What makes a casual game competitively popular? Why did Smash blow up?

2

Comments

  • TebboTebbo Play. Joined: Posts: 5,688
    isnt darksiders a single player action adventure game?

    lol what the fuck. someone help me out here. metal gear solid is 'deep' too but not in a way that you can really compare to a fighting game...
    Play more.
  • zeechzeech Dismember Joined: Posts: 578
    Maybe he meant Darkstalkers?


    As for smash, I've always found it interesting - at our FG events, smash is pretty big and occupies pretty much 1/3 - half of the turnout. But they are such a seperate group that never mingles with the others. Whereas people who play SF/KOF/etc will generally hang out and even dabble in each others' games, it always seems like the smash crowd is rather hostile despite turning up to the same event.
  • ric0ric0 Pretty cool Guy Joined: Posts: 466
    SSBM is definitely not basic and not easy to play, whether it was intended to be that way or not.

    I think what really makes a competitive fighting game is the hype it generates.
    "I always get rico and honzo confused because they're both like, little gingers... with a beret." -anon
  • SynikaLSynikaL Melee Prophet Joined: Posts: 1,697
    The word does have a meaning - but its subtle and depends on context. Since it varies from conversation to conversation, simple minded people prefer to think it's meaningless ;)

    In this context, the difference between casual and competitive/hardcore is the intentions of the developer. A "competitive" game would be making at least a token effort to support the needs of a competitive community, either by patching balance issues, or including tournament/competition friendly features, etc. Or even just the stated vision of the developer. If they say, "oh, this is just a fun game for kids, our primary intention is not competitive play," then there you go.

    So one could say that recent fighting games have been "casual-ized" by tournament unfriendly features such as DLC/unlockable characters, gems and so forth.


    As an example, in a different context I describe myself as "casual" FG player. This is because I don't practice very much and don't care about winning. However, since I attend offline tournament events ("for fun") and mash buttons and beat other low-skilled players, this makes me considerably more "hardcore" when compared to the majority of the population. So yeah, "casual" means different things at different times, and you have to use your brain to work out what people are trying to say.


    You respond to me with an insult? An ironic one at that.

    You're a fucking idiot. You acknowledge the fluidity of language in your thesis and on that merit, attempt to construct an argument that calcifies its potential in an intelligent discussion. Tell me; should I build my igloo in the Great Basin or the Sahara?

    Obviously, the word "casual" has meaning(s); my point was to dismiss the FGC's usage of it completely, because when trying to analyze the current phenomena regarding the industry's market demographics, and more specifically, fighting game demographics; the term is fucking worthless for the very reason your thesis states. The word is too relative to be used in any intelligent discussion. People can be "casual" about anything and anything can be "casual". In the context of an intelligent discussion, it is effectively meaningless. I could be "casually hardcore" if I wanted. People in the FGC lean towards using it dismissively, because from their standpoint, "casual" is antithetical to competitive and is worthy of derision.

    The "Competitiveness" of a thing is something that can, more or less, be actually quantified: you simply measure the amount of humans competing in its regard. That was my point. Only simple-minded ingrates would care to call something strictly "casual" when there are known humans that exist, playing said-game competitively. People can call the Smash series "casual" all they want - it doesn't change the fact that people pack convention halls and hotels to play these games competitively, in effect, making them competitive games.

    Developer intentions are meaningless as are the mechanics a game houses. Most games - not just videogames - are not developed with strict intentions to comply with established competitive values. The most popular games, especially. The sport of football isn't any less competitive at the professional level due to the fact that fat Americans across the country toss the pigskin around casually on Saturday afternoons. Competitiveness is a socio-psychological concept, not a strict, mathematically determined one.


    It's a war with perception. I often find SRK posters lose those battles.
    "Grandad, this food is destructive!"
    "Boy, what is wrong with you? This food is your culture."
    "Then the culture's destructive."

    -The Boondocks
  • Kinniku BusterKinniku Buster KIMO! KIMO! KIMO! Joined: Posts: 8,925
    SSBM is definitely not basic and not easy to play, whether it was intended to be that way or not.

    I think what really makes a competitive fighting game is the hype it generates.
    That was great. :lol:
    Peace to the Mountain
    Amiibo Aficionado

    Negro Install

    The sky's fallin', baby, drop that ass 'fore it crash.

    Currently Playing - Splatoon 2 (Switch), Uncharted: The Nathan Drake Collection (PS4)
    Currently Reading - Rick and Morty (Onipress), Usagi Yojimbo (Dark Horse)
    Currently Watching (Animated) - Star vs. The Forces of Evil, We Bare Bears
    Currently Watching (Live Action) - GLOW


  • ric0ric0 Pretty cool Guy Joined: Posts: 466
    Glad you liked it, it's one of my favorites.
    "I always get rico and honzo confused because they're both like, little gingers... with a beret." -anon
  • IglooBobIglooBob Bob the builder Joined: Posts: 4,039
    any game that people want to play competitively can be a competitive game. yeah you can play Mario Party competitively, but it's pretty luck-based and you'll have a hard time growing a community of people that wants to play the game competitively or organize any kind of tournament scene.

    whether it's a FG is a silly side argument and it doesn't matter at all. It's closer to FGs than any other genre. but who cares? SFxT can more properly be called a FG and everyone hates it. how you classify it has nothing to do with how competitive it is or how fun it is.
  • zeechzeech Dismember Joined: Posts: 578
    The "Competitiveness" of a thing is something that can, more or less, be actually quantified: you simply measure the amount of humans competing in its regard. That was my point. Only simple-minded ingrates would care to call something strictly "casual" when there are known humans that exist, playing said-game competitively. People can call the Smash series "casual" all they want - it doesn't change the fact that people pack convention halls and hotels to play these games competitively, in effect, making them competitive games.

    You're still missing the point. You're probably angry because "casual" is used in a dismissive way most of the time, and you would prefer it not to be.

    But that's a side issue - the word is still useful as an adjective to describe things. Smash is not the same as Street Fighter. Naruto is not the same as Guilty Gear, etc. There are differences in goals, target audience and design that are undeniably real. How to capture and describe those differences? If I say, "casual", most people will know what I mean. My thread requires it, because I'm trying to ask why/how a game not really intended for competitive play, ends up competitive anyways. "Casual" is a simple and clear way to sum up what I mean, that people here will instantly understand.

    If I wanted to lump Powerstone, Naruto, DBZ, Smash, etc into a single category, and differentiate them from SF, GG, BB, KOF etc, what would I use? Smash could be called a "party game", but that doesnt fit for the others. "Non-competitive game"? But smash is competitive, as you just described! Naruto/DBZ are "anime games", but BB and AH gets lumped in there too, and Smash doesnt. etc, etc, etc. "Casual" is a useful word here that people will get the gist of.

