"Why is Smash Bros the laughing stock of fighters?"

[Big-Cat]

If anything, you could say that the Melee community is starting to grow up. I still think that the immature attitude of the community in general is what has made the series "be the laughing stock."

 

[ETWIST51294]

Our whole community (except for 64) thinks in this stupid fashion too. Jiggs for ex. Jiggs vs Marth isn't even, it's like 60-40 Marth, but since Hbox is amazing at the match up it must be even. So stupid. If X character does better than Y character, X character must be better than Y character. Ex. Marth, Marth isn't better than Falco and Sheik, but since M2K ***** so hard Marth is better than them. I just don't understand this thinking.

 

[Big-Cat]

That was a load of gibberish you just wrote. Definitely shows the logic of the community. I swear, we need more people from other communities , or some of our people get involved with others, if this one is ever going to grow up.

 

[ETWIST51294]

Something BIG has to happen to change it. Dogysamich brought it up to me. He writes HUGE *** posts. Maybe we should try to do something about it.

 

[Big-Cat]

You got a link to his/her posts? I'd like to support this.

 

[ETWIST51294]

Dogy first post is about Mario being better than Doc but he says something about it in the post.

His post on the second page is where he really talks about how the community works.

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=264016

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

(sorry, I get kinda long winded when I go into detail. And I got kinda bored, so I figured I'd type a while. )

First and foremost, I'm not upset at you pming me at all. Hell, I wouldn't have minded if you called me out. I know I look like the bad guy when I do this stuff, but if and when you see what I'm getting at, you'll see why it happens.

___

I don't hate the people of the community. I can tell you a few (hell, really only like, two) people in the community I DISLIKE, but for the literal definition of hate, I don't hate anybody.

What I do hate is how people think about here. It drives me up the wall. In large, it's elitist, it's inconsistent, it's absolute, it's boardline illogical, and when you actually venture out into other stuff and come back, it really makes you want to just punch people in the face.

___

Cause I mean, take the Mario > Doc thing for example. I've told people for years that Mario is better than Doc, although I can make a much better argument that it really comes down to player preference and player style. But, aside from some open-minded people, you can't really convince push that idea without being called crazy.

Why? Because that's how things roll around here. The MBR look at the tourney results, and say "Hey, all the Marios have died, drop his *** down the tierlist" (elistist), then alot of the people who were TRYING Mario jump ship to Doc because Mario magically has all of these horrible matchup that Green Mario and Eggz are probably the ONLY two that have ever seen (inconsistent). Once everybody hops off and writes him as a lost cause, he can never be good again (absolute), and all this came because the matchups magically change overnite, inspite of the fact that people who actually PLAY the characters do well (illogical).

I mean, I want you to seriously think about this; is jiggs REALLY a top 3 character, or are mango and hbox good at bad matchups? If jiggs really is THAT GOOD of a character, why isn't there a large amount of randomly successful jiggs like there are Foxs and Falcos? It's not like people don't PLAY jiggs, it's because they get destroyed in those harder and bad matchups.

*

I probably could write a short book about everything I don't like about the community's mentality. "Smash is this great entity that is unique from every other thing in the genre", not exactly, although it is fairly different. "This is the most indepth and advanced game ever", not exactly.

I mean, those two specific points are some of the many reasons why people dont want to get into the game. The first one is very elitist, and both of them make the game sound like you need a degree to get started, which we both know isn't REALLY true.

___

It's like, I see people who are supposed to have some merit say something dumb, and I think "Wow, is this what we're working with? No wonder nobody wants to deal with us, we look like *******."

I mean, there's one specific incident in the MBR where somebody said "We're not like street fighter. Our mixups are not just footsies." ... -facepalms- That seriously makes me want to ask "Have you played ANY SF for more than 5 minutes? When/Where, high/low, grab/hit. What mixups does smash have? AM I GOING TO HIT YOU OR AM I GOING TO GRAB YOU? AM I DOING TO DO IT NOW OR ONE SECOND LATER." If I went into detail, smash would have the shorter end of the stick, but really they have the same.

Oh, and while I'm thinking about horribly wrong, I think of the pound4 stream when a commentator said something along the lines of "This is what's great about the game. The meta is always changing and is unpredictable. It's not like street fighter or tekken." Anybody who keeps up with current SF4 looks at that and says "Wow, I hope this guy isn't talking about Sagat being "unbeatable", considering that they've been talking about how he loses projectile wars with akuma and can't zone viper." Somebody who's stayed with SF's history might say something like "Hope he's not randomly talking about a shoto being on top, caaaaause yun and chun don't fit that category." All this is in lou if the fact that FOUR YEARS AGO, Reflex said "I'm willing to bet money that the peak of melee's metagame is going to be a jiggs who can space well and land rests." -looks at pound4 results- I'll admit, Reflex is a cooky genius, but he called this YEARS in advance.

