Casual, Competitive, and Brawlers - more than 2 types?

[Vortok]

Was gonna post this as a reply in another thread, but then I decided to do the "cool kid" thing and just make a new thread. Warning: Collision with Wall 'o Text imminent.



I came to a realization the other day while watching an anime.

Tourney/competitive players are basically sportsmen, just like say... a Pro Boxer.

Also, there's more than two categories of players, it's just easier for some people to say "I'm in this group of people, and everyone that isn't a part of it is in the 'not in this group' group of people" because that's human nature. Of course, lumping people together like that doesn't exactly help the sitaution, especially when the description is pretty inaccurate for a lot of the people thrown into that group (aka, Casuals).


First, I'll take a look at the overall mentality differences using examples from the real world.


Competitive/Sportsman
First, let's take a professional wrestler. Sure, they're buff, they work out, and they study their fighting style. Within matches, they're a lot of rules (pin an opponent for a certain amount of time to win is a good example). Of course there's other rules as well. All of those rules are in place for the same general reasons - to promote a fair, even fight with clear deciding factors. Obviously, you generally don't want wresters in a professional setting seriously hurting each other, so certain rules are in place to prohibit stuff (don't punch a brother in the junk, lol). Thus, you have sportsmen. They enjoy what they do (or like the paycheck, heh) and as a common group agree to various rules. After all, as funny as it would be to watch (in a fictional setting of course, coughcough) Football players (Soccer or American football, doesn't matter which) use random weapons to help them beat the other team (defender in the way? BAZOOKA! Not anymore!) it would make it unplayable as far as a professional setting goes.

Brawler
Now on the flipside, let's take someone on the streets or in the military or something, who for some reason or other fights people as well (make up a reason... they looked at each other funny, idc). Here, though, it's not a professional setting. There are no rules, since in many cases, their life is literally on the line (or beat the other guy until he can't fight back... or whatever). Anything goes. It doesn't matter if one guy has a knife and the other guy brought a gun. Knife guy wouldn't be able to stop and say "Hey, that's an unfair advantage." Or kicking dirt in someone's eyes. You don't really get a choice, you would have to find a solution/work around the disadvantage or get beaten/killed. It's still combat, and the people involved (unless they're stupid or forced into the situation) would train their skills (aka, military training) to give them the best chance of winning, just like a sportsman would train to win in their matches. This type of fighting encompassing for more than the sportsman's variant, for better or worse. I called them brawlers because it's fun to make a play on words using the upcoming Smash game... and the term kinda fits anyways. XD

What happens if one of each of these people got into a scuffle in the street. Who would win? Some may claim the professional sportsman would lose, as he limits himself whereas the brawler will do anything to win. The other side could claim that the sportsman would win as he constantly trains for a fight it's his job and has more consistent sparring practice, whereas the brawler likely doesn't train as often nor can he cosistently train against skilled opponents. Well, claiming one would win over than the other based on that reasoning would make you stupid, plain and simple. What if the sportsman studies stuff from the "brawler" side as well to further expand his knowledge even though he'll never use it in an actual match? What the fight would really come down to - aside from random elements/if one has a signficant (dis)advantage (aka, bringing a knife to a gunfight) - would still be skill. And what happens if you reverse the fight, and put them into a fight by sportsmen rules? Sure one of them may be more familiar in either setting, but if one is much more skilled than the other, it won't matter.


How it relates to Smash Brothers:

Tourney players are the sportsmen. There's money on the line so they want to have good, clean, even fights and as such devise rules to ensure that goal is met. That's why most of they are against just about any random variable that can be avoided (aka, exploding capsules due to items being on/all items, depending on the player). It's their sportsman mindset, trying to make the game as fair and even as possible. They're basically try to make sure that in a fist fight, there isn't an oppotunity for one guy to pick up a crowbar halfway through and go to town on his opponent. It's perfectly acceptable for them to work to avoid such instances. It may not work for others, which is why those that understand that difference often tell people on these forums that argue "If you don't go to tournaments, then nobody is forcing you to play by tourney rules." Many of their rules have reasons similiar to the more complex rules of various Sports - to make sure people don't get away with being a douchebag. Taking football as an example. In the NFL there's penalties for all kinds of junk like holding (as opposed to pushing) another player. There's also a penalty for "roughing the passer" which is basically for hitting the quarterback after he already threw the ball. If the rule wasn't there, we'd have ******* tackling the quarterback in practically every play in a attempt to tire him out. A lot of the rules in pro footbal, a group of guys getting together to play a friendly game won't care about or use. Doesn't make the way the play the sport on their own the wrong way. Point is, all the seeminly weird rules (depending on your perspective) that tourney players play by do have a point... and at least half of them are probaly to ensure people are douches (which is why Hyrule Temple and a load of other stages are banned, due to being able to run in a circle).

Casual players (actual, true casual players) just play for the hell of it. Hammers, Poke Balls and Heart Containers turned on Very High played on Flatland could be a very good time as far as they're concerned. Didn't bother posting an explanation because everybody knows what the difference is between true casuals and other types of players as far as Smash goes.

