Options

Keep your fucking Wii-related puns out of this thread.

13468962

Posts

  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] new member
    edited October 2007
    The user and all related content has been deleted.

    [Deleted User] on
  • Options
    TheySlashThemTheySlashThem Registered User regular
    edited October 2007
    I usually keep them on medium but I can handle high sure

    TheySlashThem on
  • Options
    GreenGreen Stick around. I'm full of bad ideas.Registered User regular
    edited October 2007
    I am having tremendous fun with Friend or Foe, but after three hours I seem to be 2/5 done already

    And maybe it's just because I'm taking a break from Hyper Mode in MP3, but this game also seems rediculously easy

    I'm glad I'm just checking it out from work

    Green on
  • Options
    DefenderDefender Registered User regular
    edited October 2007
    This argument just makes Smash look like a bad game. I mean, I can't think of any other fighting game where there's substantial disagreement in what rules should be set up.

    Defender on
  • Options
    PotUPotU __BANNED USERS regular
    edited October 2007
    All

    Items

    High

    It's the best.

    'cept for the healing ones, I don't play with them.

    PotU on
    2mong9u.jpg
  • Options
    No Great NameNo Great Name FRAUD DETECTED Registered User regular
    edited October 2007
    Defender wrote: »
    This argument just makes Smash look like a bad game. I mean, I can't think of any other fighting game where there's substantial disagreement in what rules should be set up.
    You mean a great game, because it has unprecedented levels of customization, of which everyone enjoys a certain one.

    Hurf durf we can all spin shit to mean what we want.

    No Great Name on
    PSN: NoGreatName Steam:SirToons Twitch: SirToons
    sirtoons.png
  • Options
    Garlic BreadGarlic Bread i'm a bitch i'm a bitch i'm a bitch i'm a Registered User, Disagreeable regular
    edited October 2007
    i don't really play Smash Bros.

    I'll be buying Brawl

    but I'm looking forward to the single-player game more than I am multiplayer

    Garlic Bread on
  • Options
    No Great NameNo Great Name FRAUD DETECTED Registered User regular
    edited October 2007
    It's the best multiplayer ever conceived. If you ever have 2 to 4 people in your house, what you should be doing is playing smash bros.

    No Great Name on
    PSN: NoGreatName Steam:SirToons Twitch: SirToons
    sirtoons.png
  • Options
    DefenderDefender Registered User regular
    edited October 2007
    Defender wrote: »
    This argument just makes Smash look like a bad game. I mean, I can't think of any other fighting game where there's substantial disagreement in what rules should be set up.
    You mean a great game, because it has unprecedented levels of customization, of which everyone enjoys a certain one.

    Hurf durf we can all spin shit to mean what we want.

    I don't want it to mean anything, because unlike some people here, I'm not a fanboy or...whatever the opposite of a fanboy is.

    The point is that it seems pretty fucked that people can't even agree on a basic ruleset for the game. I mean, it's clearly a problem, and no other fighting game that I know of has this problem.

    EDIT: Oh, and the source of the problem is gameplay features that are apparently either outright broken or just bad for high-level play. That's not a "feature," that's an "issue."

    Defender on
  • Options
    No Great NameNo Great Name FRAUD DETECTED Registered User regular
    edited October 2007
    That is probably the most asinine thing I've ever even read in my entire life.

    No Great Name on
    PSN: NoGreatName Steam:SirToons Twitch: SirToons
    sirtoons.png
  • Options
    DefenderDefender Registered User regular
    edited October 2007
    Yeah, of course it is. The community around that game seems to have major issues with "item spawning" as it affects gameplay/balance, but it's totally asinine to point it out because...I guess because it's a Nintendo product?

    Defender on
  • Options
    StratoStrato Registered User regular
    edited October 2007
    Defender wrote: »
    Yeah, of course it is. The community around that game seems to have major issues with "item spawning" as it affects gameplay/balance, but it's totally asinine to point it out because...I guess because it's a Nintendo product?

    Items are FUN.

    But for tournament situations, I'm pretty sure they're turned off, to reduce the "random" element.

