User talk:Mr. Anon/Melee Vs Brawl

If you disagree with the content of the essay, or have found errors or holes, bring it up here. Mr. Anon teh awsome 18:45, July 25, 2010 (UTC)

Minor quibble, but L-cancelling is not a physics exploit like wavedashing is, although it is presented as such. It should be slightly reworded. Toomai Glittershine 20:08, July 25, 2010 (UTC)

If it isn't a physics exploit, is it a glitch? Sir Anon the great 20:54, July 25, 2010 (UTC)

L Caneling is a technique. Read the articles Anon.--MegaTron1XD 20:55, July 25, 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it's a technique. That doesn't mean it can't be a glitch or a physics exploit. Wavedashing was a "technique". Was L canceling intentionally put into the games, or is it a glitch? That's what I'm asking. Sir Anon the great 20:59, July 25, 2010 (UTC)

Intentionally. Doctor Pain 99 (CTE) 21:00, July 25, 2010 (UTC)

OK then, I'll change it. Mr. Anon teh awsome 21:08, July 25, 2010 (UTC)

So, is there any other error you guys see? Sir Anon the great 17:36, August 18, 2010 (UTC)

There are two particular errors I see. You should never used the words "cheap" and "broken" in a serious essay about competitive gaming unless you're using them to make a point. Your sentence "Yes, Brawl does have Meta Knight and Snake, 2 of the most broken characters in probably the history of SSB." is faulty for describing Meta Knight and Snake as "broken". The terms "cheap" and "broken" are subjective and should never be used in an objective standpoint. The second fault is how you mention Fox lost his Shine spike in Brawl, which he did not. He lost his Shine combos. Omega Tyrant 18:08, August 18, 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about that. It's fixed now. Anon 18:18, August 18, 2010 (UTC)

I agree that brawl is quite a bit more balanced, and getting rid of hitstun and physics exploits and such does balance it, but I kinda think having special techniques that are sorta hard to execute like wavedashing do add to the competitiveness. It draws a line between competitive and casual players, and don't really agree that more balanced=more competitive. If so, the tournies would make everyone play as one character to balance out the match and make it based on skill. I get what your trying to say though. Also... "In football, weather is unpredictable, much like tripping in Brawl, and it can turn the tide of a match. But does that make football less competitive? Of course not." I don't really agree. It seems a lot of this essay said "Brawl is more balanced and thus more based skill and more competitive," and while I disagree with that, I think basing it on luck is a lot less competitive than basing it on wavedashing and other physics exploits.Dhawk (talk) 21:07, 8 December 2010 (EST)

Would fall under forum rules. Too old, shouldn't respond.--MegaTron1XD 22:33, 8 December 2010 (EST)

Not necessarily, this is a user subpage, that Anon been opened up to discussion about. Dhawk is merely commenting on what is presented on the subpage, not responding to any particular old comment. As such, just like any mainspace article, the content of an active user's subpage is always opened for discussion, regardless of how old it is. Omega Tyrant 22:46, 8 December 2010 (EST)

Edit Conflict

No, it's fine. The purpose of this talk page is to express any disagreement with my essay. Anyways, in response to Dhawk's points, my point was to counter the claim that wavedashing makes a game more competitive. Just because the game has a technique that is hard to execute doesn't mean that it is more based on skill. For one, there's only 2 characters that greatly benefit from Wavedashing: Marth and Luigi. Both had pretty much no changes in tier position between Melee and Brawl. You also say that it "draws a line between competitive and casual players". But being able to execute a technique that is unintended and not very often used does not make one competetive. There are many casual players who know how to wavedash and competitive players who don't, so it doesn't really draw a line. You also say that a balanced cast is not what makes a game competitive. You're right in that it's not the sole factor, but it is a contributing one. Obviously not everyone has to play as one character, as that would reduce the original fun, but a balanced cast allows for a tournament with a more diverse character set. In Melee, the range of characters that are "tourny acceptable" is much smaller than the proportial one in Brawl.