And then we have our third, brawler type that has mostly been ignored/lumped into the Casual group. In terms of Smashboards, these are the non-tourney players who detest with every fiber of their being that they're being placed in the Casual group due to the mentality of "either you're in Group A, or you're in Group B which consists of everybody who doesn't meet the Group A criteria." These people can be just as dedicated to exploring every nook and cranny of a character's potential and developing their Smash skills as a tourney player (indeed, many tourney players could fall into this group when they're not fighting in an official tournenent, as some tourney goers have attested to regarding casual/friendly matches that occur at tourneys that aren't connected to official matches of the tournament) might be decidated to those things. However, the brawler group doesn't neccessarilly care for or use some/all/any of the rules that tourney players have decided to play by. Many often prefer to have those variables that are slightly too random/lopsided for use in a sportsmanship setting. For some, their reasoning is that such things will force them to adapt and overcome the challenge, in the process making them a better player. Life isn't always fair, but people deal with it anyways and some people excel even when curveballs are thrown at them in real life. The brawler applies the same mentality to Smash, feeling that even in adverse conditions a skiledl player will find a way to succeed (and thus are willing to have those conditions present when they play, so that they can learn to adjust to and overcome those situations). Some of them may use certain items (though pretty much anyone in this group could probably agree that Stars and Hammers, among other items, are a bit too game-breaking to use all the time, though they may even turn those on from time to time to practice using/defending against them as well).


The three groups of people enjoy the game just as much as the others, but just go about in in a different way. Many members of a group may even play as a different "type" now and then... it's not like they're locked into playing one way only. As far as what way is "right?" The game was made to be fun. I'm pretty sure that was the intent of the developers - fun. All three of these groups have fun, even though they play in drastically different ways. And there's a good chance that some people from one group would be miserable if they could only play the way a different group primarily plays. That, coupled with the human tendency to criticize anything that doesn't match a person's own, personal rules and beliefs is what leads to all the very 'entertaining' arguments that we all get to witness. (aka, people that whine about tourney rules even though they have never been to a tourney and never will go to one).

And of course, there's probably more than three types of players (nevermind hybrids), but the point isn't to identify and label every single type of player. For one group to criticize another group's method of play just shows that the criticizer has more maturing to do (don't we all, though?). Personally, I think that Smashboard's origins compared to what it has become nowadays also helped create the current situation. As far as I can tell, it was more or less started as a common meeting place for Smash players visited primarily by tourney players. Overtime, the site has grown in popularity and a much wider range of players now visit it (mainly the sportsmen and brawler types, both of which are keenly interested in every little tidbit of information about the game and things that could give them an edge). And since the mentalities differ, hilarious hijinks ensued.


Well, that was longer than most people are going to be willing to read. I hope it helped enlighten at least a few people.

 

[TempestFunk]

This does not follow.

Just because tournament players play like that in tournaments it doesn't mean that's how they would play with their friends.

Secondly - We group people into different divisions for simplicity's sake, people who play in tournaments and tournament players, people who don't are not... it doesn't matter what we call them, but casual just seems to have stuck.

we could make a million arbitrary divisions if we wanted to: people who like to play with only healing items on = healies, people who like to play in lighting melee/brawl mode = quickies, people who play while upside down = you get my point yet?

The more arbitrary divisions we have, the more complex it becomes and harder it becomes to talk about things. Then we're back to where we were when we had no divisions

 

[MRX]

Does not computer. Can't label by split. Categorize expands a lot more than 2 and also continues with "Crossover." I remember that thread a long time ago where someone actually made a great statement about the "groups." Anyone else remembers?

 

[tennisthehilife]

Well I agree with you, theres a new group: Brawlers. Its not melee, its a new game!!!!! We will have to be open to find the full potential of Brawl. But you guys have to remember what SmashBoards really is:

First sticky of Brawl Discussion:

NEW MEMBERS READ BEFORE POSTING: General Brawl Boards/Brawl Info FAQ (Updated 2/5)
http://smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=128574

- What Smashboards is/isn’t
• It’s very important to realize what Smash World Forums is and what it is not. If you are new here, it is likely that you are accustomed the forum operations of websites like Gamefaqs, IGN, NSider2, and others. However, it is VITAL that you realize that Smashboards is run very differently than those forums, even though we welcome all new users. SWF is the central website for pretty much every professional Smash Bros. Melee player. Naturally, we get a lot of casual players and new smashers, which is awesome because the SWF community is growing. But the fact still remains that this is the top Smash Bros. forum on the internet. Many of Melee’s ‘advanced techniques’ (such as wavedashing) were originally discovered here, and the same is likely to be true in Super Smash Bros. Brawl.

Not being mean but just saying:
There are other forums where you can go find other casuals if you really hate the idea of being competitive: GameFaqs, GameSpot,... well you can google "Brawl forums". You don't have to be in this competitive place.

 

[2L84U]

Well I agree with you, theres a new group: Brawlers. Its not melee, its a new game!!!!! We will have to be open to find the full potential of Brawl. But you guys have to remember what SmashBoards really is:

First sticky of Brawl Discussion:

NEW MEMBERS READ BEFORE POSTING: General Brawl Boards/Brawl Info FAQ (Updated 2/5)
http://smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=128574




Not being mean but just saying:
There are other forums where you can go find other casuals if you really hate the idea of being competitive: GameFaqs, GameSpot,... well you can google "Brawl forums". You don't have to be in this competitive place.

