So...none items user....cant adapt?

[Jooce Bocks]

Second, something that you must read if you REALLY think that items are gamebreaking whor3s that always break matches

Items aren't ALWAYS game-breaking, but the possibility of it RANDOMLY happening, even if minimal, is still too much to make its way into competitive play.

Also, I started reading that experiment there, and in my opinion, that experiment is useless for this topic. Item generation is random, no amount of study is going to indicate the probability of this changing tournament results. This is especially true in tournament match-ups which are usually determined in about 2-3 matches. As I stated earlier, probability follows no guidelines. Even if a random possibility only seems to occur in one out of every 100 matches does not mean it cannot occur in 2 out of the 3 matches of a final round. This means, that although the better player will win the majority of a thousand item matches, the better player has an increased chance of randomly losing the first few matches (which in a tournament are the deciding matches) to the lesser player.

Also, how the CPU acts should not be used to determine regulations for competitive play. The CPU is far too different from any person with a brain to even be considered in testing like this; this is like letting level 9 CPUs duke it out to create the new tier list.

 

[Vijin]

SNIP

Haha! A guy who plays with items on is trying to talk about true skill. Comical.
You're a funny guy; you should do stand-up.

Anyway, why should 'we' have to learn to adapt? It is you that needs to learn how to adapt... tournaments are played with items set to none, and random stages banned. Get that ish outta here. You're really good with playing with items? Well, good for you. If tournaments allowed items, that might actually matter. But it doesn't. You can be 'King of the Scrubs' all you want, but when you're ready to step out of the sandbox, you better learn to "adapt."

 

[-Linko-]

This is like letting level 9 CPUs duke it out to create the new tier list.

That would actually be the best way to create a provisional tier list. Not a definitive one, sure; but a very acurrate provisional one. It would be better than most tier lists hanging around lately.


And those tests were only benchmark tests for future tests. On its original thread that was explained.

 

[Mechageo]

Being able to win consistently with items is like being a street racer.

If you can consistently win with all of the horrible things like oncoming traffic, non-race-participants, and random hazards happening to you, then if you're on a controlled track that's been sectioned off, you're set.

Besides, just let your opponent get the hammer and then kill them.
Dodge + Grab.

 

[dguy6789]

Haha! A guy who plays with items on is trying to talk about true skill. Comical.
You're a funny guy; you should do stand-up.

Anyway, why should 'we' have to learn to adapt? it is you that needs to learn how to adapt... tournaments are played with items set to none, and random stages banned. Get that ish outta here. You're really good with playing with items? Well, good for you. If tournaments allowed items, that might actually matter. But it doesn't. You can be 'King of the Scrubs' all you want, but when you're ready to step out of the sandbox, you better learn to "adapt."

Quoted for Truth.

 

[rajendra82]

Items aren't ALWAYS game-breaking, but the possibility of it RANDOMLY happening, even if minimal, is still too much to make its way into competitive play.

I have to disagree wholeheartedly. I have been told before on these boards that video games should not be compared to professional sports, but since they are some of the truly competitive events we witness today, I will have to use another sports analogy again.

Playing a stage like Final Destination with no items is like a playing baseball inside domes of identical dimension on artificial turf. There are no external random factors to affect game play. Since the 1980s, a majority of the baseball teams have moved out of domes and play on natural grass today. With these conditions balls can take a bad bounce and skip between the legs of a Bill Buckner to make your team lose world series game 6, it might rain at the bottom of the 5th and the game will be called making your team lose, the ball that should have been a home run could get knocked back into the park by a sudden gust of wind resulting in an out, Bucky Dent might hit a home run just over the wall that would not be there in any other stadium. These are all random game breaking events, yet most teams have chosen to embrace rather than eliminate them. I believe it is because the game is a lot more fun to watch that way. Anything can happen so you don’t want to stop watching. As a result the popularity of baseball is much greater today than before the move out of cookie cutter domes.

