Sakurai essay in EDGE on appealing to all types of gamers with the new Smash Bros.

I've never played smash against anyone more than moderately skilled(Still enough to kick my ass). For most people, it's just a fun, accessible local co-op fighter.
 
The only thing that worries me is responsiveness. If he takes the speed down a bit that's okay, but hearing from many people who played it at E3 that it felt sluggish during animations/ lag after moves really concerns me.

The annoying thing is that he thinks to remove all the annoyance with long animation endlag, he has to add in l-cancelling... Just reduce it automatically dammit!
 
I honestly did feel Melee was a bit too fast for casual players like me. It doesn't have to be as slow as Brawl though.

Hopefully they can strike a balance.
 
In fact, we recreated all characters almost from scratch.
My most wanted request. Recycling models, voices, and animations from Melee only made the scrutiny worse.

Thank you Mr. Sakurai.
 
You'd think, with all of the options this game is bound to have, they could have just put a damn speed setting in there and forgotten all about it!
 
My most wanted request. Recycling models, voices, and animations from Melee only made the scrutiny worse.

Thank you Mr. Sakurai.

You know that they have recycled some animations and entire character voice samples from Brawl, right?

Maybe not some models, though its hard to tell in some cases.
 
Yup.

I cannot understand why he feels he needs to strike a balance here in the least. You didn't need to learn all of the ins and outs of Melee to have fun with it. I mean, has ANYONE ever said "I can't play Melee; it's too fast for me. I'd rather play Brawl"?

Casuals and kids will play the new game online, melee they did not. Melee was fine as they only played family and friends. Now those players are facing the world, most of 'em will get murdered unless the game caters to them somewhat.
 
Casuals and kids will play the new game online, melee they did not. Melee was fine as they only played family and friends. Now those players are facing the world, most of 'em will get murdered unless the game caters to them somewhat.

Posts like these make me laugh, no offense.
First of all, they wouldn't, as they'd just pick the "for anyone mode".

If they pick "For Glory" mode instead, I have bad news for you: they'd be murdered even if it was Brawl.
 
The only thing that worries me is responsiveness. If he takes the speed down a bit that's okay, but hearing from many people who played it at E3 that it felt sluggish during animations/ lag after moves really concerns me.
I've only heard the opposite, that it's much quicker and less sluggish than Brawl.
 
You know that they have recycled some animations and entire character voice samples from Brawl, right?

Maybe not some models, though its hard to tell in some cases.
I'm gonna take Sakurai's word on it. Though some mainstays like Marth seem to have minimal changes. I'm still not keen on Mario having FLUDD either.

Hopefully Fox and Captain Falcon can get new games this gen so we get new voice acting and such. (though Starfox 64 got brand new VA with the original cast)
 
Posts like these make me laugh, no offense.
First of all, they wouldn't, as they'd just pick the "for anyone mode".

Because every player is one of two skills....casual noob or expert pro.

No inbetween at all.

Also no trolls who will pick 'for anyone' when they a more than capable player. Never seen that in a fighting game online ever.


Nice fantasy land you live in.
 
Casuals and kids will play the new game online, melee they did not. Melee was fine as they only played family and friends. Now those players are facing the world, most of 'em will get murdered unless the game caters to them somewhat.

Those people will get murdered in 64, they'll get murdered in Melee, they'll get murdered in Brawl and they'll get murdered in Smash 4, regardless of Sakurai's efforts to reduce the impact of a player's technical skill.

I'm ok with this.
do we have feedbacks from the Pro players that fought at the E3 tournament?

Most thought it was ok but the lack of any form of animation cancelling on aerials made the game feel really stiff/slow and was too limiting on the combo game.
 
I just can't understand some of the thinking in that essay, and I can't understand how it lead to the changes we got. I don't think Melee was harder for newer players and I don't think taking away tools from the veteran players makes it any easier for the new players.
 
I thought Melee was OK as a kid but after Brawl came out I couldn't go back to it. The new airdodge was improved in every way, and the characters felt a lot better (in Melee they always seemed too heavy and too fast). It seemed like they made it a little slower than it needed to be though, so I'm glad that Sakurai wants to strike a balance between the two games.
 