Pardon me for this:

Why is this mindcept still craving through you after weeks of burning discussion ??
This is Smash World Forum, not Competition World Forum. Everybody who are passionate enough and have interest in the game are welcomed regardless competitive players make up the majority.

I myself do not reject competitiveness. It is awesome. I'm just annoyed of all the pointless discriminations.

 

[-Aether]

SWF is the ONLY real legitimate competative Smash forum. I have no problems with casuals using the forum, but the forums heart and soul and made of competative players. Casuals should come here respecting these players, not bashing the work they've put in to make this game competative and the community robust.

I'm sorry, but these distinctions need to be made. If you support playing with items on in a competative manner, or if you think wavedashing is "cheap," you probably shouldn't be here and truth be told, the foundation of the community doesn't particularly want you here either.

This of course, doesn't mean we cant have discussion about other types of play...or how to play the game in different ways, but the core of SWF is it's competativeness.

 

[Misto-Roboto]

SWF is the ONLY real legitimate competative Smash forum. I have no problems with casuals using the forum, but the forums heart and soul and made of competative players. Casuals should come here respecting these players, not bashing the work they've put in to make this game competative and the community robust.

I'm sorry, but these distinctions need to be made. If you support playing with items on in a competative manner, or if you think wavedashing is "cheap," you probably shouldn't be here and truth be told, the foundation of the community doesn't particularly want you here either.

This of course, doesn't mean we cant have discussion about other types of play...or how to play the game in different ways, but the core of SWF is it's competativeness.

Correction: SmashBoards originated as a forum for what we now define as casual, but obsessed players. Please stop making the assumption this board was made for the competitive. The core of SmashBoards is not its competitiveness, it's Smash that is SWF's core aspect.

 

[Maveritchell]

O.P.: It's neat that you took the time to write out an expanded interpretation of a sports metaphor, but I think you need to step back and take a hard look at this fact - the regular tournament-goers are the best.

There's not really a question of how they would fare if they went up against a regular item-user or casual player or whatever you want to call it. As Smash players get better, if they want to continue to up their game, they become non-item users. That doesn't make them better by virtue of their gameplay-style, the gameplay style (for better or worse) is what they must choose to adopt to participate in arenas where they can get better (for reasons countless, expounded upon in these forums enough times to the point that I feel no need to rehash them).

 

[BloodMagnumX]

O.P.: It's neat that you took the time to write out an expanded interpretation of a sports metaphor, but I think you need to step back and take a hard look at this fact - the regular tournament-goers are the best.

There's not really a question of how they would fare if they went up against a regular item-user or casual player or whatever you want to call it. As Smash players get better, if they want to continue to up their game, they become non-item users. That doesn't make them better by virtue of their gameplay-style, the gameplay style (for better or worse) is what they must choose to adopt to participate in arenas where they can get better (for reasons countless, expounded upon in these forums enough times to the point that I feel no need to rehash them).

I completely disagree. I personally fit into the "Brawler" category, and I understand both sides of the equation. Items are random, but the street-smart players can adapt quickly. One thing that isn't understood by most (especially those that haven't gotten into a real-life fight) is that if you use a weapon, you become dependent on that weapon. Your strength is also your weakness. Competitive players, which are more book-smart, tend to not understand that, and just see the item as an advantage. Now, I'm going to stop debating items, and point out some other things.

Although SFW is largely competitive, look how many new members that joined for Brawl fit into the "Brawler" group. A lot. It's truely bizzare how players are opposed to the street-smart playstyle of "Brawlers." But it's the same way in real life. If a guy from the ghettos trys to play paintball with competitive players (yes, it's a little out there), there will be some conflict. Players don't play the same! The wars need to stop, and Vortok's words should be taken as truth.

No, Maveritchell, tourny players are not "the best." All player types are best in their own regard. Tournament players are good against tournament players, and the same with Brawlers and casuals. They all are different styles of play. Sit a Brawler like me, a pro, and a casual player in a room together, and tell them to make a ruleset for a tournament. Then you'll understand that it just doesn't work. Thanks to wonderful human nature, we don't get along. There can be compromises, but we need to be recognized as independent from the other groups. "You got your peanut butter in my chocolate! No, you got your chocolate in my peanut butter!" Sound familiar? It should be, it's the candy metaphor to explain what SmashBoards has become. It's no longer the "competitive smash" community. It's the combination of all types of Smash. If everyone would open up to new ideas, we'd be doing a lot better here.

Vortok, sorry for posting a wall o' text in a thread centered around your wall o' text, just wanted to get my point across, and I support your observations in entirety.

 

[DraginHikari]

The whole issue over the casual term is merely due to the recent change in viewpoint in games other then smash. The full fledge casuals are the newer group that's surfaced that likes to play usually less then 5-10 hours a week usually in the party games or a few games in general. They don't tend think too hard or too deep into what they're playing because it matters little to them.