    Whether I'm insulting smash or not will be evident from the context I'm using it, and it's a seperate issue entirely. It can't be helped that people here associate the word with negative characteristics. That will happen regardless of what word is used. (like how the various words for disabled people or homosexual people have changed over the years to avoid negative connotations, but the connotations eventually follow.)

    So yeah, insults depend on context as well. You should be able to figure out that I'm not using casual in a pejorative sense here.
  • SynikaLSynikaL Melee Prophet Joined: Posts: 1,697
    You're still missing the point.

    You telling me I'm missing your point isn't convincing. This is my last response to you - I'm not going to repat myself.

    But that's a side issue - the word is still useful as an adjective to describe things.

    Of course it is: but it's worthless for the purpose of our discussion and I explained why.

    Smash is not the same as Street Fighter. Naruto is not the same as Guilty Gear, etc. There are differences in goals, target audience and design that are undeniably real. How to capture and describe those differences? If I say, "casual", most people will know what I mean. My thread requires it, because I'm trying to ask why/how a game not really intended for competitive play, ends up competitive anyways. "Casual" is a simple and clear way to sum up what I mean, that people here will instantly understand.

    Whether I'm insulting smash or not will be evident from the context I'm using it, and it's a seperate issue entirely. It can't be helped that people here associate the word with negative characteristics. That will happen regardless of what word is used. (like how the various words for disabled people or homosexual people have changed over the years to avoid negative connotations, but the connotations eventually follow.)

    So yeah, insults depend on context as well. You should be able to figure out that I'm not using casual in a pejorative sense here.


    Talk about missing the point. DId you even read my response to you? I address the bolded portion, specifically.

    If your next post is responding to this post and not my last, I'm going to ignore you.

    *edit*

    I guess I addressed the "why" but not the "how". The processes don't need documentation to explain the "why", really. "How" a game becomes competitive is a function of the "why" - read: "X game became competitive via Y processes because people wanted to play X game with a competitive disposition." People play a game competitively because they want to for a variety of reasons. As much as you'd like it to be, the "why" is not purely a function of how the game is built.
    "Grandad, this food is destructive!"
    "Boy, what is wrong with you? This food is your culture."
    "Then the culture's destructive."

    -The Boondocks
  • KassandraNovaKassandraNova ☆Classy☆Kassy☆ Joined: Posts: 2,080
    Ugh. I didn't say it was basic on a competative level, I'm saying it's easier for people to get into and feel like they're raping.
    There are still some things in melee that are pretty easy to do. Like shieks cg on herself. Lulz
    Melee is a great game that takes a lot of time to get good at, but ugh I guess what I'm trying to say is that smash is a scrub magnet. Lol
    twitch.tv/KassandraNova
    @KassandraNova
    UMvC3: Zero/Vergil/Ammy
  • darktowndarktown Darktown2 Joined: Posts: 497
    I don't exactly agree with the smash not being easy to play. I played melee for a long time with my group of friends who grew up playing the same games as I. Once I discovered years after all of these more complicated advanced tactics i was able to pull them off consistently fairly quickly could do some combinations of them with characters i didn't really use within a hour or so. I'm not trying to bash the game either i enjoyed it when I played it and still have fun even if i play it now. However when i uncovered more games like 3s and kof i kind of felt overwhelmed with the motions and such in sequences during combos it felt a lot more difficult to do consistently. Even though the example with the fox setups was a good way to show how someone could possibly do so much in a little amount of time; when i played the other games it felt like those moments were happening all the time whenever i did a combo. Just my experience. Link 4 life...
    psn: darkTown2
    3s: ken, shotos, yang, dudley, urien
  • SynikaLSynikaL Melee Prophet Joined: Posts: 1,697
    A game is only as easy/hard to play as far as a player is willing to understand it. That bar is set by a player's competition. There's nothing intrinsically difficult about playing any fighting game. Fighting games are easy to play and understand relative to other genres - deplete your opponent's life bar by pressing buttons.

    In fact, most people tend to think they're good at whatever game they currently beat their friends at until they run into tournament competition - it's at that point, a fighting game tends to blossom in its complexity and execution requirements. Those players realize they had a limited understanding of the game - and most things in this universe are difficult to comprehend FULLY.
    "Grandad, this food is destructive!"
    "Boy, what is wrong with you? This food is your culture."
    "Then the culture's destructive."

    -The Boondocks
  • t1bzt1bz Joined: Posts: 196
    I would argue that Smash "blew up" because of the simple and incredibly intuitive controls. Instead of double tapping or pressing two buttons to dash, you just slam the control stick in whatever direction you want to go and your character starts running. There is an actual jump button instead of having to tap up every time. Likewise, grabs can be accomplished with the press of a single button as opposed to having to use 2 buttons or a direction in conjunction with a button. When you need to block, you just hold a trigger button, you don't have to worry about left/right or high/low. Perhaps most importantly there are no traditional FG inputs like qcf's. All moves are produced by simply pressing one of two buttons and holding a certain direction. All of this adds up to make the game 10x easier to pick up and understand on a basic level than traditional fighters.

    I know several people who play smash on a competent, if not quite tournament-quality, level. Yet none of these guys will play Mahvel with me. When they try to, they immediately get frustrated because they cannot do DP motions consistently, they get hit because they forgot to block low, etc. Another turn-off to these guys are the combos. As easy as Mahvel's basic combos are, to people who have never played a proper FG before they still look quite intimidating, and even ABCS -> BBCS -> super does take some small amount of play/lab time to get down if you have never played a FG and are still having trouble just doing a qcf consistently, as opposed to smash where combo'ing is much less important below tournament level (or simply non-existent in the case of Brawl). I really think how comfortable you can get with a game the first 2 or 3 times you play it makes a huge difference in whether or not you stick with it, and that smash excels in this category compared to traditional fighters.

    Last but not least, even though Melee is extremely technical at high levels, just like in other FGs there are certain characters who can get the same results as others with much less, if any, need for high execution and tech skill. Sheik and Jiggles being the two biggest offenders IMO, and I don't think it's a coincidence that one of my friends who can't short hop or wave dash plays those exact two chars. And then of course you have brawl where it's like "lol execution? what is that?"
  • EllipsenEllipsen SFV PC Joined: Posts: 2,036
    Easy to learn, hard to master.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  • IglooBobIglooBob Bob the builder Joined: Posts: 4,039
    it seems like something Sirlin would talk about. that FGs that strip down the execution barrier allow you to immediately get to the part of FGs that's actually fun, interacting with your opponent in interesting ways. SSB as a series seems to follow that philosophy.
  • KassandraNovaKassandraNova ☆Classy☆Kassy☆ Joined: Posts: 2,080
    I would argue that Smash "blew up" because of the simple and incredibly intuitive controls. Instead of double tapping or pressing two buttons to dash, you just slam the control stick in whatever direction you want to go and your character starts running. There is an actual jump button instead of having to tap up every time. Likewise, grabs can be accomplished with the press of a single button as opposed to having to use 2 buttons or a direction in conjunction with a button. When you need to block, you just hold a trigger button, you don't have to worry about left/right or high/low. Perhaps most importantly there are no traditional FG inputs like qcf's. All moves are produced by simply pressing one of two buttons and holding a certain direction. All of this adds up to make the game 10x easier to pick up and understand on a basic level than traditional fighters.