(I know what two guys I'm talking about, I'm not going to namedrop to hurt people.)

-My point in all this is that smash players, as a collective whole, tend to sit in their own world and look down at others. I can't act like I'm not a part of it, I just wish it'd change.

(last point with this and i'll go on, I swear)

I mean, it's not like other communities haven't TRIED to include us. But, with the way we operate, we just slap their hands away and say "Na, we had MLG, we can run on our own." In the south, we (the smash community) actually function relatively well with "the fighting game community". Final Round, second biggest fighting game tourney in the nation, second to evo, barely scrapped up enough pre regs to have both melee and brawl, inspite of the fact that the southern brawl community s***ted on them last year (that's important because sadly, we're not looked at as 2 different communities, but one "Smash" community. One thing i absolutely hate about the community mentality. Not only do we let it happen, we encourage it). You know why FR let that happen, because Shin blanka (the TO) knows who chaddd, ga peach, mike g, cornell, and I are. We, and a few others, play other fighters and do relatively well. Melee is another game in our mix. They give up chance after chance inspite of the fact that the way we operate really kills their tourney and we refuse to change it (sigh).

But the community as a whole? No. That's taboo to support "those guys who talk trash about our game." No, not with their "stupid fireball infested games", or their "juggle-a-thon" games.

*

I really haven't even hit the tip of the iceberg with stuff I don't like. But me constantly janking on the community isn't because I hate people.

If anything, all I really want is for it to change. I don't even want the fame or anything to go along with it, but I mean ****, I can't count how many people I've met that said "Man, melee is an aight game, but I just can't get into it because of ___________", and that blank is something that really SHOULDN'T be happening, it's just people wont try it.

***********

So next topic, the tierlist.

*slams head against desk* Now, I could tell you a story about me, the smash community, and this tierlist. It's a sad story that, if avoided, could have me sitting with the likes of M2K, but it's largely irrelevant to the point.

My gripe about it has always been that the way the tierlist is done around here doesn't tell me who's better than who, it tells me who's more likely to win a tourney. On the surface, that's a completely valid purpose. No matter what I think or believe, I can't argue with that, nobody can. The flaw with that is that this game isn't always played in tourney. The bigger flaw (which is what you get with a tierlist based off of matchups) is that it doesn't tell me which character is literally better than the other one.

Going all the way back to Mario > Doc. Look at that tierlist, and look at past tierlists for... hell, as long as I can remember i guess. I think it's always said Doc > Mario. Like we've said though, Mario is > Doc. But because HMW, Shroomed, Boss, 18s, OTG, Pine, DJN and I Exist, and because $mac, Bob$, Cyphus, Desh, Captain Jack, S-royal existed, Doc is "a better character." Yeah Doc's going to finish better if there are more doc's and they're better players. Doesn't mean the CHARACTER is good.

Every matchup chart attempt has failed? There's an obvious reason for that; nobody really plays all the characters. If anybody actually PLAYS said character, they're usually not specifically amazing with them (save a few specifics.)

So imagine this, if you've never seen a good m2, and nobody plays m2 (taj plays marth, run with that for now), would you really let me convince you that M2 stands any sort of a chance vs Sheik? No. That's because whenever you DO see that one random m2 player, he gets annihilated by scrubmaster557. I myself watch Iori go to tourneys, MM EVERY SHEIK in the building, and win most if not all of his matches.

You can't convince me the matchup is something like 2-8. But how does the community work? Sheik is high tier, m2 is bottom. I see sheiks doing well, I forgot what m2's down+b down. Therefore, Sheik must destroy m2.

___

With the way the tierlist is, it's apparently "impossible" for a character below another on the tierlist to have a good matchup.

Prime example: Doc vs Jiggs. People are hauling off and saying Doc/Jiggs is 4-6 (or worse) in Jiggs favor. Except for a select few people, nobody's SEEN the **** matchup, aside from Chillfever99 vs Mango, and of course Mango's going to DESTROY the guy, he doens't have a clue how to play the matchup. You ASK mango, or hbox, or honest jiggs who's played a competent doc, and they'll tell you "The matchup is hard." Now, if jiggs players who are on top of the world are saying Doc is hard for their character, why do people still think Jiggs not only beats, but destroys Doc?