If the “professional” smash players want to be better off, I think they should play with a little more randomness thrown in the mix. Sure the better player might lose some day, but it will be a heck of a popular show that brings so much money to the event in the first place that the loser would be better off by losing a highly attended exciting event than winning a poorly attended boring one. Over time the randomness will even out, and all will be right. Too much randomness and unplayable chaos will rule (as if a baseball game was allowed to be continued in a hurricane), but a little randomness is actually a good thing.

 

[Firebert]

That would actually be the best way to create a provisional tier list. Not a definitive one, sure; but a very acurrate provisional one. It would be better than most tier lists hanging around lately.


And those tests were only benchmark tests for future tests. On its original thread that was explained.

That is a pretty good idea.

 

[MorpheusVGX]

I totally agree with DanteSmash, he is no idiot. He "understands". To adapt, overcome and win. That's the true spirit of smash. I am glad someone posted a link to the Casual Competitive League, which I will support. But I don't want to leave this thread without supporting DanteSmash and everyone who is with him. Some time ago, in a thread similar to this one , I posted this:

Ok, I will add up some thoughts about this matter.

First, why do Item lovers (like me) would like to have item Tournaments?

1. Items require skill to use properly.
2. Avoiding items requires skill.
3. Items add a whole new variety on the battlefield, thus a whole new variety of skill to survive.
4. For some players, Smash Bros is about fighting and survival, with or against anything happening. That is the spirit and fun.
5. The truth is that if in a certain situation, an item put a character in an advantage, in a long battle, skill and wit prevails. The best player will survive in the end. If someone loses his last stock by a random item, that does not change the fact the victory is about the whole battle, not just the last stock.
6. Banning item play takes a lot away from the game. Both in skill, "drama" and fun.
7. The truth is that item play requires all the skills you use on non item play and many many more.
8. The ultimate truth is that the best Smash player is the one who survives in the end against all odds in a stock 4 player FFA match, just like the game is designed to be played.
9. Sakurai designed the game so skill can be used against items ( air grab, power shielding, reflectors, air and ground dodge).


So then, why do some elitist just want to compete in no items battles?

1. Many of them are just sore losers, and everytime they lose with an item involved they will just cry like babies "is not fair!, is not fair". I've seen this many times and I hate it. It ALWAYS happen that arrogant sore losers does not want items involved (and they just happen to suck at using items so they are even more pisssed off because their skills are "limited").

2. Coming from other games like street fighter or tekken, they want to turn the smash competitive community just like those games. Taking away a lot of the greatness of Smash Bros.

3. They just think that a final stock lost in the last moment defines the best player.

4. They cry about items being unfair and just turn them off. While item player in time grow in skill enough to avoid and counter those items. There is a difference in courage within these two kind of players.


There are other things to be said. I do not have anything against 1 vs 1 , no items play. But what I want to do now is create a community of competitive item players (gladly, it already exists), having the fun of items, pokemons, assist trophies, orthodox stages and final smashes . I do think Items on high is too chaotic and random. Having them on medium is a better thing. Also, I suggest a 5 stock survival match with 4 player FFA, or team battles will do. Stages can be random but 3 matches should define the winner. Who is with me?

P.D. : Don't you notice that most people that are against items seems arrogant and cocky when posting. The think they are great. Elitists they call them. They come here flaming and talking about trolls, and sh...t. Bunch of idiots.

 

[Mercury]

stop responding to the troll already. clearly he doesn't understand that it was already logically considered whether items are viable or not, and the conclusion is based on years of gameplay evidence.

i would just like to point out that for those claiming items take skill, it can but it doesn't promote as consistent a game as can possibly be played, where the good players are always the winners, where losers lose because it was entirely what they did and the same for a good player.

it is entirely possible however very unlikely for a good item player to beat a good non-item player with items on, but you will never see a good item player beat a good non-item player with them off. when you pick up that green shell or bomb, and you throw it at someone who is at an edge, and they die from it, esp. when done by characters like marth who have no projectiles because of their proficiency close range, all it does is make the roster uneven, especially considering other characters like diddy have their projectiles as items, and it takes away from that character since now everyone has the potential diddy does.

i can come up with countless examples but i'm probably never looking at this topic again because of how idiotic it is and how OP ignores common sense, i am just hoping you can truly understand why items do not promote true fighting skill and make the game more unbalanced.