    I know several people who play smash on a competent, if not quite tournament-quality, level. Yet none of these guys will play Mahvel with me. When they try to, they immediately get frustrated because they cannot do DP motions consistently, they get hit because they forgot to block low, etc. Another turn-off to these guys are the combos. As easy as Mahvel's basic combos are, to people who have never played a proper FG before they still look quite intimidating, and even ABCS -> BBCS -> super does take some small amount of play/lab time to get down if you have never played a FG and are still having trouble just doing a qcf consistently, as opposed to smash where combo'ing is much less important below tournament level (or simply non-existent in the case of Brawl). I really think how comfortable you can get with a game the first 2 or 3 times you play it makes a huge difference in whether or not you stick with it, and that smash excels in this category compared to traditional fighters.

    Last but not least, even though Melee is extremely technical at high levels, just like in other FGs there are certain characters who can get the same results as others with much less, if any, need for high execution and tech skill. Sheik and Jiggles being the two biggest offenders IMO, and I don't think it's a coincidence that one of my friends who can't short hop or wave dash plays those exact two chars. And then of course you have brawl where it's like "lol execution? what is that?"

    This is more or less what I was trying to say. I love smash and marvel and dp motions are weird, but once you practice them they aren't that bad. :0

    Hm another reason why people may like smash more, is well think of it like this.
    How many reads do you need to beat someone in marvel? 3 or 4 at least, one hit should kill at least (I play zero so yeaaa). So if I only get 4 or 5 reads of my opponent, I win the match. Unless they drop a combo ect. But in smash since there's DI, how many reads do I need tO take a stock? Well I need a few reads for damage, lets say 4 reads, and then I need a read for the kill, now you've taken a stock (at 5 reads), but there are 4 stocks so now I have to do this 4 more times putting it at a total of 20 reads. That's 20 times I have to read my opponent, just to win a match. Jesus Christ. That's annoying as hell. Haha I miss melee xD
    Brawl is bad because it takes too fuckig long. There's always tournaments going until literally 1 or 2 am because they have too many stocks or a high time limit or whatever but it's bad. Lmao
    This is just a guess. Hahah
    Thanks thread now i wanna play melee. That ancient ass dinosaur game. <3 I fucking love it.
    twitch.tv/KassandraNova
    @KassandraNova
    UMvC3: Zero/Vergil/Ammy
  • CryohCryoh Rock Shock Thunderous Beat Joined: Posts: 9,639
    I guess that games like Melee became really popular in terms of a large tourney scene because, mostly, it's really fun to play on a casual level. I mean, look at all of the cool fluff that the game had that wasn't exactly made for tourney play, but it taught you how to control your character and use all of their tools in a non-threatening setting. It also didn't hurt that it had the 1-2 punch of recognizable characters and four player capabilities.

    Fuck, I really loved Melee back in the day.
  • TebboTebbo Play. Joined: Posts: 5,688
    it seems like something Sirlin would talk about. that FGs that strip down the execution barrier allow you to immediately get to the part of FGs that's actually fun, interacting with your opponent in interesting ways. SSB as a series seems to follow that philosophy.

    yeah but that is just one perspective. that's how he thinks of things, and what he likes.
    tons of players, myself included like technical stuff and going through that process of learning and expanding with the limitation of execution.

    i think ssb is a bad example anyway. imho the main contributor to its success was using a variety of nintendo characters. of course everyone who grew up during that time was going to want it. you get to beat on mario as link. it sells itself.

    from that point its just a numbers game. if you sell several million copies of the game, you're going to get some people who REALLY like it and want to seriously dig into it and push the game as far as possible. so it becomes competitive because of that.
    Play more.
  • ph00tbagph00tbag Joined: Posts: 96
    Maybe he meant Darkstalkers?
    lol, yeah, this.
  • SynikaLSynikaL Melee Prophet Joined: Posts: 1,697
    yeah but that is just one perspective. that's how he thinks of things, and what he likes.
    tons of players, myself included like technical stuff and going through that process of learning and expanding with the limitation of execution.

    i think ssb is a bad example anyway. imho the main contributor to its success was using a variety of nintendo characters. of course everyone who grew up during that time was going to want it. you get to beat on mario as link. it sells itself.

    from that point its just a numbers game. if you sell several million copies of the game, you're going to get some people who REALLY like it and want to seriously dig into it and push the game as far as possible. so it becomes competitive because of that.


    Melee is an excellent example. To those that have set their minds to the discussion - the paragon. Its character roster is a great contributor to its general popularity, sure. Your "numbers game" theory is also sensible. But the design philosophy of the game's gameplay mechanics, without a doubt, is a great contributor to the game's competitive popularity as well.

    I was going to FG tournaments a good year before I started playing Smash. Without a doubt, the scrub/competitive player ratio was, consistently, the highest for any fighting game I'd ever seen at the height of that game's popularity. At almost every tournament, it felt like % 25- 30 were people that had never been to a Smash tournament. EVERYONE thought they were good at Melee, due to they type of game it was and people's perception of the game.

    The game bred a very unique subculture. I don't think people outside the community realize how much of a phenom this game truly was. Melee was life. EVERYONE I knew in 04'-07' played Melee in some capacity. My mother played Melee. A girl I dated in my freshman year of college played Melee - so did her friends. My friends and their girlfriends (and their friends). If you were part of the FGC at the time, It was only a matter of a few degrees of separation until you came across someone that played the game in tournaments, or at all. Because of how fun the game was to play outside a competitive setting you could have fun playing the game with anyone. No matter how good you were at it. That's something special, and its in large part due to the gameplay design.

    It's a damn shame that more FG developers aren't looking at this game's mechanics and design philosophies more closely because they're so afraid of the traditional community's negative perception of it. The game has some excellent mechanics that could easily expand the genre.
    "Grandad, this food is destructive!"
    "Boy, what is wrong with you? This food is your culture."
    "Then the culture's destructive."