But here's the issue with that, as stated in the opening, most that get lumped into this catogory don't fit the catogory of what a casual game stereotype is. More then anything the only thing that seperates these is either they're own viewpoint on not using particular techinques or 'honor' code or sometimes an inability to particate in tournments. Most people on this forum that are considered referred to as Casual would fit better in a non-competitive group. Hardcore gaming doesn't refer to whether or not your competitive in a game necessaryily, simply means you play games alot and alot of different games usually. The problem is when you lump people into a group which is not a general outlook in gaming overall on the term casual you do cause hostility and anger people real quick.

The primary issue is I see with people using three groups is that the line for the Non-competitive and Competitive is harder to draw then it first appears, moslys because I've heard several people draw that line at a far different point. Is it just using AT? Going to Tournments? Or just a mindset of winning regardless? I've heard it even here put in a ton of different ways.

Techincally if you really wanted to simpify the issue you could easily label the casuals and medium area players as Non-competitive because to me that doesn't sound nearly as stereotypical and straight forward. I know that probably won't change but my main point mostly is that Casual does not equal Non-competitive.

 

[Devotion]

I like playing 1v1 no items with friends and also just ffa all items, whatever stage with friends. We have fun either way. Usually play ffa when casual friends are over so they can have fun as well.

 

[Kirby M.D.]

The metaphor is kinda wonky, but I understand your point. Different people play the game different ways: that's the beauty of Smash.

I believe there's a fourth group though: the Honor Guard. They are the players who will defend a style or facet of play to the death without question. At best, they are the ones who explain how that group works and develops something everyone of that group can enjoy. At worst, they poison the other groups' view with their venomous zealotry. A Honor Guard can switch from one side of the coin to the other; as seen when well-respected members of this board from Melee choked this section with complaining about ATs and such.

The Honor Guard is the hardest to quantify or demonize: they are both Smash Director and Tourney***, intelligent casual player and ranting noob, clever counterculturist are basest scrub (in the Sirlin sense).

 

[Papapaint]

Everyone seems to have all these little ideas on what they think defines a "competitive" player. How often they play, what items they use, etc.

It's simpler than any of that.

Competitive players will use any technique at all to win--bar none.

There was a well written article describing how this separates the competitive players from everyone else--quite simply, competitive players use any and all techniques at their disposal. Rules exist because certain techniques would make some characters or stages unusable.

 

[rageagainst]

sorry duble post

 

[rageagainst]

I know its wrong to categorize people but if your gonna do it do it right!
This is according to popular media:

casual gamers

Casual gamers, are people who OWN a game system. Casual gamers are people who play once a week to play around 5-10 hrs a day (though thats stretching it), who are barely interested in games but are interested nonetheless. So far the media didn't fudge up, lets go to hardcore gamers

hardcore gamers

according to the media, these are people who PLAY video games, as in, all people who beat metroid prime, or a Zelda game, are "hardcore gamers." Hardcore gamers are people who love to play the Sims everyday, they are the football players who play halo an hour a day, and everything in between.
----------------------------------------------------------

Now correct me if i'm wrong, but hardcore is something that is interesting to watch but strenuating to do. Such as bunji jumping an hour a day, riding your bike in a marathon, doing ANYTHING professionally, and so forth. The terminology above WOULD make sense if it were something like ice skating. Anyone who KNOWS how to ice skate is a casual skater, but people who do it 3 hours a day, should definitely be called hardcore since its, well, strenuating.

Playing Zelda is NOT hardcore! Playing Fire Emblem is NOT hardcore! Playing smash competitively IS however, and those are the people that should be called hardcore, not the people in-between.
A good analogy that gaming should be compared to is watching TV, if you watch 2-3 hours of TV a day, you are not a "hardcore TV watcher" but I imagine, if you watch 6+ hours a day and take notes on the stuff your watching or something, then that is, well, pretty "hardcore."

To be politically correct, there should be 3 groups of gamers, casual gamers, the kind stated above, gamers. the kind who play like 2-1 hrs a day of Fire Emblem, and hardcore gamers the kind who go to tournies and play smash competitively.

 

[Papapaint]

I know its wrong to categorize people but if your gonna do it do it right!
This is according to popular media:

casual gamers

Casual gamers, are people who OWN a game system. Casual gamers are people who play once a week to play around 5-10 hrs a day (though thats stretching it), who are barely interested in games but are interested nonetheless. So far the media didn't fudge up, lets go to hardcore gamers

hardcore gamers

according to the media, these are people who PLAY video games, as in, all people who beat metroid prime, or a Zelda game, are "hardcore gamers." Hardcore gamers are people who love to play the Sims everyday, they are the football players who play halo an hour a day, and everything in between.
----------------------------------------------------------

Now correct me if i'm wrong, but hardcore is something that is interesting to watch but strenuating to do. Such as bunji jumping an hour a day, riding your bike in a marathon, doing ANYTHING professionally, and so forth. The terminology above WOULD make sense if it were something like ice skating. Anyone who KNOWS how to ice skate is a casual skater, but people who do it 3 hours a day, should definitely be called hardcore since its, well, strenuating.

Playing Zelda is NOT hardcore! Playing Fire Emblem is NOT hardcore! Playing smash competitively IS however, and those are the people that should be called hardcore, not the people in-between.
A good analogy that gaming should be compared to is watching TV, if you watch 2-3 hours of TV a day, you are not a "hardcore TV watcher" but I imagine, if you watch 6+ hours a day and take notes on the stuff your watching or something, then that is, well, pretty "hardcore."