    Strato on
  • Options
    No Great NameNo Great Name FRAUD DETECTED Registered User regular
    edited October 2007
    Yeah, and I bet some people dislike instant kills in guilty gear, or switching teammates in KoF/MvC2, or different grooves in CvS2.

    The difference is you can't change these things like in smash, thus the options are given to the player. Guess what defender, sometimes people have differing opinions and sometimes even like different things. Some people like items constantly falling from the middle of nowhere to then be used against your oponent, and some people don't stating that any amount of randomness that can affect the outcome of a match is terrible and shouldn't be allowed.

    Continue with your god-awful-octoberian-levels-of-spin-only-seen-in-election-years if you want but I can't believe there's a single person that can't see through your bullshit by now.

    No Great Name on
    PSN: NoGreatName Steam:SirToons Twitch: SirToons
    sirtoons.png
  • Options
    DirkMaximusDirkMaximus Registered User regular
    edited October 2007
    Yeah, and I bet some people dislike instant kills in guilty gear, or switching teammates in KoF/MvC2, or different grooves in CvS2.

    The difference is you can't change these things like in smash, thus the options are given to the player. Guess what defender, sometimes people have differing opinions and sometimes even like different things. Some people like items constantly falling from the middle of nowhere to then be used against your oponent, and some people don't stating that any amount of randomness that can affect the outcome of a match is terrible and shouldn't be allowed.

    Continue with your god-awful-octoberian-levels-of-spin-only-seen-in-election-years if you want but I can't believe there's a single person that can't see through your bullshit by now.

    Don't be silly. There's no such thing as opinion, just FACT.

    DirkMaximus on
  • Options
    MarathonMarathon Registered User regular
    edited October 2007
    Yeah, and I bet some people dislike instant kills in guilty gear, or switching teammates in KoF/MvC2, or different grooves in CvS2.

    The difference is you can't change these things like in smash, thus the options are given to the player. Guess what defender, sometimes people have differing opinions and sometimes even like different things. Some people like items constantly falling from the middle of nowhere to then be used against your oponent, and some people don't stating that any amount of randomness that can affect the outcome of a match is terrible and shouldn't be allowed.

    Continue with your god-awful-octoberian-levels-of-spin-only-seen-in-election-years if you want but I can't believe there's a single person that can't see through your bullshit by now.

    Don't be silly. There's no such thing as opinion, just FACT.

    But that's only when Defender thinks something. If you disagree with him then you are just voicing your opinion..and it will always be wrong.

    Marathon on
  • Options
    Dread Pirate ArbuthnotDread Pirate Arbuthnot OMG WRIGGLY T O X O P L A S M O S I SRegistered User regular
    edited October 2007
    Zek wrote: »
    I don't like having to worry about killing blows in Time. But I also don't like having to sit the rest of the game out when I lose in Stock. Hiding is no big deal though, just agree to team up on the douchebags that won't fight.

    This makes Team Stock the best, then. You can steal your partner's lives and keep on fighting.

    Dread Pirate Arbuthnot on
  • Options
    Bloods EndBloods End Blade of Tyshalle Punch dimensionRegistered User regular
    edited October 2007
    Wait

    multiple options and different play styles are the mark of a bad game?

    O_o

    Bloods End on
  • Options
    Dread Pirate ArbuthnotDread Pirate Arbuthnot OMG WRIGGLY T O X O P L A S M O S I SRegistered User regular
    edited October 2007
    I'm going to play Snake when I play Brawl online, and have my four short messages be

    A HIND-D
    LIQUID!
    METAL GEAR!
    A SUBMARINE?!

    Dread Pirate Arbuthnot on
  • Options
    Bloods EndBloods End Blade of Tyshalle Punch dimensionRegistered User regular
    edited October 2007
    I'm going to play Snake when I play Brawl online, and have my four short messages be

    A HIND-D
    LIQUID!
    METAL GEAR!
    A SUBMARINE?!