    -The Boondocks
  • TebboTebbo Play. Joined: Posts: 5,688
    melee is a great game.
    not sure how that changes anything that i said. the series is successful because of the characters.
    the gameplay comes after that. brand awareness is pretty much the most important thing when it comes to selling a product.

    you can't compare that to other stuff that does not have that kind of awareness. the gameplay is sick, I played melee all throughout college and still love the game. it is an awesome game all around. but smash became big because it let kids play as their favorite character and beat up their friends. not because the gameplay was super slick and refined (although it pretty much is especially in melee).
    Play more.
  • SynikaLSynikaL Melee Prophet Joined: Posts: 1,697
    melee is a great game.
    not sure how that changes anything that i said. the series is successful because of the characters.
    the gameplay comes after that. brand awareness is pretty much the most important thing when it comes to selling a product.

    you can't compare that to other stuff that does not have that kind of awareness. the gameplay is sick, I played melee all throughout college and still love the game. it is an awesome game all around. but smash became big because it let kids play as their favorite character and beat up their friends. not because the gameplay was super slick and refined (although it pretty much is especially in melee).


    To suggest that the Nintendo branding is the only reason the game was popular is simple-minded and plain wrong.
    "Grandad, this food is destructive!"
    "Boy, what is wrong with you? This food is your culture."
    "Then the culture's destructive."

    -The Boondocks
  • GAPGAP Joined: Posts: 59
    I may just interrupting but the general gist I got form this thread is that everyone loves Smash because you don't have to QCF motions to execute a move. I had been playing Smash (although not recently) for a little while and I'll find it to be a lot easier to play than SF. Even though SF has much more simple controls than most fighters I know of, I don't have to worry as much about inputs since they are almost universal. You know I am not sure if the time had something to do with to do people flocking to smash but from what I researched on the internet and from Shoryuken, some of the main reasons why SFIII series failed on the market is because most of the causals couldn't recognize anyone from the games save for Ryu and Ken.

    I have an easier time understanding the movesets with the help from this site but Smash is one of those games where you can pick up and play the game without having to worry about what moves do for each character.
  • ric0ric0 Pretty cool Guy Joined: Posts: 466
    You can pick up and play pretty well against someone else who is doing the same thing, or maybe someone who's played before but doesn't play often. Put them up against someone who has put time and research into the game and the person picking up and playing will want to quit cause they don't know what the fuck is going on. I feel this holds true to most games in general.
    "I always get rico and honzo confused because they're both like, little gingers... with a beret." -anon
  • zeechzeech Dismember Joined: Posts: 578
    I wonder how much of an effect nostalgia has. We know that SF4 was pretty big (in contrast to SF3) because of its SF2 characters evoking nostalgia from a generation of arcade players. Smash obviously runs the entire gamut of Nintendo's history so it probably has a pretty strong effect here too.
  • GAPGAP Joined: Posts: 59
    I wonder how much of an effect nostalgia has. We know that SF4 was pretty big (in contrast to SF3) because of its SF2 characters evoking nostalgia from a generation of arcade players. Smash obviously runs the entire gamut of Nintendo's history so it probably has a pretty strong effect here too.


    To be fair, characters such as Ryu, Ken, Chun Li, Bison, Dhalsim, Zangief and the SF2 cast are pretty well known by most of the world even those who don't normally play fighting games. I look in ads of SFII and I mostly see Ryu or Chun Li fighting Sagat or E. Honda. Alpha barely breached new players and SFIII series was too different for the mainstreams liking. Ryu himself is basically Capcom's Mario for fighters, everyone knows who he is and how his fireball sounds, "Hadouken!!!" Nintendo pretty much has the advantage of brand recognirion as almost everyone know who Pikachu, Link or Mario is.
  • SynikaLSynikaL Melee Prophet Joined: Posts: 1,697
    Nostalgia can only take anything so far. Especially among a competitive crowd.

    A perfect example is myself. I started playing Melee with Mario and I loved the character so much, I was determined to make him work at a competitive level when I was introduced to the scene. I was easily one of the best, if not, THE best, Mario at the time - but I couldn't win with him. I grinded with him for a good six months at least. I could do a lot of innovative and cool things with the him and made people drop their jaws with my tech skill and understanding of the character - but I couldn't win with him.

    I made an ironic, Ken inspired decision (TG6 vids vs. Chillen) to start messing around with Marth. This was ironic because at the time, Marth was easily my most hated character. I thought he was cheap, and looked way too effeminate for my tastes. But I figured if I learned to play him, I'd do better fighting against him.

    Marth quickly became one of my favorite FG characters of all time:

    http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=419105

    Even though I don't play Melee at all anymore, just the idea of gracefully swinging Marth's sword around with dedicated spacing brings a certain degree of mirth. There's nothing like it in any other FG. I fell in love with this character purely due to his gameplay. My ever increasing love for how Marth played increased my passion for the game, which helped me develop the drive to win. I never even heard of Fire Emblem prior to Melee and have had no interest in touching the series till' this day. 95% of my love for Marth comes from how he plays in the context of SSBM.

    So yeah, nostalgia definitely had a hand in recruiting a lot of Melee's competitive army but the gameplay made us dedicated soldiers.
    "Grandad, this food is destructive!"
    "Boy, what is wrong with you? This food is your culture."
    "Then the culture's destructive."

    -The Boondocks
  • DarknidDarknid The Chan Man Joined: Posts: 532
    Smash took off because it took Nintendo's legendary game icons and put them together in a game that combined the time-tested elements of Nintendo's great platformers with the style of a beat-em-up fighter, and Melee just happened to be an incredibly deep competitive game. It attracts casual and competitive players alike.

    I get the distinct impression that people who insult Smash Bros either haven't seen a competitive match or have seen one and the sight of all the tech at work made their balls shrink and they're living in denial ever since.
    Ready as hell.

    A tier list.
  • ViolentDjangoViolentDjango KEEP CALM and EWGF Joined: Posts: 1,170
    Smash took off because it took Nintendo's legendary game icons and put them together in a game that combined the time-tested elements of Nintendo's great platformers with the style of a beat-em-up fighter, and Melee just happened to be an incredibly deep competitive game. It attracts casual and competitive players alike.

    I get the distinct impression that people who insult Smash Bros either haven't seen a competitive match or have seen one and the sight of all the tech at work made their balls shrink and they're living in denial ever since.

    I don't really insult, Smash Brothers, but after quitting it and switching to proper fighting games I no longer have respect for it. They all have their valuable points in competitive depth, but honestly, the game as a whole just doesn't do it for me after I learned to play real fighting games.

    Maybe if SSB4 is designed from the ground up with competitive play in mind -- so that the tier lists and the stages get better designs, but if it continues in the vein of Brawl then the series is never going to be any more respected.

    And frankly, after having watched TONS of competitive matches back when I wanted to try and break into playing hte game competitive -- there's nothing about them that I actually like. Especially when Brawl's MLG scene basically turned into a joke of being able to predict who'd win based on the characters and the stage.