Because Jiggs is higher tier, therefore all matchups must be in her favor. "We're not going to TRY it, we'll just pencil it in and deal with it later." Ignore the people who've actually play the matchup, Doc's aren't a hot commodity.

__

I've gotten used to it, and I accept the fact that that's how the community works, but it's annoying when a guy new guy comes up to me and is like "Hey Dogy, I want to play Link, what do you think about that?", I say "Well, it's not going to be as easy as some characters, you might need a secondary, but it's doable.", and then some random guy (be it a "credible" person or not) comes by and spews "Link? Why play him? He's low tier, low tiers can't do anything, you need to play Marth." (True example)

Every matchup above link isn't abysmal. Sure he's got disadvantages, and sure he's got horrid matchups, but most of them are do-able. It's work, but it's doable. That's all some people want. Play a character they like, go to tourneys, and have a good time.

But people come talking about tourney viable. And yes, that's a concept that doesn't originate in smash. But there's all sorts of twists and turns around here when the words "tourney viable" come up.

Somebody says not tourney viable in smash, and it's like "Well, this character can't even beat the guy above him. You'll never beat anybody, inspite of how good or smart you are. Character has too many unworkable flaws. You'll never win ANYTHING." No consideration to the level of the player or level of play they're exposed to.

It ties into the tierlist and balance of the game (Is melee balanced or unbalanced? depends on who you ask), but the words "tourney viable" turn a lot of potential players away.

_

Now, take another community, MvC2 for example (Broke vs Capcom). Admittedly horribly unbalanced game (everybody knows that), with a small pool of playable characters. Like, 75% of the cast is "Not Tourney Viable". But say you want to play Megaman for whatever reason. Guess what you just landed? A bad matchup for Magneto, a HORRIBLE matchup. Now sure, you've got an unviable point character, but say you just want to go jank on some Magnetos, and you'll switch up for other teams? Well there you go, mission accomplished.

SC4, I main Talim (and cassandra). Talim is considered the second worst character in the game, and outside of God's Disciple known an Kira, there's absolutely no way anybody can win with her and absolutly no reason anybody should play with her. Guess what? She's got a 50/50 with Hilde, "Miss Broke." 2nd worst character in the game with a 5/5 vs 2nd best. If Talim is my Hilde slayer, then that's all I need.

See where I'm getting with that? People don't think like that around here.

If somebody wants Y.Link to destroy Peach, that's not possible. Y.Link's low tier, Peach is high. Does not compute. Nevermind what those 2 (or the ones who've played it) say about the matchup.

__

See where tourney viable goes? It's not a written law or anything, but when other communities talk about tourney viable, they tend to mean characters that just can't work on their own. They've done enough research to know if and what utility the character has, but it usually means the character can't function on their on.

In smash, a non tourney viable character can't do anything. It's by God's will if they ever squeak a win out. No way that matchup is closer than 7-3. Don't even think about mentioning that character in MBR.

*****

-taps fingers on desk-
I think I'ma stop here for now.

Like I said, I could go on for ages about it, but I'll save it for another time.

Again, I'm not mad by any stretch of the imagination. Doesn't bother me at all. I just don't like the way people think about alot of things around here.

If for nothing else, it's closing a lot of doors on the community.

Not too many people are stepping back and looking at the big picture, they're just looking at "Hey, Pound4 has 300+ participants, biggest smash tourney ever." You ever think where those people came from? It's not exactly NEW people like everybody thinks. I mean, year there are SOME, but alot of people came out of retirement, and then alot of players flew in.

*shrug* In the end, it's really just a half full/ half empty kind of thing.

I'm guessing this is what your talking about correct? I agree with his ideas.

 

[ETWIST51294]

Yup. except make it Green. lol

It ain't Dogy unless it's a Green wall.

lolthis green

 

[jmanxiv]

because is nintendo, and nintendo is treated like the disney of video games

 

[Number 28]

Bawrl: Because it requires almost zero tech skill
Smash64/Melee: Because some people are narrow minded. They talk too much about things they do not know **** about.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Bawrl: Because it requires almost zero tech skill
Smash64/Melee: Because some people are narrow minded. They talk too much about things they do not know **** about.

Pretty bad reason right there.

 

[kr3wman]

Wow dogy really doesn't get it.

 

[Big-Cat]

Care to explain? I'm not against you or anything, I just want to know your reasoning.

