Ok. So I have paraphrased a couple of sentences in there... Yuna, I feel like you are overreacting a little bit here. Calm down. Lighten up. Is it too much for you that some people disagree with what you are saying? You keep going on about having "facts" on your side, like you are some SSB holyman or something. Let me remind you that this is a game. Different people find different things fun/entertaining/challenging/exciting.
Now I'll try to address some of the points in your post.
You don't have to be a "magician" to deal with the randomness of items. Although it is true that items can result in some unavoidable accidents (like a bomb appearing on top of you during an attack), but these are just a small subset of what can happen. Most of the time these fluke events are not enough to ruin a game. As I was saying before, a good player is able to deal with many situations, including those that involve quick witted use of an item that just appeared, and including those where the opponent has an item based advantage. I thought it was obvious that when I referred to "unarmed" opponents I was talking about "item-less"opponents. It was pretty silly of you to say "They're not unarmed, they have their movesets." You deliberately misinterpreted what I said. It suggests that you aren't even willing to think about my point of view.
Besides, since the randomness effects all players, on a larger set of games the net effect is even for all players. Is it so atrocious for you to think that the best smash player can't be chosen from a single game? Is it so bad that there could be a fluke win by a unskilled player against a skilled player from time to time?
Finally there seems to be a misunderstand as to why I am saying all this. I'm not trying to demand anything from you or your elite club that you claim to be a part of. I'm just suggesting and reasoning that items may not be as bad as you claim. I'm putting forward my opinion. If you are set in your ways, so certain that items are not for you, I don't care. I really don't. But I do think you should try not to shove your opinion down other people's throats. Even with your fantastic evidence based reasoning you can't use your "facts" to that "prove" that no-items is the best way to play, because different people like different things. For example, I prefer to play with items on, and there isn't really any reasoning you can use to change my mind on that. So when I play in a competition, I'd prefer to have items on. That is my opinion, and I've tried to explain why. To say that I am "wrong" makes about as much sense as to say I'm wrong for preferring vanilla ice cream over chocolate ice cream.
Look, I can see that your holy crusade against items isn't going to stop just because of what I've said. I realise that you're going to flame me and my post until the ashes blow away. It is clear that winning this 'argument' means more to you than it does to me. So you can have it. I'm out. Flame away. Flame on until the only people left in this thread are those who agree with you. Then the world will know peace.
i agree, you are as blind as a bat Yuna, you will just keep fighting the same fight, no matter what other people say, even if his point changes. i prefer to use items as well, and you need to deal with different situations, weither it's "random" or not.
That reminds me. I forgot to emphasise that a game with items involves certain skills that are not required in a game with no items. The game is slightly different with items. The best player when items are turned off may not be the best player when items are turned on. So it is difficult to say which form of play is best for competitive play from the point of view of finding the "best player".
Also, a few people are asking why anyone would want to choose add more randomness to the outcome of matches. My response to that is that the randomness is not what we are choosing to add. The randomness is a side-effect. The reason I'd prefer to play with items is to add variety in what can happen in a game; not to obscure who is the better player - that's just a side effect.
yes, there isn't only one way to deside who is best. and to the randomness is a side effect, that is true, it is variety that items bring, not unfair victories. hey, also i believe you said that this place was for competitive smashers until brawl was announced, well if you feel that way, go back to the melee forums!
It's not that you're wrong, it's that you're wrong and refuse to realize that you're wrong and keep reusing the same old tired arguments others and even you yourself have already used and failed with already.
Ignorance is perfectly fine since not everyone can be expected to know everything. But once you're informed of something, you're expected to be able to learn from that, not to ignore it if it works against your cause. You still say that you think we should at least try Final Smashes out in tournaments despite the heap of evidence and arguments I've showered upon you on why we will never do so.
hey, Yuna, how about you take your
OWN advice for once. you say ignorance is ok because people are not perfect, but you sure sound like it. and you shouldn't ignore something just because it hurts your cause. ignorance, you claim the same thing every time, no matter what the other side says. y do you have to be so closed-minded? what is there to lose from trying something new? nothing!
read the first paragraph of this quote, how many times is the words wrong and you're. lets check shall we? it doesn't matter! because it makes no sence! let me brake it down.
1)it's not that you're wrong. (ok, nothing bad here)
2) it's that you're wrong and refuse to
realize you're wrong
WOah Woah Woah! objection!! i see a contradiction! you say we're not wrong, yet you say we REFUSE to realize we're wrong! so, you're saying we are wrong, look who's stupid now!