To be politically correct, there should be 3 groups of gamers, casual gamers, the kind stated above, gamers. the kind who play like 2-1 hrs a day of Fire Emblem, and hardcore gamers the kind who go to tournies and play smash competitively.

I think people should feel free to categorize themselves. For example, to contrast your example, I have a friend who plays halo maybe 2-3 times a week, but could easily sauce any one of my group of friends--we're all really good at halo, and play almost 6-7 days a week.

At the same time, I have a friend who plays games 60+ hours a week, including smash and halo, and still calls certain techniques "cheap," gets rocked in smash, is several levels below me in Halo, and is more of a "casual" than anything.

I think it all comes down to the player.

 

[rageagainst]

I think people should feel free to categorize themselves. For example, to contrast your example, I have a friend who plays halo maybe 2-3 times a week, but could easily sauce any one of my group of friends--we're all really good at halo, and play almost 6-7 days a week.

At the same time, I have a friend who plays games 60+ hours a week, including smash and halo, and still calls certain techniques "cheap," gets rocked in smash, is several levels below me in Halo, and is more of a "casual" than anything.

I think it all comes down to the player.

Well the title should be more about how much you play it/ how much effort you put into it, how good you are is mostly irrelevant.

 

[MookieRah]

There are subcategories to every category. But as it stands, if you aren't actively seeking competition via tournaments and also traveling then you are a casual player. Yes, you can play casually and be competitive, but that is simply a sub category of casual play. If you aren't willing to put in the time and the traveling then how can you claim to be as competitive as a tourny goer?

Also... by your definition, a Brawler wouldn't beat the Sportsman. Every competitive player was once a casual player, and contrary to everyone's belief on casual players and items... well they don't even know how to use items efficiently. The sportsman can use items better because he used to use items and has access to the vast knowledge that was discovered through curious competitive players. It's likely that he's messed around with items after going competitive for fun matches and tried these things out. On the other hand, ALL of the casual players I have encountered have never actually sat down and tried to figure things out with items. They just grab them when they appear and either use/throw them. A lot of them don't even know you can catch items in the air with Z, or that you can air dodge and spot dodge and still catch items.

It's really sad to see casual players like this argue for items... It's also really sad when people think that casual players can consistently beat competitive players if they turned items on.

 

[Papapaint]

There are subcategories to every category. But as it stands, if you aren't actively seeking competition via tournaments and also traveling then you are a casual player. Yes, you can play casually and be competitive, but that is simply a sub category of casual play. If you aren't willing to put in the time and the traveling then how can you claim to be as competitive as a tourny goer?

Also... by your definition, a Brawler wouldn't beat the Sportsman. Every competitive player was once a casual player, and contrary to everyone's belief on casual players and items... well they don't even know how to use items efficiently. The sportsman can use items better because he used to use items and has access to the vast knowledge that was discovered through curious competitive players. It's likely that he's messed around with items after going competitive for fun matches and tried these things out. On the other hand, ALL of the casual players I have encountered have never actually sat down and tried to figure things out with items. They just grab them when they appear and either use/throw them. A lot of them don't even know you can catch items in the air with Z, or that you can air dodge and spot dodge and still catch items.

It's really sad to see casual players like this argue for items... It's also really sad when people think that casual players can consistently beat competitive players if they turned items on.

Mookie, come to VA and teach me mewtwo.

 

[Ogre_Deity_Link]

I like the idea.

It'll never fly though.

<sarcasm>A third group? HELL NO! WE CAN'T HAVE SERIOUS CASUALS!!! THEY DO NOT EXIST!</sarcasm>

I'd totally be considered a Brawler. I'm not all "All items on High, Flatzone, Pichu only" or whatever the reverse of the Competitive cliche` is.

 

[BentoBox]

How do you call casuals who like to flaunt their ignorance about and seem to enjoy taking parts in discussions which only really matter to the part of the community that they don't even wish to take part in?

I just noticed Nsiders went down, this explains everything.

 

[DraginHikari]

There are subcategories to every category. But as it stands, if you aren't actively seeking competition via tournaments and also traveling then you are a casual player. Yes, you can play casually and be competitive, but that is simply a sub category of casual play. If you aren't willing to put in the time and the traveling then how can you claim to be as competitive as a tourny goer?

The problem is your creating a conflicting view on the term casual which in the rest of the gaming world does not mean the same thing as what you are implying here. That's where you run into the conflict at and it is enough to provoke people sometimes. The major problem I see with your statement you simply assume people either chose to go or don't, there's absolutely no middleline involved and that simply is not true. Even if it's not what you were implying that what's it's going to look like for most people. You ever heard the two sides to every story thing? It's really not true there's usually a lot more then that and it just seems easier for competitve and non-competitive alike to just start throwing people on two inaccurate sides.

It is just more generalizing, in most places the casual players that most people refer to here don't fit in the casual catorgory in the rest of the gaming area.

 

[MookieRah]

HELL NO! WE CAN'T HAVE SERIOUS CASUALS!!! THEY DO NOT EXIST!

You claim to be serious yet you don't actually compete on a level beyond local/semi-local. You are serious with your friends, but how is that not casual. You aren't really going beyond just playing the game for fun with your friends to be honest.