 

[Jellybelly]

5. The truth is that if in a certain situation, an item put a character in an advantage, in a long battle, skill and wit prevails. The best player will survive in the end. If someone loses his last stock by a random item, that does not change the fact the victory is about the whole battle, not just the last stock.

Wrong. There is no hidden code of honour, victory is victory.

Trust me on this, any tournament scene that uses items will never be as succesful as one without items. If money is involved then balance must be the ultimate priority, items take away balance. They're fun in moderation, but when someone loses there own money due to a golden hammer spawning randomly in front of there opponent then I doubt they'd waste there money on such a tournament again.

Clearly some people just haven't played for money.

 

[MorpheusVGX]

Well. I respect you opinion. I just hope we can see some "All items, all stages" tournament. It should be pretty interesting. Then, having that champion play against the No Items Tournament champion. They would play with items first, then with no items.

 

[Vijin]

I have to disagree wholeheartedly. I have been told before on these boards that video games should not be compared to professional sports, but since they are some of the truly competitive events we witness today, I will have to use another sports analogy again.

Playing a stage like Final Destination with no items is like a playing baseball inside domes of identical dimension on artificial turf. There are no external random factors to affect game play. Since the 1980s, a majority of the baseball teams have moved out of domes and play on natural grass today. With these conditions balls can take a bad bounce and skip between the legs of a Bill Buckner to make your team lose world series game 6, it might rain at the bottom of the 5th and the game will be called making your team lose, the ball that should have been a home run could get knocked back into the park by a sudden gust of wind resulting in an out, Bucky Dent might hit a home run just over the wall that would not be there in any other stadium. These are all random game breaking events, yet most teams have chosen to embrace rather than eliminate them. I believe it is because the game is a lot more fun to watch that way. Anything can happen so you don’t want to stop watching. As a result the popularity of baseball is much greater today than before the move out of cookie cutter domes.

If the “professional” smash players want to be better off, I think they should play with a little more randomness thrown in the mix. Sure the better player might lose some day, but it will be a heck of a popular show that brings so much money to the event in the first place that the loser would be better off by losing a highly attended exciting event than winning a poorly attended boring one. Over time the randomness will even out, and all will be right. Too much randomness and unplayable chaos will rule (as if a baseball game was allowed to be continued in a hurricane), but a little randomness is actually a good thing.

If FD was the only stage people could play on, your argument might be valid. What a lot of people don't realize is that stages are banned for a reason. In Melee for instance, certain stages give characters a major advantage. And I'm talking like game breakingadvantage. Like Yoshi's pipes stages. A fox can simply shine most characters off the stage. Or Yoshi's stage with the cloud in the lower right corner. People can just camp and stall there, wait for their opponent to come after them, and then just make the cloud disappear so their opponent just falls to their death.

In Brawl, it's the same thing but worse. On more than half the stages, Dedede can simply chainthrow the character right off the stage, or chain throw him into a wall, and it's impossible for the other guy to get out of it. That's broken, and that's why stages are banned.

As for items? Well, melee and brawl aren't baseball. Yeah, baseball players are at the mercy to some minor random-happenings, but hey, Sakurai gave us the option to turn those random happenings in brawl and melee off.