    NOT TOOLS OF
    THE GOVERNMENT
    OR ANYONE ELSE

    Bloods End on
  • Options
    SeriouslySeriously Registered User regular
    edited October 2007
    Guys! No!

    This one isn't the Defender thread!

    Seriously on
  • Options
    TheySlashThemTheySlashThem Registered User regular
    edited October 2007
    Bloods End wrote: »
    Wait

    multiple options and different play styles are the mark of a bad game?

    'swhat I'm saying. Only with less smiley.

    TheySlashThem on
  • Options
    StratoStrato Registered User regular
    edited October 2007
    I'm going to play Snake when I play Brawl online, and have my four short messages be

    A HIND-D
    LIQUID!
    METAL GEAR!
    A SUBMARINE?!

    Are these voice messages you can record, or what?

    Strato on
  • Options
    Bloods EndBloods End Blade of Tyshalle Punch dimensionRegistered User regular
    edited October 2007
    text messages.

    Bloods End on
  • Options
    OdinOdin Registered User regular
    edited October 2007
    Over the last 5 years or so, I've played a crazy amount of matches of Melee with my brothers, it never gets old.
    We usually tend to play 5 minute matches with the score display on and all items on at high. The first to score 100 KOs wins.
    Obviously, it's fucking chaotic, but thats where the fun is, at least for me and my brothers.

    Odin on
  • Options
    PotUPotU __BANNED USERS regular
    edited October 2007
    I'm going to play Snake when I play Brawl online, and have my four short messages be

    A HIND-D
    LIQUID!
    METAL GEAR!
    A SUBMARINE?!

    The majority of players will have that.

    PotU on
    2mong9u.jpg
  • Options
    DefenderDefender Registered User regular
    edited October 2007
    Yeah, and I bet some people dislike instant kills in guilty gear, or switching teammates in KoF/MvC2, or different grooves in CvS2.

    The difference is you can't change these things like in smash, thus the options are given to the player. Guess what defender, sometimes people have differing opinions and sometimes even like different things. Some people like items constantly falling from the middle of nowhere to then be used against your oponent, and some people don't stating that any amount of randomness that can affect the outcome of a match is terrible and shouldn't be allowed.

    Continue with your god-awful-octoberian-levels-of-spin-only-seen-in-election-years if you want but I can't believe there's a single person that can't see through your bullshit by now.

    It's funny because when I think of good, solid, well-balanced multiplayer games, I look at franchises like Street Fighter, Tekken/Soul, Virtua Fighter, War/StarCraft, Doom/Quake, Team Fortress, etc.

    Those games don't seem to have this issue. I mean, some of them have a few options, for example, Quake 2 has a few options to deal with how power-up items are handled. But none (or extremely few) of those games have these glaring features that some people argue are "really fun and the game is boring without them" while other people say that those features "remove the possibility for meaningful competition."

    A good game has BOTH AT THE SAME TIME. Users don't have to set options to decide whether they want a fun game OR a well-balanced game, they can simply get a fun, well-balanced game out of the box.

    Whoops, there I go "spinning" again by pointing out that players should get fun and balance at the same time. I guess I should start managing presidential advertising campaigns.

    Defender on
  • Options
    DefenderDefender Registered User regular
    edited October 2007
    Bloods End wrote: »
    Wait

    multiple options and different play styles are the mark of a bad game?

    O_o

    Yeah, it seems like that's what I said on the surface, but if you look deeper, that's not really it.

    "Multiple play styles" is usually a good thing, because it means that two or more players can square off against each other using different strategies. RTS games are known for this. For example, even within a single race in Warcraft, you can often have different overall strategies. Humans, just to pick one at random, can choose their heroes and powers such that their army is extremely hard to kill and then make a fairly cheap, low-tech army of unusually durable troops and rush to attack, hoping to wear the enemy down in a vaguely zerg-like fashion, only with units that aren't total throwaways. They could also use their masonry upgrades and their pretty cool array of towers to turtle up, scout, and tech reactively. They could use their workers to fast-expand so that they can fuel a mid-tier army. They could use cheap, one-shot tricks like invisible mortars or a surprise siege engine mass. They could tech to low-count, high-power units like knights, which they could further upgrade to act either as a vicious attack force (accompanied by a mountain king with storm bolt and either of his other powers + weapon upgrades) or as an indestructible wall for something like back-line mortar teams or riflemen (accompanied by a paladin with holy light and maybe devotion aura + some priests and/or armor/hit point upgrades).