    Like it or not, MLG was where the money was for the game -- and as a result, that's what people will reference for competitive play for the game.
    SFxTK: Lars/Kazuya, Bryan/Marduk | P4U: Undecided | BBCS: Valkenhayn
    Fundamentals: [OO~~~] | Theory: [OOOO~] | Execution: [OO~~~] | Beast Mode: [OO~~~]
    Check out my Nerd Dating/Life Advice Blog: www.AskGeekLink.com
  • SynikaLSynikaL Melee Prophet Joined: Posts: 1,697
    Like it or not, MLG was where the money was for the game -- and as a result, that's what people will reference for competitive play for the game.


    You might have watched some Melee matches, but judging by your post and this line in particular, you likely just played Brawl. Everything you just posted is awful in more ways than one.
    "Grandad, this food is destructive!"
    "Boy, what is wrong with you? This food is your culture."
    "Then the culture's destructive."

    -The Boondocks
  • ViolentDjangoViolentDjango KEEP CALM and EWGF Joined: Posts: 1,170
    You might have watched some Melee matches, but judging by your pos,t and this line in particular, you likely just played Brawl. Everything you just posted is awful in more ways than one.

    I've seen plenty of Melee matches -- but when was the last time you saw a big Melee tournament anywhere? Even Comicpalooza here in Houston's Smash tournament is Brawl and they are putting $1000 dollars into it.

    It's hard to consider Melee relevant to anything when you don't see it anywhere outside of the inner sanctums of the Smash community. Everyone talks about how great 3rd strike was, yet you never see that around either because it's not relevant to the current tournament scene outside of side tournaments.

    Be defensive of your precious Smash brothers all you want, but at least face the fact that Brawl is the game people think of when they think about Smash these days. People can harp about the good old days technical depth in Melee, but at the end of the day Brawl is the current face of Smash -- just like SSF4AE is the current face of Street Fighter, regardless of whether or not Third Strike was the better game.
    SFxTK: Lars/Kazuya, Bryan/Marduk | P4U: Undecided | BBCS: Valkenhayn
    Fundamentals: [OO~~~] | Theory: [OOOO~] | Execution: [OO~~~] | Beast Mode: [OO~~~]
    Check out my Nerd Dating/Life Advice Blog: www.AskGeekLink.com
  • SynikaLSynikaL Melee Prophet Joined: Posts: 1,697
    I'm not defensive regarding Smash, or even Melee - I'm defensive against bad opinions. I'm pretty sure Melee had its largest tournament ever just last year (Genesis, maybe? Not sure, don't pay attention to the scene much anymore). Alphazealot suggests numbers are strong for the game in general, still, with many tournaments throughout the year. I doubt 3rd Strike at the height of its popularity even compared.

    How relevant to the FG scene Melee (or even Brawl) is to the scene at large - is irrelevant. Especially in consideration for how self-sustained they are.

    Brawl is such a bad game, I don't even consider it cannon. I always make sure to mention I'm referring to Melee whenever talking about Smash.
    "Grandad, this food is destructive!"
    "Boy, what is wrong with you? This food is your culture."
    "Then the culture's destructive."

    -The Boondocks
  • ViolentDjangoViolentDjango KEEP CALM and EWGF Joined: Posts: 1,170
    I'm not defensive regarding Smash, or even Melee - I'm defensive against bad opinions. I'm pretty sure Melee had its largest tournament ever just last year (Genesis, maybe? Not sure, don't pay attention to the scene much anymore). Alphazealot suggests numbers are strong for the game in general, still, with many tournaments throughout the year. I doubt 3rd Strike at the height of its popularity even compared.

    How relevant to the FG scene Melee (or even Brawl) is to the scene at large - is irrelevant. Especially in consideration for how self-sustained they are.

    Brawl is such a bad game, I don't even consider it cannon. I always make sure to mention I'm referring to Melee whenever talking about Smash.


    First, there's no such thing as a "bad" opinion, there can be uneducated opinions -- but that assumes the opinion references the pertinent information in some way or would otherwise benefit from it. The fact that Melee had a big tournament last year doesn't really equate much to what I'm trying to say...

    I've never said anything about Smash not being a popular series, and I've said nothing against Melee as the hallmark of the game's quality -- but when the average person thinks of Smash, Brawl is the game that comes to mind, purely because its the most recent -- Numbers be damned. If people cared about numbers then Brawl probably would never have been played in a single tournament.

    Just saying that, unfortunately, Brawl is Smash Bros for the average person these days. And the only reason I brought up the Third Strike example was not to try to goat some "Street Fighter is better and more popular comparison" comparison, but to point out that, for example, the last sentence of your last post is EXACTLY something someone would say about Third Strike compared to AE, because arguably, Third Strike is the technically superior game. Just meant to point out that the comparison was parallel in terms of quality among people who know what they are talking about.
    SFxTK: Lars/Kazuya, Bryan/Marduk | P4U: Undecided | BBCS: Valkenhayn
    Fundamentals: [OO~~~] | Theory: [OOOO~] | Execution: [OO~~~] | Beast Mode: [OO~~~]
    Check out my Nerd Dating/Life Advice Blog: www.AskGeekLink.com
  • sanchaz1sanchaz1 Joined: Posts: 1,010

    Just saying that, unfortunately, Brawl is Smash Bros for the average person these days.

    Bullshit. Melee is the game for a smash player.
    option select toppers pizza- my roommate.
  • SynikaLSynikaL Melee Prophet Joined: Posts: 1,697
    First, there's no such thing as a "bad" opinion, there can be uneducated opinions -- but that assumes the opinion references the pertinent information in some way or would otherwise benefit from it. The fact that Melee had a big tournament last year doesn't really equate much to what I'm trying to say...

    Lol. An uneducated opinion is typically bad for the very reason that it misinterprets or misses the pertinent information completely when forming statements. I'm sorry, but your parents lied to you.
    I've never said anything about Smash not being a popular series, and I've said nothing against Melee as the hallmark of the game's quality -- but when the average person thinks of Smash, Brawl is the game that comes to mind, purely because its the most recent -- Numbers be damned. If people cared about numbers then Brawl probably would never have been played in a single tournament.

    I don't even know what this is saying, honestly. Turnouts don't matter in a competitive scene for Melee because Brawl holds the general mindshare? Mindshare is determined by tournament numbers? What?
    Just saying that, unfortunately, Brawl is Smash Bros for the average person these days. And the only reason I brought up the Third Strike example was not to try to goat some "Street Fighter is better and more popular comparison" comparison, but to point out that, for example, the last sentence of your last post is EXACTLY something someone would say about Third Strike compared to AE, because arguably, Third Strike is the technically superior game. Just meant to point out that the comparison was parallel in terms of quality among people who know what they are talking about.