 

[-Linko-]

If FD was the only stage people could play on, your argument might be valid. What a lot of people don't realize is that stages are banned for a reason. In Melee for instance, certain stages give characters a major advantage. And I'm talking like game breakingadvantage. Like Yoshi's pipes stages. A fox can simply shine most characters off the stage. Or Yoshi's stage with the cloud in the lower right corner. People can just camp and stall there, wait for their opponent to come after them, and then just make the cloud disappear so their opponent just falls to their death.

In Brawl, it's the same thing but worse. On more than half the stages, Dedede can simply chainthrow the character right off the stage, or chain throw him into a wall, and it's impossible for the other guy to get out of it. That's broken, and that's why stages are banned.

As for items? Well, melee and brawl aren't baseball. Yeah, baseball players are at the mercy to some minor random-happenings, but hey, Sakurai gave us the option to turn those random happenings in brawl and melee off.

Tell me: How do you turn tripping off?

 

[Vijin]

P.D. : Don't you notice that most people that are against items seems arrogant and cocky when posting. The think they are great. Elitists they call them. They come here flaming and talking about trolls, and sh...t. Bunch of idiots.

Not cocky or arrogant. You play the way you want to play, and that's fine. But when you step into a tournament where you pay money to enter and hope to get to 2nd or 1st place to win the prize pot money that could be over 300 bucks, you will see exactly why items are off. Yeah, you say items require skill, and you gotta adapt, blah blah blah. If you played in a tournament under those circumstances though, I'm pretty sure your views on items would be swayed. You have people responding to you the way they do because you talk like you think you know what you're talking about. But there's a difference between thinking you know, and actually knowing.

 

[Vijin]

Tell me: How do you turn tripping off?

Tie your shoe lace.

 

[Firebert]

Tie your shoe lace.

Or make sure your shoes have grip.

 

[Thino]

Well. I respect you opinion. I just hope we can see some "All items, all stages" tournament. It should be pretty interesting. Then, having that champion play against the No Items Tournament champion. They would play with items first, then with no items.

yea but it would be a tournament with no money at stake obviously

of course items take skill to use , to avoid etc...
the problem is their randomness , not the fact that a player with a beam sword got an advantage on a player w/o it

 

[Adi]

You live in NY eh? Care for a wifi match?

 

[DanteSmash7]

Just to say, I appreciate your bravery.

Thanks, but like I said Items aren't for the faint of heart. It def takes a lot of training to adapt to many worst case scenarios. Of course what I call now the "Bomb Trauma". There is always that random factors in items if not altered.

That is why, its balanced. No user. Knows what is gonna spawn.

 

[Thino]

That is why, its balanced. No user. Knows what is gonna spawn.

the problem isnt "what" the problem is "where"
it would be balanced if the items appeared at equal distance from all players

 

[DanteSmash7]

I totally agree with DanteSmash, he is no idiot. He "understands". To adapt, overcome and win. That's the true spirit of smash. I am glad someone posted a link to the Casual Competitive League, which I will support. But I don't want to leave this thread without supporting DanteSmash and everyone who is with him. Some time ago, in a thread similar to this one , I posted this:

Ok, I will add up some thoughts about this matter.

First, why do Item lovers (like me) would like to have item Tournaments?

1. Items require skill to use properly.
2. Avoiding items requires skill.
3. Items add a whole new variety on the battlefield, thus a whole new variety of skill to survive.
4. For some players, Smash Bros is about fighting and survival, with or against anything happening. That is the spirit and fun.
5. The truth is that if in a certain situation, an item put a character in an advantage, in a long battle, skill and wit prevails. The best player will survive in the end. If someone loses his last stock by a random item, that does not change the fact the victory is about the whole battle, not just the last stock.
6. Banning item play takes a lot away from the game. Both in skill, "drama" and fun.
7. The truth is that item play requires all the skills you use on non item play and many many more.
8. The ultimate truth is that the best Smash player is the one who survives in the end against all odds in a stock 4 player FFA match, just like the game is designed to be played.
9. Sakurai designed the game so skill can be used against items ( air grab, power shielding, reflectors, air and ground dodge).