    But the reason it's good is because it's the SAME SET OF RULES. They're all playing the same game. If your play style hinges upon the rules being configured some special, custom way, then you aren't using a different play style, you're playing a significantly different game.

    The problem here is that there's no consistency. If I want to play different ways in Warcraft, I can pick different races or different unit makeups or different heroes or different overall strategies. The strategies are legitimate because we're all playing the same game, and I'm merely choosing how I want to play the game. In Smash, you're actually talking about changing the rules of the game to accommodate your play style...that's pretty weak. "Multiple play styles" is a concept that only makes sense if you don't ALSO change the rules.

    Defender on
  • Options
    potatoepotatoe Registered User regular
    edited October 2007
    aren't there a whole slew of game variations for warcraft/starcraft?

    potatoe on
  • Options
    DefenderDefender Registered User regular
    edited October 2007
    Koshian wrote: »
    I don't see what the problem is. Instead of catering to a people with a specific set of likes and dislikes, Nintendo is allowing people to slightly change the rules in accordance with their play style. This way they have a larger fanbase than if the game was made specifically for competitive players or party gamers. How does being able to change rules make it a shit game?

    The problem is that the game should just work; it shouldn't require fifteen different options to be set in order for some kind of standard play to exist. I personally like to play fighting games like Street Fighter, Tekken, etc. with three rounds to win (instead of 2), and no time limit (instead of 40 or 99 seconds). That's not the standard. But if I want to play the game seriously, it is clearly understood that it's two rounds and the timer is left at the default value. Most importantly of all, the game doesn't become "boring" when played the arcade/tournament/standard/whatever way, and it doesn't become "broken" or significantly altered when I change the round counter or the timer settings. Unless I do something screwy like set both players down to 1% life (one-hit matches), the game still plays roughly the same.
    Koshian wrote: »
    also, defender, what's your opinion on mods

    Mods are great. They allow young and independent people to be creative in ways that would not otherwise be possible. Beginning programmers with game ideas can play with them and gain valuable experience by coding up things like heat-seeking rockets or radar detection items in their favorite FPSes. Writers can construct campaigns in NWN or Warcraft (with a little studying of the scripting systems). Modelers can create player models and see how well their physique riggings can handle, for example, the hip and shoulder deformations in Jedi Knight. Animators can make their own set of animations Quake or Unreal Tournament and see them in action. Mods are a great creative outlet and a great way to learn for new people who might want to become game development professionals, and I can tell you that mod experience is good to have on a resume if you want to do game stuff. Also, it extends the life of the developer's game while allowing the community to produce future professionals who are familiar with the game's engine, so it benefits the developer and the engine/middleware/tech company.
    potatoe wrote: »
    aren't there a whole slew of game variations for warcraft/starcraft?

    There do exist custom maps and mods.

    Ladder play, however, has a few different game types (FFA, RT, AT, Solo) and that's it. You can't, for example, go "OK I want to play FFA, only creeps give triple experience with no level cap, double gold, and don't drop items." Doing that would alter the strategic balance of the game significantly (in other words, "break the game"), and it's GOOD that you do not have that option because undermining a game's capacity for high-level play is not a good idea.

    EDIT: To clarify, I'm not saying that extra game modes are bad. I'm saying that not having a "standard" rule set that is fun AND well-balanced at the same time is bad.

    Defender on
  • Options
    Octopus MelodyOctopus Melody Registered User regular
    edited October 2007
    I dont see the problem with ssbm having two popular play styles. Theres basically the "normal" one, which is hectic, having to deal with environmental stuff going on and items and random chance. This is pretty crazy good times for a lot of people. The developers also put in a whole heck of a lot of options so people can mess around and play different types of games. If you want everyone to be giant sized and drop mushroom items at a high frequency, you can play like that, etc.