 

[Maveritchell]

I completely disagree...No, Maveritchell, tourny players are not "the best." ...All player types are best in their own regard.

Disagreeing's your perogative. I'd be inclined to say that it doesn't make you correct, though. Tourney players have hours upon hours of practice - not just matches, but actual practice - under their belts and as a whole know their fundamentals far better than the non-tourney-goer.

And even if being fundamentally better players wasn't enough, it's not like they're ignorant of what items are. I can't speak for the competitive community, but if I had to guess I would imagine that the whole reason they don't "use items" is because they do know the capabilities of them and how to use them, and because they know how significant an advantage they give (not to digress into an analysis of the advantages items give, that is another topic for another... topic).

The "Competitives" are just "Brawlers" who want to meet with the best other "Brawlers." They became "Competitives" because they, as a "Brawler," felt that they were pretty good and wanted to test their skills. They got together, "Brawl"-ed, and gradually modified their style until it became "Competitive."

One type ("Competitive") is a subtype of the other ("Brawler"), but not the other way around. To assume that a "Competitive" couldn't be a "Brawler" is faulty logic because they were already a "Brawler." It's like saying a dessert won't necessarily be a pie, but a pie won't necessarily be a dessert.

Edit: Whoops. I see I've just made a near-paraphrase of an above post. Ignore the above unless you just feel like being hit over the head twice.

 

[MookieRah]

The major problem I see with your statement you simply assume people either chose to go or don't, there's absolutely no middleline involved and that simply is not true.

Well that is the case. You either are competitive as defined by the "competitive community" or you are not. You either actively seek out competition of it's highest level, or you do not. You see this as being antagonistic, but the thing is there is no exclusive nature of being competitive. You are free to actively seek competition. If you cannot, you can still train for it and work towards it (you'd still be competitive if you trained for competition but were unable to go to most tournaments). If you do not do this, you aren't part of the "competitive" community.

The thing is you guys see being labeled as casual means you aren't competitive. Nobody is saying that. The very nature of fighting games forces some level of competition. The thing is that when we, and every other gaming scene, refer to competitive players we mean those who are a part of the tournament community.

 

[DraginHikari]

Well that is the case. You either are competitive as defined by the "competitive community" or you are not. You either actively seek out competition of it's highest level, or you do not. You see this as being antagonistic, but the thing is there is no exclusive nature of being competitive. You are free to actively seek competition. If you cannot, you can still train for it and work towards it (you'd still be competitive if you trained for competition but were unable to go to most tournaments). If you do not do this, you aren't part of the "competitive" community.

Fair enough, however some times some clarity needs to be put forth sometimes which is the real problem I've seen here. The main thing I've just merely noticed is what is 'definied' even by the competitive community isn't quite clear as you put it seeing that I've seen at least 4 different responses on what is defined which causes confuse particularly for people who are more prone to overreacting over said words.

The thing is you guys see being labeled as casual means you aren't competitive. Nobody is saying that. The very nature of fighting games forces some level of competition. The thing is that when we, and every other gaming scene, refer to competitive players we mean those who are a part of the tournament community.

But that's one of the core problems, people are going to assume that when you use the term casual, you go to any gaming website and you'll see the term casual linked mostly to party games and such, which was more my point then anything else. Also the Hardcore and Competitve in many places aren't considered the same thing which casues more conflicts and easy assumptions are made. Which is why I tend to just stick to the term, non-competitive most of the time because the phrase only points out to the point your making, are you in the competitive scene or are you not.

 

[xDARKLINKx]

I completely disagree. I personally fit into the "Brawler" category, and I understand both sides of the equation. Items are random, but the street-smart players can adapt quickly. One thing that isn't understood by most (especially those that haven't gotten into a real-life fight) is that if you use a weapon, you become dependent on that weapon. Your strength is also your weakness. Competitive players, which are more book-smart, tend to not understand that, and just see the item as an advantage. Now, I'm going to stop debating items, and point out some other things.

That analogy sucks...balls. First of all competitive players are much MUCH more smart and able to adapt than a casual. For example, get a trained boxer and some guy whos got in a few fights in high school or watever, give them both a pair of brass knuckles. Who is more likely to win??? Now smash, get p.c. or m2k or actually get anybody who has done anything notable in this community, and then go get your friends cousin. All items on high on hyrule, whos gonna win?? Also dont give me that best buy tournament **** cuz not only did they use that atrocity they call a "classic control" but the tournamnet was not ran well, and I think the winner was from here anyways, either way it was still a joke.

Although SFW is largely competitive, look how many new members that joined for Brawl fit into the "Brawler" group. A lot. It's truely bizzare how players are opposed to the street-smart playstyle of "Brawlers." But it's the same way in real life. If a guy from the ghettos trys to play paintball with competitive players (yes, it's a little out there), there will be some conflict. Players don't play the same! The wars need to stop, and Vortok's words should be taken as truth.