As for tripping, I may have worded my point wrong. I didn't mean that tripping made the game more competetive. Instead, I merely refuted the argument that it makes Brawl a "party game". Tripping simply adds another variable to the match, much like stale move negation, yet it happens to be based on randomness. When it comes to reduced hitstun, my point was that it allows for more "improvised" strategies, testing the players live skill, whereas super high hitstun (such as the one in SSB64), more or less makes the match based off of whoever hits the other player first. Mr. Anon (talk) 22:56, 8 December 2010 (EST)

Not that I intend to argue, but one of your presented facts is false, Luigi and Marth are not the only characters who saw significant benefit to their metagame from wavedashing. Fox's signature "Waveshines" were possible because of wavedashing. The Ice Climbers and Mewtwo (who both had the second and third longest wavedashes respectively) also had a significant use for the wavedash. Like Luigi, both of these characters could traverse ground fastest through the use of their wavedash. Omega Tyrant 00:16, 9 December 2010 (EST)

Forgot about those, but my point still lies, none of those characters have significantly been weakened by the loss of wavedashing. Fox may have possibly been, but he was nerfed in many other areas too, so wavedashing isn't the only reason for his drop. Mr. Anon (talk) 00:30, 9 December 2010 (EST)

...Touche. Okay I have no argument against all that....I feel like I should fill up more space with this after all that...Dhawk (talk) 11:33, 12 December 2010 (EST)

Mind if I go through and fix some minor errors regarding grammar and spelling?

It'll save you from ad-hominem Grammar Nazis. Dr. 8-Bit (talk) 01:16, 23 May 2011 (EDT)

My 2 cents

Here are my thoughts on this topic.

Let's go straight to the definition of "competitive." What you defined for the term is very good: the innate property for better players to win consistently, but how you examined the games with respect to this term is a little flawed. Let's analyze it again.

In smash skill is divided into 3 main components:

The push and the pull:

This is everything you do to try and take control of the match. In layman's terms: mindgames. Everything you do to manipulate your opponent goes here.

The Punishment:

Everything you do to capitalize on your reads goes here. This where stuff like tech skill and combos go.

The Edge:

This is what makes smash the oddball compared to other fighting games. This is where you lump in recovery and edgeguarding. In general being on stage is supposed to be a better position than being offstage. In terms off edgeguarding though, off stage edgeguarding is more rewarding than on-stage edgeguarding.

To be good at smash you need to divide your skill amongst these 3 components. I understand some characters do better at certain aspects than others but in general, a player who excels in all 3 of these areas is considered a pro. All fighting games have a mix between these aspects(minus the edge). Competitive fighting games are supposed to have a good balance between them. I claim melee is more balanced in these aspects than brawl. Now you stated the removal of hitstun as well as wavedashing and L canceling does nothing to reduce the competitiveness of the game. That isn't true. The changes in physics and loss of advanced techniques take away alot of depth from the latter 2 areas of smash, Punishment and the Edge. It even ebbs away from the push and pull too in that it removes options your opponent must guess and makes spacing alot less complicated. Your stereotype of melee is also very very wrong. Comboing is difficult in melee believe it or not. Combos are a result of you winning a complicated version of rock, paper, scissors with your opponent. Once they make a mistake during the neutral game, you can punish them with a series of weak moves that lead to stronger ones. Furthermore, in melee the game of rock paper scissors isn't over after you land the first few hits. You still have to chase their DI and if they hit the ground, you have to continue to read where they will tech.

Now in Brawl, the push and the pull has become the central aspect of the game whereas the punishment and edge game have been greatly simplified. Combos are extant in Brawl so you can only give your opponents a few hits before the game goes back to neutral. As for edgeguarding, in Brawl if you get someone offstage, it is very likely they will come back as oppose to in melee where there was a good chance once you were offstage, you couldn't come back. Exceptions to all of this is Meta Knight, who actually has the advantage offstage (and godlike at edgeguarding) and the Ice Climbers who can deliver extreme punishment with 1 grab. --Brian^{Don't try me!} 18:24, 27 March 2013 (EDT)