So then, why do some elitist just want to compete in no items battles?

1. Many of them are just sore losers, and everytime they lose with an item involved they will just cry like babies "is not fair!, is not fair". I've seen this many times and I hate it. It ALWAYS happen that arrogant sore losers does not want items involved (and they just happen to suck at using items so they are even more pisssed off because their skills are "limited").

2. Coming from other games like street fighter or tekken, they want to turn the smash competitive community just like those games. Taking away a lot of the greatness of Smash Bros.

3. They just think that a final stock lost in the last moment defines the best player.

4. They cry about items being unfair and just turn them off. While item player in time grow in skill enough to avoid and counter those items. There is a difference in courage within these two kind of players.


There are other things to be said. I do not have anything against 1 vs 1 , no items play. But what I want to do now is create a community of competitive item players (gladly, it already exists), having the fun of items, pokemons, assist trophies, orthodox stages and final smashes . I do think Items on high is too chaotic and random. Having them on medium is a better thing. Also, I suggest a 5 stock survival match with 4 player FFA, or team battles will do. Stages can be random but 3 matches should define the winner. Who is with me?

P.D. : Don't you notice that most people that are against items seems arrogant and cocky when posting. The think they are great. Elitists they call them. They come here flaming and talking about trolls, and sh...t. Bunch of idiots.

That says it all, Well said man. Eliminating the spirit of smash shouldn't be awarded. Let me say that your argument points to a lot.

-Thino

In regards to where the item spawn. Thats random as well. Could be on top of a player or from a far. But its def impressive when that player takes that heart. And still is done in.

 

[PredictablyStubborn]

I just played brawl today. I was playing against my friends 2 vs. 1 vs. 1 ( i was one of the "1s". casual play because new players were there.).

Items were on.

At first, I was irritated because I kept getting AT'd and Final Smashed. Then, I started winning when I took a different approach at the battle.

When items are on, the approach you take to win is "I need to win. I need to get the items." It's very different from the usual approach I take, which is to outsmart my opponents etc... since once you get an AT or a FS, your opponent loses a stock no matter how smart they deal with it. (even if they ARE smart enough to dodge a ******** person using an AT or FS, you're still smart enough to take full advantage of the ATs and Final Smashes).

Anyway, taking the "I need to get the key items" approach to win games is boring, and isn't as interesting as "I need to outsmart my opponents". It definitely doesn't take as much skill to charge at key items than it does to play the game without items. And when you win a match using all your potential, it's more satisfying imo.

 

[DanteSmash7]

Boring...not at all.

I just played brawl today. I was playing against my friends 2 vs. 1 vs. 1 ( i was one of the "1s". casual play because new players were there.).

Items were on.

At first, I was irritated because I kept getting AT'd and Final Smashed. Then, I started winning when I took a different approach at the battle.

When items are on, the approach you take to win is "I need to win. I need to get the items." It's very different from the usual approach I take, which is to outsmart my opponents etc... since once you get an AT or a FS, your opponent loses a stock no matter how smart they deal with it. (even if they ARE smart enough to dodge a ******** person using an AT or FS, you're still smart enough to take full advantage of the ATs and Final Smashes).

Anyway, taking the "I need to get the key items" approach to win games is boring, and isn't as interesting as "I need to outsmart my opponents". It definitely doesn't take as much skill to charge at key items than it does to play the game without items. And when you win a match using all your potential, it's more satisfying imo.

All your potential and surviving insane odds but that shouldn't always be the case. Because your able to adapt to the changing battlefield. Key items like smash ball, can be avoided and smacked out of the player. Esp if the player wants to make sure to eliminate your next stock and not your current stock with 250%.

In regard to boring, I think it is the random factor that makes things more tense. Its anything but boring.

