thoughts. We must define the word on our own.

The definition of competitive that has received the most support is the innate property of a game allowing better players to win consistently. This yields my mantra, that which I repeat over and over to prove my point.

To me, this is the heart of the issue being discussed, but needs a little more elaboration.

You state that a competitive game means a game having the property that "better" players will win consistently. What is meant by "better" here? Playing smart? Technical skill? Is "better" not defined by the results of the game itself? Between Player A and Player B, the player who wins games consistently would be considered "better."

To say that Melee is more competitive is probably inaccurate since there will likely be one player (between any two given people) who consistently wins games in Brawl. The issue here is whether the Brawl player who wins consistently will have fun in doing so.

Most here are likely familiar with the "playing to win" mindset. There is no point in "playing with honor" as some scrubs like to say. In a competition (tournament), playing to win is the only logical way to play. What we have to consider is this....

Is "playing to win" in Brawl fun?

This question is what is really at the heart of most of the Brawl/Melee discussions. Face the facts: people don't want to compete in something that they don't enjoy (like a Mayonaise eating contest for example)!

For many (myself included), it was clear that, in Melee, "playing to win" was also IMMENSELY FUN. I agree 100%. Melee has a near-perfect formula that makes "playing to win" extremely fun and entertaining to watch at the same time.

Is "playing to win" in Brawl fun? I'm still undecided, but I'm trying to give it a fair chance. What time period/deciding factors should we consider a "fair chance?"

 

[Powderfinger]

I think it's just miscommunication coupled with a one sided mirror effect.

People who played Melee on a high level and enjoyed it see brawl as a sub par game. They find Melee to be more challenging and dynamic. Melee vets are baffled by how so few people share their love of the game, and won't even concede the fact (yes, I said fact) that Melee is more dynamic than Brawl.

People are talking about balance in Brawl...this means they haven't been to a Brawl tournament and/or have yet to play anyone 'skilled' in the game.

Honestly, I motioned to close this topic many moons ago.

There are people who just want to play Brawl with their friends and have fun, and I say go ahead, have a blast. For the other people who are interested in getting into the tournament scene, I think they are going to be thoroughly disappointed by what the game is reduced to at a competitive level.

That is the main point I get out of this topic. It's not about whether or not there can be Brawl tournaments, but what Brawl tournaments will look like. Sure there are a lot more characters in the game, that just mean there are going to be a lot more characters gathering dust as snakes and metaknights dominate the tournament scene.

We can 'debate' all we want in our free time, it won't really have any effect on either group, but I do so enjoy it. Honestly, only time will tell what happens to Brawl, and in the mean time I plan to continue flaming you noobs.

QFT, I like how people just ignore this post though.

 

[Wiseguy]

Is "playing to win" in Brawl fun? I'm still undecided, but I'm trying to give it a fair chance. What time period/deciding factors should we consider a "fair chance?"

It's quite simple really: different people find different things fun. Some people find, enjoyment in Brawl while others do not. The same could be said of Melee, Smash 64, and every other videogame known to man. Like all art forms, what people like and dislike in videogames is subjective.

Personally, I think Brawl does a superb job of balancing what everyone wanted. But its inevitable that some people would feel cheated, since you can't please everyone.

 

[The Executive]

It's quite simple really: different people find different things fun. Some people find, enjoyment in Brawl while others do not. The same could be said of Melee, Smash 64, and every other videogame known to man. Like all art forms, what people like and dislike in videogames is subjective.

Personally, I think Brawl does a superb job of balancing what everyone wanted. But its inevitable that some people would feel cheated, since you can't please everyone.

True. Also, awesome art sig. Have you seen the SSBB Hellsing spoof?

 

[Wiseguy]

True. Also, awesome art sig. Have you seen the SSBB Hellsing spoof?

Tanks. Yes, just saw it in your post in the "We love Brawl thread." It made all my dreams come true.

Who made it?

EDIT: To the rest of you, here's what we're talking about: http://smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=152395&page=3

 

[The Executive]

I wish I knew...that's some amazing art right there.

 

[Wiseguy]

I wish I knew...that's some amazing art right there.

100% agreed. Thanks for showing it.

 

[Mew2King]

i define competitive as good and deep, azen defines it as how many people go to tourneys to compete in it

 

[LouisLeGros]

i define competitive as good and deep, azen defines it as how many people go to tourneys to compete in it

So by Azen's logic halo(2) is the most competitive game ever?

 

[The Executive]

So by Azen's logic halo(2) is the most competitive game ever?

By M2K's logic Ft. Knox is competitive. Money is good the the vault is deep. VERY deep.

/joke

 

[Wiseguy]

i define competitive as good and deep, azen defines it as how many people go to tourneys to compete in it

I agree with Azen whole heartedly. That's what competitive has always meant. It's the traditional, proper defintion that is an established and recognized part of the English language.

Of course, you can use words to mean whatever you want. For instance, I could arbitrarily decide to refer to all food as pea soup. The only problem is that people will assume that I mean soup with peas in it.

 

[Maxxthepenguin]

God, people--READ BEFORE YOU POST! Yuna, Scar, and even myself have addressed this all before. This debate is going around in circles because people do not have the capacity to see if their argument has already been answered.

And the fact of the matter is that we already do know all the frame rates and attack physics (maybe not by heart, unless you're M2K). People don't realize that the top Melee players have been analyzing Brawl since the JAPANESE RELEASE. I think we know a little bit more about it than you.