 

[kr3wman]

he goes on complaining about scrubs, and people just fap to his reasoning like he's some kind of god. After that, he complains about how tier lists are based on tournament results and how that skews people who need to know who to main like everybody ****ing looks at the tier list before choosing one, and then mentions how matchups are ignored in preference to the tier list even when he knows its two different things in the smash community.

his first two posts about mario > doc just lead to this, and are all right, but jeez nobody wanted to know your complaints about Smash scrubs and ****, jesus.

 

[Big-Cat]

he goes on complaining about scrubs, and people just fap to his reasoning like he's some kind of god. After that, he complains about how tier lists are based on tournament results and how that skews people who need to know who to main like everybody ****ing looks at the tier list before choosing one, and then mentions how matchups are ignored in preference to the tier list even when he knows its two different things in the smash community.

his first two posts about mario > doc just lead to this, and are all right, but jeez nobody wanted to know your complaints about Smash scrubs and ****, jesus.

I think the bold might be the worst thing about the Smash fanbase. If you've checked the MK debate, there have been times where people are dry humping Sirlin's ban criteria. It seems like half the time, the fanbase can't think for themselves.

 

[kr3wman]

I'd say that people, in general, can't think for themselves. Don't know what to buy between X and Y? Go on online and base your opinion, one of the only thing truly yours, on someone's, someone you never met and never will. This applies for every choice where someone might be an outside influence (ie a subjective fact) Which is a cause for most problems nowadays, including what this thread is about.

Did I just derail the thread to get back into it?

god**** im good.

 

[Brawler1432]

Let me bring up the points posted by the people claiming it isn't a true fighter (Points in underlined, my rebuttal in bold):

No Lifebar, must knock opponents off

Why does that matter? If anything it brings more strategy into play. It does not mean you can be easily hit off when you start, you still have to do damage to your opponent to effectively eliminate him.

No items causes to game to lose balance, and makes it more a party game

Items DO throw off the balance off in competitive play, but in casuals matches, they make the game more fun, and in competitive matches you can simply turn the items off.

It has stages with wild terrain, making it less competitive as the terrain becomes a much larger factor in who wins. Older fighting games have used flat terrain very successfully

Tradition fighters do indeed have flat terrain, but that fact does not mean games without it require less skill. While playing in some larger maps, more strategy is required to participate in the combat and scale the terrain simultaneously, sometimes requiring more skill than if the match were played on flat terrain

The game is a party game

You can play the game at a party, if that is what you're saying, but you can do the same with Street Fighter, Tekken, Virtua Fighter, Capcom Vs games, and more. Nothing makes the Smash Bros series more like a party game than any other fighter. It has items, which can be turned off at will, it has a well balanced roster of 35 characters, with full move sets, and an array of stages. Tournaments exist for the game, and it has a competitive scene as large as any other fighter. In competitive matches, the game relies almost solely on skill. It is as much a pure fighter as any other , but because it is unique in its gameplay it is a party game? It has the same muliplayer functionality of any other fighter out there, and other than stages, and parts of gameplay (both still requiring just as much skill as the leading fighting games) it is very similar to any other fighting game and just as, if not more competitive.


Perhaps their doubts for the game stem from the casual audience that makes up a part of Wii owners, but that should not be a detriment on the design of the game, which was truthfully not made for the casual audience, but somewhere in between, and perhaps even more so in the "hardcore" section of the Wii audience.


WAIT, OH NO! I'M DEFENDING NINTENDO I'M OBVIOUSLY A FANBOY BECAUSE YOU DISAGREE WITH ME.

OP, if you are reading this, you should link them this thread, so that your side can at least get in a worthy rebuttal.

 

[ETWIST51294]

I'd say that people, in general, can't think for themselves. Don't know what to buy between X and Y? Go on online and base your opinion, one of the only thing truly yours, on someone's, someone you never met and never will. This applies for every choice where someone might be an outside influence (ie a subjective fact) Which is a cause for most problems nowadays, including what this thread is about.

Did I just derail the thread to get back into it?

god**** im good.

Go argue with Dogy and see what happens.

 

[Pokemon Z RPG]

Smash Bros. is one of those misundestood games, much like Animal Crossing in the way that, it's an excellent game series, but people turn away from the idea of playing it because of its kiddie-like outlook. I am unfortunate enough to have friends that don't laugh at the sight of Smash Bros., and will willing play it with me a lot of times. Hardcore fighters think that all there is to a fighter is commands that are hard to pull off, which leads to often button-mashing. This just makes things more difficult than they need to be, and the Smash Bros. series realized that. Also, Nintendo wants to have an innovative and unique fighter. They could have made a game where it was two people per match, with life bars and hardcore 8-button move combos, but they didn't because they are smart.