Wow, DO NOT CALL THEM "STREET-SMART". L O L , theyre not streetsmart, theyre not even smash smart, they MIGHT be *familiar* with items, i wouldnt even say smart. I say this because if you know how to play smash, you know how to use items.......run to it jump dodge whatever, press A to pick it up, press A to use it. Complex? yes, i know, i cant imagine that players who cancel, wavedash, sweetspot, tech chase, and outsmart theyre opponents would be able to cope with such an advanced technique and integrate it into our playstyle. As for the ghetto fool and the paintballers, yes your absoultley right he wont play the same as the competitive players, he'll suck complete a$s cuz he doesnt compete in competetions and train to get better, then he'll complain about how they used cheap tactics, or better yet he'll say how if he had all 37 of his homeboys they woulda rocked theyre ****.

Easy as that, if you dont wanna put in the time and effort to be good at something, dont complain when you get your as$ kicked. Its people like that that made sakurai not want to include rankings, so they're sorry a$ses wont see themselves at rank 846,789.

No, Maveritchell, tourny players are not "the best." All player types are best in their own regard. Tournament players are good against tournament players, and the same with Brawlers and casuals. They all are different styles of play. Sit a Brawler like me, a pro, and a casual player in a room together, and tell them to make a ruleset for a tournament. Then you'll understand that it just doesn't work. Thanks to wonderful human nature, we don't get along. There can be compromises, but we need to be recognized as independent from the other groups. "You got your peanut butter in my chocolate! No, you got your chocolate in my peanut butter!" Sound familiar? It should be, it's the candy metaphor to explain what SmashBoards has become. It's no longer the "competitive smash" community. It's the combination of all types of Smash. If everyone would open up to new ideas, we'd be doing a lot better here.

Vortok, sorry for posting a wall o' text in a thread centered around your wall o' text, just wanted to get my point across, and I support your observations in entirety.

ACTUALLY BloodMagnumX tourny players ARE the best. I dont care what context you put them in, they are the best out of all smash sub-types. Put Them all together in an FFA with items, and the majority of the time they will win, i dont say ALL the time because stars, hammers and exploding crates are so random and broken they cant even be avoided or worked around.

Dont take me wrong though, im not downplaying ANY specific style of play, play as you want i could care less. If you dont like tournie rules and how we play, dont go to tournaments. Like wise for competitive players and items, just turn'em off. Just when you say were not the best at this game LOL thats where i draw the line. You fail to see how much time, practice, and most of all skill that competitive players put in this game to know it inside and out, items on or items off its still smash.

 

[Ogre_Deity_Link]

I GOT IT!

Why don't we call the two "Tournement Players" And "Non-Tournement players"!!!!!

Eh?

EH?

No?

 

[PanzerOceania]

this is odd becuase I was just thinking of this myself before you even posted, I would use the analogy of skaters though.

there are the kids, or family players, they are ignorant about any of us online, but they play it and have fun, good for them, that's fine, just like a kid who has a skateboard, but isn't trying to prove anything to anyone, just having fun.

then there are the wannabes, the people who come and whine for nothing because they want to be an awesome player, but just aren't

then there are the posers, people who pretend to be elites, but really suck if you ever played them in real life, there are many of these in the skater world

then there are the competatives, like pro skaters they are very good but play by very specific rules and refute other forms of play

then there are the HARDCORE, who play any style, they play any match with any rules and dominate all and laugh at everyone. They don't care how you play, and have no allegience with anyone, they just kick *** and laugh at people for whining about any unfair rules. YOU WILL NEVER BEAT THEM. play tournament? they kick ***. Play with anoying cheap people with items? kick ***, kick all as, you get a star? they dodge and kick your ***. You get a hammer? they drop kick it out of your hands, and kick your ***

they are the Chuck Norris of Smash Bros.

 

[MookieRah]

The main thing I've just merely noticed is what is 'definied' even by the competitive community isn't quite clear as you put it seeing that I've seen at least 4 different responses on what is defined which causes confuse particularly for people who are more prone to overreacting over said words.

A LOT of the people here are new to the competitive scene. Most competitive players don't bother much with the general brawl discussion. There are only a handful of competitive vets hanging out here amidst all the casual and new competitive guys. The newer guys tend to be the ones that are somewhat inconsistent, cause they are new and they don't know about all this stuff like the back of their hand yet. Amongst the guys that have been playing competitively for a while, there is clarity as to what the "competitive" community is.

But that's one of the core problems, people are going to assume that when you use the term casual, you go to any gaming website and you'll see the term casual linked mostly to party games and such, which was more my point then anything else.

Look, you are in a mostly competitive community here. This is what is known as jargon. In different communities, in different fields of work, and etc. the same word can take on a whole new meaning. If you go outside the competitive community and talk about someone playing casually, they will view it as playing casual games. We aren't referring to the same thing here, and because you guys weren't a part of this community when it was made. We aren't saying that you are a casual gamer, we are just denoting that you do not go to tournaments to compete.

Also the Hardcore and Competitve in many places aren't considered the same thing which casues more conflicts and easy assumptions are made.

"Hardcore" and "Competitive" are only mixed up outside of the competitive community. Nobody here refers to a competitive player as "hardcore." "Hardcore" inside the competitive community is usually a way to denote extreme skill and/or dedication. Again, this is a difference in jargon.