 

[Icarus Descent]

the problem isnt "what" the problem is "where"
it would be balanced if the items appeared at equal distance from all players

But now bombs can't be in boxes,there are now "bomb boxes". And when the bomb item actually appears it's up to you to dodge it or catch it,take your pick. And why don't people just change the bomb item to off. Simple as that.

 

[DanteSmash7]

Item Users

But now bombs can't be in boxes,there are now "bomb boxes". And when the bomb item actually appears it's up to you to dodge it or catch it,take your pick. And why don't people just change the bomb item to off. Simple as that.

I hope you don't turn it off, cause that would be a coup out. If you play with items, play with all of them. Unless your doing a special brawl or something like that.

The best way to adapt, would be handling all the items but you could also try to add them in one by one. But you see if that happens and then it becomes a debate about.

Item A is too godlike but item B is well okay.

Hammers can be avoided and smash balls countered. But already you people considering these as god like items. No one doubts how strong these are but they can be stopped and avoided. Hence the balance.

 

[Icarus Descent]

I hope you don't turn it off, cause that would be a coup out. If you play with items, play with all of them. Unless your doing a special brawl or something like that.

The best way to adapt, would be handling all the items but you could also try to add them in one by one. But you see if that happens and then it becomes a debate about.

Item A is too godlike but item B is well okay.

Hammers can be avoided and smash balls countered. But already you people considering these as god like items. No one doubts how strong these are but they can be stopped and avoided. Hence the balance.

I keep them on, I'm just telling people who keep blaming everything on bombs apperaring in your face.

 

[Thino]

But now bombs can't be in boxes,there are now "bomb boxes". And when the bomb item actually appears it's up to you to dodge it or catch it,take your pick. And why don't people just change the bomb item to off. Simple as that.

im not talking about bombs im talking about items in general

In regards to where the item spawn. Thats random as well. Could be on top of a player or from a far. But its def impressive when that player takes that heart. And still is done in.

sorry but the "spirit of smash" is something very relative
its impressive , but since when is this game about being impressive
I know its random so I dont get your point.

 

[SenorPresidente]

If two players of close or equal skill are playing and one wins due to items spawning near him more often then the other player then the better player didn't win the one with more luck did.

 

[Jooce Bocks]

First, why do Item lovers (like me) would like to have item Tournaments?

1. Items require skill to use properly.

While this may be true for some items, even if we consider that both players are proficient with items, they offer an advantage to the player who obtains the item. Items are placed randomly and are often not placed in situations where it is equally possible for each player to obtain them.

2. Avoiding items requires skill.

Read above response. While avoiding items requires skill, top players are often relatively close in skill level. A lot of times items offer minimum risk for missing while deciding an entire stock if you fail to avoid it. The advantage here is still placed upon the player who was lucky enough to get the item (especially now that items can be caught while performing pretty much any move using the A button).

3. Items add a whole new variety on the battlefield, thus a whole new variety of skill to survive.

They add more variety, but this variety is not always balanced for both players. I feel this following comment applies to the above 2 points as well: It seems that points for items seem to assume that the player who wins must be completely dominant, rather than just good enough to win the match. Assuming that I should be able to win despite being randomly screwed out of a stock or two seems like an unfair assumption. The winner should only have to be better, not God-mode.

4. For some players, Smash Bros is about fighting and survival, with or against anything happening. That is the spirit and fun.

Not to be insulting in any way, but I believe this defines casual players. For many competitive players the spirit and fun comes from becoming a better player through fair, one-on-one competition. Winning a match in which a random factor defeats my opponent or gives me an unfair advantage is not going to be a rewarding victory.

5. The truth is that if in a certain situation, an item put a character in an advantage, in a long battle, skill and wit prevails. The best player will survive in the end. If someone loses his last stock by a random item, that does not change the fact the victory is about the whole battle, not just the last stock.