    The sentence you're referring to is simply explaining where I stand in regards to discussions involving the series. It makes no real attempt to extrapolate from either game's mechanical qualities. That's much different from how 3S purists tend to speak in regards to SF4. Especially since many of them actually play SF4 and actively contribute to its popularity.
    "Grandad, this food is destructive!"
    "Boy, what is wrong with you? This food is your culture."
    "Then the culture's destructive."

    -The Boondocks
  • ViolentDjangoViolentDjango KEEP CALM and EWGF Joined: Posts: 1,170
    Bullshit. Melee is the game for a smash player.

    Average person =/= Smash player...

    I'm not going to bother with trying to re-explain any of this again...
    SFxTK: Lars/Kazuya, Bryan/Marduk | P4U: Undecided | BBCS: Valkenhayn
    Fundamentals: [OO~~~] | Theory: [OOOO~] | Execution: [OO~~~] | Beast Mode: [OO~~~]
    Check out my Nerd Dating/Life Advice Blog: www.AskGeekLink.com
  • sanchaz1sanchaz1 Joined: Posts: 1,010
    Average person =/= Smash player...

    I'm not going to bother with trying to re-explain any of this again...

    Yeah, me either.
    option select toppers pizza- my roommate.
  • GAPGAP Joined: Posts: 59
    Why does everyone want Smash to be competitive so much? If it was built like a traditional fighting game then it will alienate a lot of players who simply want to play the game for fun. Smash may not be as respected a lot of other fighters but Smash's(or should I say Nintendo's) target audience had always been causals or people who don't normally play games. Nintendo's target audience had always been these people and the minute they implent those competitive elements that Melee fans want, it starts to lose its appeal and it become just another fighting game that only fighting game nerds (no offense) play.

    Nintendo is not supportive of the competitive scene and I am starting to see why. Competitive players don't really play solely for fun but for bragging rights and money. Nintendo had always been about making fun games and if they do a good job they make a lot of money off it. So what if some characters are to powerful or the stages are too unpredictable or the items are too annoying or it doesn't wavedashing, frame rate, etc.? Smash is silly chaotic fun and that is not going to change anytime soon.
  • Negative-Zer0Negative-Zer0 Joined: Posts: 9,666
    To suggest that the Nintendo branding is the only reason the game was popular is simple-minded and plain wrong.

    Sorry SynikaL, but i disagree. I highly doubt that anyone in that community would be playing the game had they not have nintendo characters to boost it's popularity. I looked up Brawl back in 06 when brawl was coming out to see what it was like, and I came across a comment about ken being the best smash player. I looked him up and saw the game. Popularity contributes to a competitive scene, the more popular your game is, especially a multiplayer one, the more likely that it is to have a competitive scene. It happened with sf2, being one of the first competetive gammes of that caliber. I am not going to say that it is the only contribute, but the Nintendo characters within the game contributed largely to the following the game has today, to say otherwise is looking at it as though nothing about the game's popularity was simple, even though there may be more complex reasons.
    “I was trying to take the easy way out by running away from everything. No matter the pain, I will keep living. So when I die, I'll feel I did the best I could.” - Koala
  • SynikaLSynikaL Melee Prophet Joined: Posts: 1,697
    Again, that's simple-minded. You're looking at one aspect of the game's appeal in a vacuum. You bringing up Ken to prove some sort of point is ironic considering how often he remarked that he didn't actually care for the Nintendo aesthetics of the game, which is why he originally chose Marth (he didn't recognize him as a Nintendo staple) and actually preferred Street Fighter games to Smash, overall (these were salty remarks he made just before he decided to quit the first time, due to people not liking him in the community. So it was probably bullshit. He ended up coming back later and dominating further, solidifying his passion for the game. It just bears mentioning). It's just that he managed to become good at Melee, so he stuck with that game.

    Also, people outside the Smash community helped develop tech for the game. Empire offshoot Deadly Alliance comes to mind.

    Mario Kart is plenty popular and has sold more units than the Smash series. Why isn't its competitive community making waves? GTA 4 sold a lot of units last I checked. Why aren't people playing that competitively, period? Probably because people think its mechanics are trash in the context of competitive gameplay.

    I'm sorry, but to say I can't divorce my appreciation for Mario and behold the gameplay on its own merits is stupid. Of course, the aesthetics helped draw people in. But people don't travel across the world/country and put thousands of dollars on the line just because their favorite game has Pikachu in it. When you make the decision to play a game competitively, what you appreciate most about the game changes completely. If this weren't true, Brawl's existence would have never been a problem. No one would've complained about its garbage mechanics, because it still has all the stupid Nintendo characters present in Melee and then some.
    "Grandad, this food is destructive!"
    "Boy, what is wrong with you? This food is your culture."
    "Then the culture's destructive."

    -The Boondocks
  • blockheadblockhead Joined: Posts: 243
    lol smash bros

    total scrub game for people who can't do an srk motion
    KoF XIII: Kyo/Ash/Ex Iori subs: King or Terry
    ST: Guile
    Alpha 2/3: Akuma
  • ph00tbagph00tbag Joined: Posts: 96
    ViolentDjango, I really do think that you're the one that's just plain not getting it. In fact, I have a hard time believing at all that you got all that deep because just from reading your posts, it seems pretty clear that you're stumbling on a fundamental point to SynikaL's posts, which anyone who has come to any remotely deep understanding of the mechanics and gameplay of Smash games can tell you: Melee and Brawl are wholly different games. They share the same fundamental goal of removing an opponents options of avoiding the blast zone, but their way of crafting gameplay around that goal is different in an almost innumerable number of ways.

    That you don't grasp this fact that all dedicated smashers, even Brawl players, confirm, is evident in the fact that you continue to insist that all Smash games can be thrown under the umbrella term, Smash Bros.

    Basically, I'm sure if you were explicitly dismissive of Brawl, there wouldn't be as many people calling you out. The issue is that you seem to think Melee is the same game as Brawl, and you dismiss it out of hand. The point is that Melee, although intended as a game for young adults to dick around with at parties, is in fact, very deep and highly competitive. Maybe it doesn't have what you want, but that doesn't mean lumping it with Brawl doesn't do it a huge disservice.
  • blockheadblockhead Joined: Posts: 243
    they're all garbage what's the difference

    inb4 my little horsey I love My Little Pony so much it hurts throws a hissy fit about hurr durr u dont like mai game
    KoF XIII: Kyo/Ash/Ex Iori subs: King or Terry
    ST: Guile
    Alpha 2/3: Akuma
  • ViolentDjangoViolentDjango KEEP CALM and EWGF Joined: Posts: 1,170
    ViolentDjango, I really do think that you're the one that's just plain not getting it. In fact, I have a hard time believing at all that you got all that deep because just from reading your posts, it seems pretty clear that you're stumbling on a fundamental point to SynikaL's posts, which anyone who has come to any remotely deep understanding of the mechanics and gameplay of Smash games can tell you: Melee and Brawl are wholly different games. They share the same fundamental goal of removing an opponents options of avoiding the blast zone, but their way of crafting gameplay around that goal is different in an almost innumerable number of ways.