Language is relative, not only that... it should be obvious that when we refer to someone as casual that we don't mean that they only play silly party games. Again, this is simply another problem created mostly by the casual scene, as they want to be respected to some degree by the competitive scene. The problem is that they assume we completely disrespect the casual scene... when in reality we just don't care. The competitive community, as a whole, has done relatively nothing to the casual community.

then there are the HARDCORE, who play any style, they play any match with any rules and dominate all and laugh at everyone. They don't care how you play, and have no allegience with anyone, they just kick *** and laugh at people for whining about any unfair rules. YOU WILL NEVER BEAT THEM. play tournament? they kick ***. Play with anoying cheap people with items? kick ***, kick all as, you get a star? they dodge and kick your ***. You get a hammer? they drop kick it out of your hands, and kick your ***

they are the Chuck Norris of Smash Bros.

I'm pretty sure any good "hardcore" player is also competitive. If they weren't, how could they claim to be better? If the "hardcore" scene were truly greater and unruly, why can't they show their skill in a competitive setting?

In the realm of smash skill, competitive players as a whole are WAY better than any other group. You can't refute this, as we have tons and tons of tournament placements and other documented cases as evidence. So far, there hasn't been some random guy that wasn't part of the scene dominate a large scale tournament. You are living in a fantasy world if you believe otherwise.

 

[roguebanshee]

First of all competitive players are much MUCH more smart and able to adapt than a casual.

No.

The competitive Smash players may be better at the Smash games, but that does not make them smarter or better to adapt, furthermore there's no guarantee that a random casual player will be worse at the Smash games. No gaming group is smarter or more adaptive than any other gaming group. Individual players can be smarter and/or more adaptive than others, but broad groups like these can not be attributed such things.

The same goes for the quote from BloodMagnumX.

Casual and competitive is not about skill, smarts or adaptability, but rather what mindset people have when they play the game. It's possible to be both competitive and utterly incompetent at the game. It's also possible to be talented and capable of ranking among the top 10 competitive, but never play no-item 1v1 on neutral/cp maps. Most of the time, however, a competitive player will learn a lot of ATs and attain a higher general skill than most casual players.

 

[MookieRah]

The competitive Smash players may be better at the Smash games, but that does not make them smarter or better to adapt

You are missing the point. Casual smash players aren't as smart and aren't as able to adapt as competitive smashers IN SMASH. He wasn't saying this in general or with any relevance to anything other than smash. Now, being a part of another competitive scene actually helps A GOOD BIT with this, but unless you actually played smash competitively you still wouldn't be able to play as smart or adapt as well as a competitive smasher just because you aren't as aware of all of the mechanics and all of your options.

 

[LaughterIsDeadly]

topics liks this are just stupid. you can call your self w/e the hell you want...

 

[Spellman]

We be brawlin'.

 

[MookieRah]

topics liks this are just stupid. you can call your self w/e the hell you want...

Yet as a group people will recognize you for what people usually refer to you as. Basically, this entire argument is based around casual players feeling that they aren't being respected by being referred to as "casual." This of course is only a problem due to it sounding like "casual gamer."

 

[Bendario]

OMFG! I'm that third group!

I have always (and will always) attest to being more of a gamer and knowing more about games than anyone else I've ever met, or even spoken to. I have been a loyal fan of countless series (especially Nintendo's) for as long as I can remember, and will become the best game designer ever (no offense to those who thought that would be them). Yet through all this, through getting and understanding EVERY reference in Smash Bros., I am called a n00b or (God forbid) a casual. I am good at Smash, I don't play in tourneys, I disagree (in general) with tourney rules, and I am one of the few people in the world that know that DI, fast falling, and small jumps are NOT advanced techniques; does that make me casual? **** NO! I am a Real Gamer.

Also, I've only heard hardcore used to describe people that play Halo, GoW, GRaw, CoD4, and other such games. You know what those people are? FAILURES. If thinking Halo is the best game ever made, and playing only games rated M is "hardcore," then they can **** off. The real gamers are the people like me, who remember the Atari systems (

Spoiler

even though I was born 1990, I've played them

), and the people who remember the long, hard nights of childhood, when we played Yoshi's Island until as crazy late as 10:00 at night and only got to world 4 (games are harder when you're young). Real gamers can give a history report on games that is more detailed then one they would give on their own country.

I'm a real gamer!

 

[Bendario]

We be brawlin'.

And they be hatin'.

 

[Sliq]

I came to a realization the other day while watching an anime.

No post should EVER begin this way if you want to be taken seriously. Ever.

 

[PanzerOceania]

OMFG! I'm that third group!

I have always (and will always) attest to being more of a gamer and knowing more about games than anyone else I've ever met, or even spoken to. I have been a loyal fan of countless series (especially Nintendo's) for as long as I can remember, and will become the best game designer ever (no offense to those who thought that would be them).

ok, here is an easy one, without looking, who is the inventor of the gameboy.

 

[Bendario]

ok, here is an easy one, without looking, who is the inventor of the gameboy.

Nintendo? Are we talking company or individual?

Edit: If it's individual, I don't know, but I'd be happy to expand my knowledge well.

2nd Edit: Whoop, just checked it out. Gunpei Yokoi, same guy that made the Game & Watch (knew that part). Quite the handheld whizz appearantly. Also, I like your sig. I rented that once. It was pretty sweet, especially since it was my first 3D game.