As for the tier list not being nailed down--this should have been at the start of your post. At least then I would have been able to disregard the rest of the nonsense in your post. It's obvious you have no idea how tier lists are established.

Also, typing via the Wii is hard.

Going in reverse.

I'm not stupid enough to type on the Wii.

Ok, so 2 and a half months for a good amount of people. That is something I did know and just wasn't thinking about. Oh so sorry.

Are tier lists not made by checking out what characters tend to win tournaments? Because my comment was based on that thought, basically another example saying "we don't know yet".

Knowing the approximate frames of the moves and the exact physics by heart for every move is important for the intuitive aspects of the game.

I assumed this had been posted in some form or another tbh. 168 pages, come on.

I read the first post, a few of the linked posts and a few random ones here and there, you can't expect anyone to have read ALL of this. I am not talking about ATs really, I'm thinking metagame.

 

[Wiseguy]

RDK, was that really necessary? Maxx is being polite and articulate in expressing his argument. There is no reason to act all hostile against every single person you disagree with.

 

[GTR!]

I think it's just miscommunication coupled with a one sided mirror effect.

People who played Melee on a high level and enjoyed it see brawl as a sub par game. They find Melee to be more challenging and dynamic. Melee vets are baffled by how so few people share their love of the game, and won't even concede the fact (yes, I said fact) that Melee is more dynamic than Brawl.

People are talking about balance in Brawl...this means they haven't been to a Brawl tournament and/or have yet to play anyone 'skilled' in the game.

Honestly, I motioned to close this topic many moons ago.

There are people who just want to play Brawl with their friends and have fun, and I say go ahead, have a blast. For the other people who are interested in getting into the tournament scene, I think they are going to be thoroughly disappointed by what the game is reduced to at a competitive level.

That is the main point I get out of this topic. It's not about whether or not there can be Brawl tournaments, but what Brawl tournaments will look like. Sure there are a lot more characters in the game, that just mean there are going to be a lot more characters gathering dust as snakes and metaknights dominate the tournament scene.

We can 'debate' all we want in our free time, it won't really have any effect on either group, but I do so enjoy it. Honestly, only time will tell what happens to Brawl, and in the mean time I plan to continue flaming you noobs.

wow

this post win everything seriously

(I still like playing brawl dont get me wrong i will keep goin to tourneys and all but idk)

i cant say anything to put into words how perfectly you just summed up how i and many other players feel

thank you brookman

 

[arrowhead]

Is "playing to win" in Brawl fun?

This question is what is really at the heart of most of the Brawl/Melee discussions. Face the facts: people don't want to compete in something that they don't enjoy (like a Mayonaise eating contest for example)!

For many (myself included), it was clear that, in Melee, "playing to win" was also IMMENSELY FUN. I agree 100%. Melee has a near-perfect formula that makes "playing to win" extremely fun and entertaining to watch at the same time.

Is "playing to win" in Brawl fun? I'm still undecided, but I'm trying to give it a fair chance. What time period/deciding factors should we consider a "fair chance?"

this is really the whole issue here. who cares how many people play this game, that doesn't make it any better. it's only popular because of melee anyways >_>.

this game lacks "OHHHH" moments. i miss all the tension and excitement that melee matches have when someone does some crazy combo. brawl breaks my heart

 

[Eternal Smasher]

This is like the "Most Powerful Character in Nintendo History" thread all over again. Valid points all around, and very fun to read. I'd add something, but I feel nothing else needs to be said, especially by me.

*sits back*

 

[Twin Dreams]

Fun is a personal opinion. I, for one, can play any game and find fun if I am able to outwit my opponent. Thus, smash is fun because it has mind games.



Chess, GG, M:TG, SSB, Halo, etc. etc.



They all are the same amount of fun because it's the human interaction/competition that's fun. Not mindlessly pushing bottons to see some flashing lights!! (exagerration)

 

[RDK]

RDK, was that really necessary? Maxx is being polite and articulate in expressing his argument. There is no reason to act all hostile against every single person you disagree with.

My apologies to Maxx if I sounded pissed. I just get tired of hearing the same exact arguments over and over. What's the point of even answering?

 

[Brookman]

I don't want to interact with people, I really just enjoy pushing buttons.

 

[The Executive]

I don't want to interact with people, I really just enjoy pushing buttons.

You amuse me. I pronounce it good.

 

[Skler]

Remember when I said every one of Brookman's posts is amazing? I do.

Is anybody still debating this or has everyone accepted that Melee is more competitive than Brawl?

 

[BlackPanther]

Either way it's not gonna stop any of the losers from playin Brawl in tourneys. We can only hope that it'll fizzle out and just become a side thing sooner than expected.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Either way it's not gonna stop any of the losers from playin Brawl in tourneys. We can only hope that it'll fizzle out and just become a side thing sooner than expected.

Or, you can not be a douche and hope that both scenes can co-exist. I still don't see why it has to be one or the other. Melee can be more 'competitive' all it wants, that doesn't change the fact that Brawl has some competitive aspects and that people want to play it competitively. Why the hell anyone would want one scene to just 'fizzle out' is beyond me.

...oh, unless you think the 'right way to play' is playing Melee. I'm going to say the same thing that was told to me about item tournaments before we worked on 'ISP': if it hurts you so badly that there are less Melee tournaments, host your own. Don't wish demise on anyone else's playing just 'cause you don't agree. Do something yourself instead of whining and 'hoping' what you want to happen will happen.

 

[LOL_Master]

you can make tic tac toe competitive, get like couple hundred scrubs and put them in a big venue, and yeah it's competitive