Honestly though, as a casual player, the biggest issue was that the stages in Melee were fantastic and there was plenty of opportunity to get knocked off the edge and not be able to get back on. In Brawl, the stages were generally poor and most KOs came from either the top of the screen or from a direct smash off the side (where you never regain control of your character). One of the fun parts of smash is thinking 'oh man will I be able to get back from here' and I feel like that aspect of the game was limited due to the stage selection and amount of characters with flying abilities.
You know, I've never thought about this before, but you're totally right.
 
Melee’s controls were, however, quite complicated and very tiring if the player really got into it in a serious way. This made the game less accessible for novice players and it basically ended up becoming a Smash Bros. game for hardcore fighting fans. I personally regret that, because I originally intended the Smash Bros. series to be for players who couldn’t handle such highly skilled games.

The controls weren't the problem, and in fact he didn't change anything control wise going from Melee to Brawl.

Although the pace of the game had to be lowered compared to Melee in order to achieve this balance, we have managed to keep the dynamism because we didn’t have to gear towards novice players like we did with Brawl.

Bullshit. The game is no more than 20% at most faster than Brawl. It's such an insignificant increase that I'm wondering why he bothered at all.
 
This is really not what I wanted to hear. Melee sold amazingly on the Gamecube despite its so called "complexity". In fact, wasn't it the best selling Gamecube game?

For everyone whose worried about how this game plays, there are hours of live gameplay video of Smash 4 on youtube. There's the Smash invitational tournament which showed pros playing against each other, there's the 3ds tournament, and tons of treehouse employees playing each other. You can see the speed of the game and even how a lot of the individual characters stack up against each other when skilled players are using them.

The Invitational didn't make the game look good at all, it was like watching a slightly faster Brawl.
 
Not that I am taking any stand, because Future sacked their online staff. But we've had several threads, transcribing more or less entire pages of this month's magazine at this point.

We allow this but forbid scans. It's kinda weird because Edge are trying to grow their digital subscriptions...
 
blablabla... keep lying :p Then, once i can play the game, my character is not even going to get momentum from jumping while running...
 
Sakurai said:
If tournament popularity was the most important consideration, then I think we would create a Smash Bros. game that included a multitude of fast moves with complicated controls. However, I believe this is actually the greatest shortcoming of fighting games at present, and that is the reason why I don’t do it.
Smash already doesn't have complicated controls and speed proved not to be a problem for anyone with Melee. Thanks for reminding us you still don't get it, Sakurai, and that you still have warped perceptions whereby stuff that makes for good tournament fodder is immediately not great for casuals.
 
i wanna believe he can walk that line like capcom did with sf2 to 3 to 4, but i dunno. here's hoping.

if you talk to most casual players, they'll say 3 never walked the line. It was incredibly hardcore.
 
I'm still trying to figure why Sakurai thinks Melee alienated people when it sold MORE than SSB64 did.
 
What I find funny about his philosophy here is that I bet more casual players didn't even realize there was a difference between the overall feel of Melee and Brawl. I'll freely admit to being pretty bad at the games (though I've played the hell out of them), and I don't really have much of a preference between the two; the more skilled you are, the more that matters to you, but to unskilled players the difference is basically negligible. I think he's overanalyzing things if he things the slower pace of brawl attracted less skilled players, or that a melee-speed game would turn anyone away who would have otherwise bought the game.
 
I somewhat agree with the general sentiment but I already felt he struck a great balance with Melee. Brawl was way to slow and I fear that Smash 4 might need more than a few patches after the release.
 
Did ANYONE complain about how SSB64 played? I feel that one gets ignored unfairly. If Sakurai wanted something to be between Melee and Brawl, guess what? He already had something like that. Not this slightly modified Brawl garbage that he decided on.
 
Did ANYONE complain about how SSB64 played? I feel that one gets ignored unfairly. If Sakurai wanted something to be between Melee and Brawl, guess what? He already had something like that. Not this slightly modified Brawl garbage that he decided on.
There is no professional player who has tried the game that thinks it's a "slightly modified" Brawl.
 
There is no professional player who has tried the game that thinks it's a "slightly modified" Brawl.
We are also talking about people who tried the game, they didn't play it for hours and hours and it wasn't even the final build. Melee took years to become what it is.
 
you know what sakurai... 2 days ago, i played a lot of smash 64 with 3 friends and... smash 64, released in 1999, is still both more fun and more of a smash bros game (there was an actual edge game, and it was difficult to come back to the stage!!) than brawl :) OH!! and, in smash 64, throws are awesome (compared to brawl, at least).