    That you don't grasp this fact that all dedicated smashers, even Brawl players, confirm, is evident in the fact that you continue to insist that all Smash games can be thrown under the umbrella term, Smash Bros.

    Basically, I'm sure if you were explicitly dismissive of Brawl, there wouldn't be as many people calling you out. The issue is that you seem to think Melee is the same game as Brawl, and you dismiss it out of hand. The point is that Melee, although intended as a game for young adults to dick around with at parties, is in fact, very deep and highly competitive. Maybe it doesn't have what you want, but that doesn't mean lumping it with Brawl doesn't do it a huge disservice.

    1. I wasn't saying that all Smash Brothers games are the same.
    2. I already expressed that Melee was a vastly superior game to Brawl, and that if any game was going to be the hallmark of Smash Brothers' viability as a competitive series it would be Melee.
    3. My point was that the average person, i.e. someone who isn't already a forum-attending part of the Smash community or the FGC in general thinks of Brawl when they think of Smash Brothers, not because of the quality of the game, because purely because it is the most recent -- just like how the average player thinks of Street Fighter 4 and Marvel 3 instead of Marvel 2 and Third Strike....

    The issue isn't my lack of understanding of what they were trying the say -- my mistake was trying to re-explain my point when it had been so clearly missed. Apparently it just made things worse. I wasn't trying to "umbrella" the games and I didn't even reference the fact that the series wasn't intended to be competitive -- because none of that was relevant to what I was saying.

    I used to compete in Smash on a local level, and I was a huge fan of the series -- including Brawl, despite its flaws -- I actually spent a lot of time defending the game's viability (and getting shit for it) despite how comparatively bad it was because I feel every game deserves its own chance in the name of due diligence. You guys are just so busy being hyper defensive of the game to be able to have any kind of conversation or debate about it. Frankly I just can't be bothered.
    SFxTK: Lars/Kazuya, Bryan/Marduk | P4U: Undecided | BBCS: Valkenhayn
    Fundamentals: [OO~~~] | Theory: [OOOO~] | Execution: [OO~~~] | Beast Mode: [OO~~~]
    Check out my Nerd Dating/Life Advice Blog: www.AskGeekLink.com
  • SynikaLSynikaL Melee Prophet Joined: Posts: 1,697
    "You guys"??? Whataya mean "you guys"?!!
    "Grandad, this food is destructive!"
    "Boy, what is wrong with you? This food is your culture."
    "Then the culture's destructive."

    -The Boondocks
  • ph00tbagph00tbag Joined: Posts: 96
    I guess, then, I'm just not sure how to interpret this bit.
    I don't really insult, Smash Brothers, but after quitting it and switching to proper fighting games I no longer have respect for it. They all have their valuable points in competitive depth, but honestly, the game as a whole just doesn't do it for me after I learned to play real fighting games.

    What it looks to me like is, you started out dismissing the series as a whole (not to insult it, or anything). Then, when you were called out on it, you started talking about how average people take "Smash Brothers" to mean Brawl, which is so unrelated to what anyone was talking about, it can't even be called a tangential discussion. The fact is, you don't have the luxury of deciding what the discussion is about, since your first post was a reply. If there's a misunderstanding, it's because you are the one missing the point.
  • LordLockeLordLocke #1 Toughest Joined: Posts: 115 ✭✭✭✭✭ OG
    It's not too hard to figure out- Super Smash Bros. and it's sequels were fun. Still are, outside of it's current scene. It's not surprising a scene was created around the game because it's got a major built-in audience, is basically the definition of 'easy to learn, hard to master,' and is both very flashy and very technical at the same time. It took years of gaming history and shoved it into one package that just hit all the right notes. The Smash games reeks of fanservice and polish and joy and flair and depth to explore, but most importantly, the Smash games were just a huge blast to play, especially with other people who truly and genuinely loved the game- much like any other competitive fighter. No sane person would spend the time it would take to consistently perform actions like L-canceling (a technique required to be performed virtually every time you used a jumping attack to be competitive) if there was not a genuine passion for the game, and no bad game could inspire that kind of passion in so many people.

    I was there when what would be the first major breakout of the scene first started up- in Northern California, the spring after Melee launched. The Tournament Go series, the Bay Area Biweeklies, etc. Back when the game was new, the player base was open minded, and it about playing some Smash Brothers and not playing the 'right' ruleset for it or the 'most competitive' stage selection- partially because there was not one for the time, but mostly because they wanted to keep Smash intact. Over a year came and went, and the most radical changes to the game were the removal of stages that had obvious horrific flaws for competitive play- Icicle Mountain for it's ability to kill heavy characters with a random speed-up (It could rise faster then Bowser or DK could keep up with- if they were already low on the screen they were dead), Yoshi Island 64 for cloud camping,

    But then the major question came up- what would it take to get Smash Bros. recognized by the greater fighting game community?

    The answer should have been one that's basically been adopted by both the Smash and greater Fighting Game community these days for spite instead of acceptance- 'Who cares? Let's play our game!' But at the time Smash was starting to outgrow it's britches. Melee tournaments were going from local affairs to inter-state to national to finally international- as early as 2003 players from Europe were already coming over for events, by 2004 Japan was coming too. And the guys behind Tournament Go were looking at trying to convince Evo to host Smash for the first time for Evo 2004. But the outside was not sold on the game. Weren't sure the scene had matured enough. Wasn't sure the game had competitive depth. They needed to be sold on Smash as an actual fighting game, and left it to the Smash community to go out and do it.

    And so starting Summer 2004, people began talking rulesets- some communities had already adapted a no item, limited stage selection like New York, while others like NorCal had only banned the bare minimum to keep the game competitive without being totally broken. After a lot of debate, the scene for a while tried to put out a somewhat unified face in terms of ruleset in an attempt to get itself taken seriously- one that tried to absolutely minimize the random factors and player vs environment factors of the game to focus as greatly on the one-on-one aspect of the game as it could- ironic, the actions they first took to reach out beyond their community and draw the interest of other fighting games groups would wind up forming the mindset that would wind up ostracizing the Smash community from both it's casual fanbase AND other fighting game communities. Some, like myself, slowly splintered off from the community during this time, but many many more trickled in- happy to know the game they lapped up so eagerly on their sofas with friends on slow weekends was actually becoming serious business and wanted to help push it into becoming a real breakout success.