This point seems to defeat itself. You are right, victory is about the whole battle. This means that for each player every stock counts. If we are relatively close in skill level but I am always able to maintain my last stock only, then you will get the match if one of those stock are randomly taken from me while I still get the same victory (except I have 2 stock left) if you are randomly taken out by the same coincidence. The better player is potentially disadvantaged with no benefit.

6. Banning item play takes a lot away from the game. Both in skill, "drama" and fun.

All it takes away from the game is the random factor (and, of course, the items). Fun may be taken out in the case of casual players, but many competitive players want to win with skill, not coincidence.

7. The truth is that item play requires all the skills you use on non item play and many many more.

I don't think anyone tried stating that no skill is required for item play, it's just that it adds too much randomness for competitive play. I don't feel much more can be added to this, since the "many many more" seem to be limited to the two skills listed in quotes 1 and 2, using and avoiding items.

8. The ultimate truth is that the best Smash player is the one who survives in the end against all odds in a stock 4 player FFA match, just like the game is designed to be played.

That's not always a fair implementation. It's not possible, even for the best of the best, to always win "against all odds." When you are slightly better than another player it is not fair to expect you to win if you get randomly gimped by more items than your slight skill advantage allows. As stated earlier, the better player is not expected to be God-mode, just to have a little more skill than the competition. Also, "the game is designed to be played" as a Party Game, not a competitive fighter, but Sakurai left us the options to make it one.

9. Sakurai designed the game so skill can be used against items ( air grab, power shielding, reflectors, air and ground dodge).

He also designed the game so that skill with a character can be utilized against other characters: Why should the more random choice be used for tournaments?

So then, why do some elitist just want to compete in no items battles?

1. Many of them are just sore losers, and everytime they lose with an item involved they will just cry like babies "is not fair!, is not fair". I've seen this many times and I hate it. It ALWAYS happen that arrogant sore losers does not want items involved (and they just happen to suck at using items so they are even more pisssed off because their skills are "limited").

I actually do not want any hostile dispute, so I am going to leave this one alone. I am just going to state that my experiences are almost absolutely opposite of this.

2. Coming from other games like street fighter or tekken, they want to turn the smash competitive community just like those games. Taking away a lot of the greatness of Smash Bros.

Smash Bros., unlike the other examples, was designed to be a party game (I believe Sakurai himself stated this at some point). Party games are meant to be more chaotic and random so that every player can have fun with a chance to win that equals even the slightly better players. Competitive gamers, however, have this fun by putting their skills to the test in a fair one-on-one competition. If Street Fighter or Tekken had random items and explosions that randomly appeared in a match while the stage fell apart then they would never likely have gotten as competitive as they did since competitive players would have shied away from them for a fighter without these.

Also, a lot of us don't see the "greatness of Smash Bros." to have anything to do with items. The greatness comes from the unique fighting system that offers such a high degree of techniques and maneuverability.

3. They just think that a final stock lost in the last moment defines the best player.

As you stated earlier, it is the fight as a whole that matters. Each player must be able to fairly utilize what is given to them. It doesn't have to be the final stock to determine the match. If I lose my first stock because of a random occurrence, then how is it fair to assume that I should win with three stock against four? It's not fair to expect one player to dominate the other while expecting the other to only be able to put up a relatively close fight.

4. They cry about items being unfair and just turn them off. While item player in time grow in skill enough to avoid and counter those items. There is a difference in courage within these two kind of players.

I believe items were given a shot in the tournament scene before. Time showed that they were in fact unfair so they were removed. Competitive players don't necessarily make the rules, they follow them. I am quite sure that in the period of time they were allowed in tournaments that many competitive players used them. Tournament holders realized the faults in using items and removed them, so competitive players followed suit and disabled them.

I wouldn't say there is a difference in courage within these kinds of players. Even if item users do grow in skill then they likely develop more in how to use and counter items while players without them develop more how to use and counter characters. Everyone has a fair chance in picking characters, but not everyone has a fair chance (mostly) when it comes to picking up items.