Or, maybe, is was just nostalgia. You can never be sure ;p
 
We are also talking about people who tried the game, they didn't play it for hours and hours and it wasn't even the final build. Melee took years to become what it is.

That's only because Melee was the first super technical smash that had a lot of things to learn.


We know enough about Smash as a series know to base certain things off the way the base mechanics work, I hear people say "We just don't know how it works yet" but that just isn't true based on what we've seen so far, and there's no reason to believe Sakurai will make changes geared towards making the game more competitive based on his consistent attitude that always manages to completely miss the point.

We're not going to find some AT years into the game that lets you reduce your endlag, there's not going to be something we find that decreases the effectiveness of defense or removes the other players ability to spam air dodges.
 
Can it be a gateway drug, though? I'm not seeing people starting with Smash Bros and then moving on to "harder" fighting games like Street Fighter or Tekken, because those other games are nothing like Smash.

Plenty of big Smash players moved onto Marvel and Street Fighter.
 
There is no professional player who has tried the game that thinks it's a "slightly modified" Brawl.

It really is though, Smash 4 is closer to Brawl than any other iteration of smash. The only thing that can make it stand out from the others is the way custom moves could potentially affect how the game develops, everything else is straight up Brawl.


Sure, it has a few things from 64, and the speed is increased ever so slightly.

But everything else, the spammable air dodge, overpowered defensive options, high endlag (with a lack of animation cancelling), nerfed offstage game and improved recoveries, increased amount of items that break the flow of gameplay just to add chaos or 1-hit KOs, floatiness, lack of momentum conservation...

It all just screams "Brawl - But we only fixed the stupid shit that shouldn't have been there in the first place like tripping instead of the actual problems with the game".
 
I press like 3 buttons a second at most, even I get annoyed at Brawl when it doesn't let me do follow-ups.

I don't know, I think Sakurai wants to cater to players who do want to get involved but are completely intimidated by all the crap in Melee that's there
 
As far as I am concerned Smash 4 is a modified Brawl. Only for the fact that development initiated on using Brawl as a base and was worked up on from there. Other then that it is completely different.
 

Honestly I don't full trust Larry's opinion on this.


He was doing a lot of offensive shit as Bowser in the grand finals that straight up would not have worked if he was playing against another pro player, all of the offensive options he used were so damn punishable but the other guy wasn't making use of the superior defensive options he had at all.


Smash 64 did not have good defense, it was the worst in the series and using your shield was practically a death sentence, meanwhile Smash 4 has the best defense in the series, saying it's a mix of the two is wrong just because it has increased throw knockback and a few other things.

64 was also defined by it's massive hitstun and complete animation cancelling that allowed for a combo game where 0-deaths were incredibly common.

Smash 4 isn't a mix of anything, it's Brawl but with a few features from the other games and a few new ones.
 
Honestly I don't full trust Larry's opinion on this.


He was doing a lot of offensive shit as Bowser in the grand finals that straight up would not have worked if he was playing against another pro player, all of the offensive options he used were so damn punishable but the other guy wasn't making use of the superior defensive options he had at all.


Smash 64 did not have good defense, it was the worst in the series and using your shield was practically a death sentence, meanwhile Smash 4 has the best defense in the series, saying it's a mix of the two is wrong just because it has increased throw knockback and a few other things.

64 was also defined by it's massive hitstun and complete animation cancelling that allowed for a combo game where 0-deaths were incredibly common.

Smash 4 isn't a mix of anything, it's Brawl but with a few features from the other games and a few new ones.

And how much did you play the game compared to him?
 
And how much did you play the game compared to him?

None, but I've watched and analysed more than enough footage and impressions to see that the things he was doing wouldn't have worked if the other player was actually good.

The invitational finals were far more indicative of what the game is going to turn out like when people get their hands on it.
 
None, but I've watched and analysed more than enough footage and impressions to see that the things he was doing wouldn't have worked if the other player was actually good.

The invitational finals were far more indicative of what the game is going to turn out like when people get their hands on it.

And why should anyone trust your opinion on this?
 
I press like 3 buttons a second at most, even I get annoyed at Brawl when it doesn't let me do follow-ups.

Yeah, you don't have to be a pro to feel that Brawl was stale and boring. Also, for a game that was supposed to be simpler its top character were so broken. Casual players can easily get destroyed by Meta knight.
 
Top Bottom