    The rest, of course, is history. Evo finally gave Melee it's shot in 2007 to some moderate success, and invited the Smash guys back to help break in their new game that turned into the community wedge that was Brawl @ Evo 2k8- ironically enough, because this time Shoryuken and Evo wanted to test out the new game in it's fullest while the Smash community, who years prior cobbled together as minimal a ruleset as possible to get themselves invited to Evo in the first place, were confused why SRK didn't just want to grandfather in Melee's proven rule list. But by then Smash wasn't just another up-and-coming community- it was a huge and unique beast all it's own, unlike anything that had really come before or has risen up since. So it wandered off and still continues to really do it's own thing, drawing in new faces every so often that want to have their favorite Nintendo characters beat each other up in a brawling game that offers a genuinely unique experience that isn't really offered anywhere else.
    Meeh...
  • SynikaLSynikaL Melee Prophet Joined: Posts: 1,697
    It's not too hard to figure out- Super Smash Bros. and it's sequels were fun. Still are, outside of it's current scene. It's not surprising a scene was created around the game because it's got a major built-in audience, is basically the definition of 'easy to learn, hard to master,' and is both very flashy and very technical at the same time. It took years of gaming history and shoved it into one package that just hit all the right notes. The Smash games reeks of fanservice and polish and joy and flair and depth to explore, but most importantly, the Smash games were just a huge blast to play, especially with other people who truly and genuinely loved the game- much like any other competitive fighter. No sane person would spend the time it would take to consistently perform actions like L-canceling (a technique required to be performed virtually every time you used a jumping attack to be competitive) if there was not a genuine passion for the game, and no bad game could inspire that kind of passion in so many people.

    I was there when what would be the first major breakout of the scene first started up- in Northern California, the spring after Melee launched. The Tournament Go series, the Bay Area Biweeklies, etc. Back when the game was new, the player base was open minded, and it about playing some Smash Brothers and not playing the 'right' ruleset for it or the 'most competitive' stage selection- partially because there was not one for the time, but mostly because they wanted to keep Smash intact. Over a year came and went, and the most radical changes to the game were the removal of stages that had obvious horrific flaws for competitive play- Icicle Mountain for it's ability to kill heavy characters with a random speed-up (It could rise faster then Bowser or DK could keep up with- if they were already low on the screen they were dead), Yoshi Island 64 for cloud camping,

    But then the major question came up- what would it take to get Smash Bros. recognized by the greater fighting game community?

    The answer should have been one that's basically been adopted by both the Smash and greater Fighting Game community these days for spite instead of acceptance- 'Who cares? Let's play our game!' But at the time Smash was starting to outgrow it's britches. Melee tournaments were going from local affairs to inter-state to national to finally international- as early as 2003 players from Europe were already coming over for events, by 2004 Japan was coming too. And the guys behind Tournament Go were looking at trying to convince Evo to host Smash for the first time for Evo 2004. But the outside was not sold on the game. Weren't sure the scene had matured enough. Wasn't sure the game had competitive depth. They needed to be sold on Smash as an actual fighting game, and left it to the Smash community to go out and do it.

    And so starting Summer 2004, people began talking rulesets- some communities had already adapted a no item, limited stage selection like New York, while others like NorCal had only banned the bare minimum to keep the game competitive without being totally broken. After a lot of debate, the scene for a while tried to put out a somewhat unified face in terms of ruleset in an attempt to get itself taken seriously- one that tried to absolutely minimize the random factors and player vs environment factors of the game to focus as greatly on the one-on-one aspect of the game as it could- ironic, the actions they first took to reach out beyond their community and draw the interest of other fighting games groups would wind up forming the mindset that would wind up ostracizing the Smash community from both it's casual fanbase AND other fighting game communities. Some, like myself, slowly splintered off from the community during this time, but many many more trickled in- happy to know the game they lapped up so eagerly on their sofas with friends on slow weekends was actually becoming serious business and wanted to help push it into becoming a real breakout success.

    The rest, of course, is history. Evo finally gave Melee it's shot in 2007 to some moderate success, and invited the Smash guys back to help break in their new game that turned into the community wedge that was Brawl @ Evo 2k8- ironically enough, because this time Shoryuken and Evo wanted to test out the new game in it's fullest while the Smash community, who years prior cobbled together as minimal a ruleset as possible to get themselves invited to Evo in the first place, were confused why SRK didn't just want to grandfather in Melee's proven rule list. But by then Smash wasn't just another up-and-coming community- it was a huge and unique beast all it's own, unlike anything that had really come before or has risen up since. So it wandered off and still continues to really do it's own thing, drawing in new faces every so often that want to have their favorite Nintendo characters beat each other up in a brawling game that offers a genuinely unique experience that isn't really offered anywhere else.

    Almost front-page worthy.
    "Grandad, this food is destructive!"
    "Boy, what is wrong with you? This food is your culture."
    "Then the culture's destructive."

    -The Boondocks
  • LordLockeLordLocke #1 Toughest Joined: Posts: 115 ✭✭✭✭✭ OG
    The wall of text just felt relevant with the recent collapse of the URC. The URC was both the ultimate realization of what the Smash Community first started to do in 2004 to form a true fighting game community and what, ultimately, was really wrong with the competitive Smash community in general- a very small selection of Tournament Organizers getting together to try and dictate to everyone else how the game has to be played if you want your Smash tournament to be taken seriously. Which isn't a problem if it's a very broad and obvious set of decisions- such a thing happens with virtually every fighting game anymore- but started grossly overstepping on the specifics of the ruleset to the point where even some of Smash's 'major' tournaments started ignoring it.

    While Smash is a little different in respects to other fighting games in terms of needing some ground rules set, it should always be at the final say of the Tournament Operator what the final ruleset is, and more importantly, that those who are 'in charge' should not actively work against Tournament Operators who choose to use to follow different rulesets, especially ones that restrict less things instead of more. More tournaments are always better for a community then less, and as long as the ruleset in question is not making the game completely unrecognizable from itself (especially if it's not restrictions, but the lack thereof that is the dissent from the given norm.) then at the very least it should be allowed to co-exist in peace and succeed or fail based entirely on the merits of player interest in that ruleset. The leadership of the Smash community has been guilty of attacking it's own base as far back as mid-2005, bullying any tournament operator who was not using the extremely restricted stage list propose to help the game be taken seriously, and with the end of the URC and the Unity Ruleset returning to being a recommendation instead of a 'requirement' for recognition by Smashboards, maybe we're finally moving towards the time where the Smash community may become more accepting of the one thing anything needs to accept for anyone else to accept it- itself.
    Meeh...
  • SynikaLSynikaL Melee Prophet Joined: Posts: 1,697
    What's the "URC"?
    "Grandad, this food is destructive!"
    "Boy, what is wrong with you? This food is your culture."
    "Then the culture's destructive."

    -The Boondocks
2
Sign In or Register to comment.