There are other things to be said. I do not have anything against 1 vs 1 , no items play. But what I want to do now is create a community of competitive item players (gladly, it already exists), having the fun of items, pokemons, assist trophies, orthodox stages and final smashes . I do think Items on high is too chaotic and random. Having them on medium is a better thing. Also, I suggest a 5 stock survival match with 4 player FFA, or team battles will do. Stages can be random but 3 matches should define the winner. Who is with me?

I have a bit of experience with 4 player FFA matches with all items and stages on and all I have to say is that I cannot possibly see these determining skill in any way. The only reason I have a lot of experience with this is because I know more people who play Smash as it was made than as more competitive players make it, a Party Game. Unless you have a really, really, really, really large difference in skill compared to the competition then the winner just seems it will be decided fairly randomly.

P.D. : Don't you notice that most people that are against items seems arrogant and cocky when posting. The think they are great. Elitists they call them. They come here flaming and talking about trolls, and sh...t. Bunch of idiots.

I sure hope I'm not one of these people seeming arrogant or cocky. I just try to make counter-arguments. If I do seem cocky in any way then give me a warning and explain how so I can prevent myself from doing so.

EDIT: Wow, I need to pay more attention to how long these posts are. Talk about a text wall from hell.

 

[Red Exodus]

I play with items but when measuring skill I prefer not to. It's like when I was doing 100 man brawl. There I was happily spamming up tilt and as soon as I do it another time a bomb spawns on me near killing me.

I'd rather earn my wins by doing the damage to my opponent, not having the damage done by uncontrollable random events.

 

[greenblob]

You could apply the same ideas to random lag. "It takes skill to adjust to lag. The randomness of it keeps you on your toes. If you can't adapt, you must not be very good."

 

[DanteSmash7]

im not talking about bombs im talking about items in general

sorry but the "spirit of smash" is something very relative
its impressive , but since when is this game about being impressive
I know its random so I dont get your point.

Oh that was in regards to why the creator made the game with items. But I suppose it could apply to none item users. At the expense of losing the original build of the game. That is what meant by the spirit of smash and the other poster as well.

 

[shadydentist]

Actually, at this point, there is pretty much no chance that items will appear in any tournaments of note. All the arguments have been heard, and it appears that no items has won out.

So what options are left for those who want items? Well, the obvious answer is to create your own tournaments. If you think there are enough people who are willing to attend items tournaments, prove it! Go and host a 100+ person items on tournament, and people will start taking you seriously. Don't let all these naysayers bring you down.

 

[Thino]

what do you mean by original build of the game? is there a build of the game where items can't be turned off? "spirit of smash" is something relative

 

[greenblob]

I hereby accuse your playing style of going against the "Spirit of Smash."

What say you?

 

[Justice7541]

Can we please stop feeding the troll now? He's established that he knows nothing about fighting games or competition in general.

Also, someone get out teh scrubhammah, please.

 

[DanteSmash7]

what do you mean by original build of the game? is there a build of the game where items can't be turned off? "spirit of smash" is something relative

What are you saying that the game forces you to turn on items? 0_o

 

[Thino]

What are you saying that the game forces you to turn on items? 0_o

of course not.
but it doesnt force you to turn them off neither
what im trying to say is that the status of items has nothing to do with orignal build of the game , its just an option in the game not a supposed original way to play the game

 

[DanteSmash7]

Tsk tsk

Can we please stop feeding the troll now? He's established that he knows nothing about fighting games or competition in general.

Also, someone get out teh scrubhammah, please.

Says mr 51 post. Yes well established brawler ineed. Please stop your negative attacks and contribute. If... you know what that means. "Errrh Troll 13 page long thread, errr troll"

-Thino

Oh I understood what you meant. But it is the original way to play the game otherwise the creator would have you turn on the items not turn them off. Get what I mean? I dont mean to offend you.

 

[pootTheBox]

Does staying in the "spirit of the game" include playing time matches?