I'm just saying that variety is the spice of life. Once you've done the same thing over and over, it's going to get boring. Sure, I understand that if you always set it to one simple map, and no items, it will never be the same, but at the same time, I think its more fun to have things changing all the time. that is why we play brawl right? to have fun? Anyways, for tournaments, I agree that having a set map, and no items will definitely show who is the greater player, but I think it makes a game more enjoyable if you're having to run like hell to avoid the landmaster. Plus, a smash ball is not a guaranteed KO. Many are really easy to dodge. It just all depends on what you want to do. If you want to determine skill lvl, great, smash balls aren't for you. But if you want to make a game more fun... in my opinion, then go ahead, throw them in there.
yeah, actually, the skill level can be determined by fs's i worked pretty hard to learn how to avoid the LANDMASTAA! but i can. you may beat me without items, but i will win with them, as several people have said, it takes a different kind of skill, yet there is only one way of determining this... hm, does anyone else find this unfair? heck, i might have a lower lvl without items, but i (probably) have a higher lvl with items, then you without! you need something to determine the skill lvl of smashers other than the boring "standerd" bull.
and, if you don't have anything good or witty to say, you just quote with the word stuff in it, instead of what they say, and respond with "go away" that is a cheezy, stupid, and immature way to repond, it's like saying "yo MOMMA!" to everything, even if it has nothing to do with the topic.
I like how there are two people who are arguing over what I've been saying... and neither one of them is me. I just think that's the bee's knees (for no other reason than it's an excuse to use the phrase 'bee's knees').
I'm going to explain this as well as I can, and hopefully someone will understand it. Yuna, I know you can't believe that I could possibly be advocating change simply to be advocating change (and adumbrodeus is totally right in that I'm not advocating replacing the current tournament standard; it's the standard for a reason and that's not likely to change, nor should it), but that's exactly what I'm doing. I'm advocating exploration of options not because we require it to survive, but because it is a vital part of the growth of the community.
Many people are satisfied with what we have now, as is their right. But, no one comes up to you and says 'here's something new for you to experience' (unless he's a salesman); you have to go and actively look for new and exciting experiences. No one can do that for you. If you don't go out and look for a diverse set of experiences, then you are running the risk of missing out on something wonderful, something that you can't possibly know exists if you don't look for it yourself. I can give you plenty of examples of this, both inside gaming and out.
I am not an outdoors person. I hate getting dirty, and I have an insect phobia. Knowing this full well, I have gone camping before. Why would I purposefully put myself in a situation that I 'knew' I wouldn't like? Simple; because I would never know for sure if I was missing out on something that I could only get by camping without trying the activity out for myself, and lo and behold I did find something I like to do because I put myself out on a limb and tried something new simply for the sake of trying something new (that something being marksmanship).
As an example in gaming, I am an avid Pokemon Trainer. My favorite Pokemon has alway been Alakazam. As a Spc. Sweeper, he has crazy S. Atk and Spd., which is perfect for my playstyle; he may not be the best, but he's never let me down, and so I enjoy having him on my team. I felt that I was becoming stagnant, though, and as such I decided to reset my Pearl version so that I could play with an entirely different team than I was used to simply for the sake of playing with Pokemon that I wasn't used to playing with. As a result, I've grown very attached to Arcanine and Gengar, and I never would have even considered using them had I not done this.
This applies to our community in a very important way. We have something that works for us (the current tournament standard)... but who's to say that there aren't ways to play out there that aren't just as good (or better)? We'll never know if we refuse to experiment, if we foolishly stick to our standard and let others mess around on the side as if it isn't important. Our community is growing at an alarming rate, new players coming into the fold in massive quantities, and not everyone is looking for the same thing. We, as a community, owe it to ourselves to experiment simply to say that we've explored every avenue we could to find different ways to play competitively that work for many different people (all as compliments to the accepted tournament standard that will bind them all together).
We all, as members of a community, should want the community to grow, to reach horizons that we might not have though possible (or prudent) before. We should all be trying to find ways to change Smash for the better (and I hear now that EVO is considering using items in their Brawl tourney...). We should all be experimenting with no items, items, heavy Brawl, fast Brawl, Smash Balls, 1v1, 2v2, FFA... anything we can to find what is balanced and what works so that we can have as many accepted standards as possible. There is literally no reason not to as we stand nothing to lose, but everything to gain.
Nothing to lose at all. As long as we continue to approach everything with the same skill, level-headedness, and determination that built our current community, only good things can come from it. And it's a simple as that.
i have several things to say to this.
1) lol at bee's knees
2) i am behind jack 100%
3) yuna still thinks jack is trying to change the standerd, and that makes me
4) exactly about the new experiences, you have lunge for it, other wise, we wouldn't have most of the technology we have today. what if the greatest inventors and scientists of all time never went out, to try something new? we wouldn't have the wii, that's for sure, heck we might now have video games at all.
5)about the community, that's true, a new generation of smashers are coming, and since they grew up with options, do you really think they will comply? what if they want to be competitive, but not in the way we are used to?
6)and what's wrong with experimenting? like jack said nothing to lose, everything to gain. are you so attached to your standerd, that you arn't into any changes. what if we add an option, another standerd, a CHOICE! then you can keep your standerd that it seems you'd flame 100 members to protect your belifes. i find that honorable, but not by disrespecting others, and you think you're a nice person, yeah, hitler said that too, (he really did)
7) the last paragraph, is my thoughts to a T.
8)also, im impressed, with you're use of persuasion techniques. especially with the
italics and the
bolding of the key words for the reader to subconsiously make your point the center of attention, causing unknowing people to be more likely to join your side. world leaders use this kind of thing all the time.
i know these things, and i applaud your cheap way of winning a arguement.
I guess it wont hurt to post it again for all the new people to read >_>