    So some people discovered that if you mess with these options enough, turn off the items, and only play on certain stages, you eliminate the hectic, random chance stuff, and end up with a fairly decent fighter hidden in there. A more traditional fighter, a la Street Fighter, that focuses more on skill.

    I prefer the hectic crazy gameplay, but can see the appeal of both. And I don't think having both options available makes it a bad game.

    Octopus Melody on
  • Options
    agoajagoaj Top Tier One FearRegistered User regular
    edited October 2007
    Options are bad?
    That's quite fanboyish to pick on Smash because it's customizable.

    agoaj on
    ujav5b9gwj1s.png
  • Options
    OdinOdin Registered User regular
    edited October 2007
    Lets face it: theres nothing quite like SSB, it practically invented a new genre all by itself.
    The Crazy amount of content and options are what make it so popular in the first place
    and the incredible ability of Nintendo to unite all that with a perfectly balanced gameplay make it all work.

    Odin on
  • Options
    potatoepotatoe Registered User regular
    edited October 2007
    *sniff sniff*

    i smell a fanboy

    potatoe on
  • Options
    Octopus MelodyOctopus Melody Registered User regular
    edited October 2007
    Defender wrote: »
    EDIT: To clarify, I'm not saying that extra game modes are bad. I'm saying that not having a "standard" rule set that is fun AND well-balanced at the same time is bad.

    I dunno if I'd like that in SSBM specifically. I imagine by well-balanced, you would mean the lack of the random element, since thats what people get rid of using the options. I like the random stuff, I don't mind if someone gets a lucky item or I run into an unlucky bomb. I find it a really fun part of the game. However, the competitive fighting scene obviously looks down on such things. They play for prizes and money and bragging rights, so they want games which lack this random stuff and are all about skill. SSBM is able to satisfy both me, and them. If it was just "well-balanced," I'd lose out. If it was just random, they'd lose out. I don't think you can have both at once in this case. Both styles are fun, it just depends on what the individual enjoys most.

    Octopus Melody on
  • Options
    OdinOdin Registered User regular
    edited October 2007
    potatoe wrote: »
    *sniff sniff*

    i smell a fanboy

    ahah, no I'm no fanboy, but smash bros. is one of the only games I still enjoy playing with my younger brothers

    Odin on
  • Options
    ZephyrZephyr Registered User regular
    edited October 2007
    Odin wrote: »
    Lets face it: theres nothing quite like SSB, it practically invented a new genre all by itself.
    The Crazy amount of content and options are what make it so popular in the first place
    and the incredible ability of Nintendo to unite all that with a perfectly balanced gameplay make it all work.

    it did not invent a genre

    it just mixed platforming and fighting

    Zephyr on
    16kakxt.jpg
  • Options
    DefenderDefender Registered User regular
    edited October 2007
    Defender wrote: »
    EDIT: To clarify, I'm not saying that extra game modes are bad. I'm saying that not having a "standard" rule set that is fun AND well-balanced at the same time is bad.

    I dunno if I'd like that in SSBM specifically. I imagine by well-balanced, you would mean the lack of the random element, since thats what people get rid of using the options. I like the random stuff, I don't mind if someone gets a lucky item or I run into an unlucky bomb. I find it a really fun part of the game. However, the competitive fighting scene obviously looks down on such things. They play for prizes and money and bragging rights, so they want games which lack this random stuff and are all about skill. SSBM is able to satisfy both me, and them. If it was just "well-balanced," I'd lose out. If it was just random, they'd lose out. I don't think you can have both at once in this case. Both styles are fun, it just depends on what the individual enjoys most.

    See, that's where you hit the problem.

    You have two good ideas, and you're putting them in one game, but you can't get them both to work at the same time. If you're going to put two good ideas into one game, you have to do the extra work to make them mesh well. For example, Warcraft 3, again. Heroes are great. Micro-intensive (Warden, Demon Hunter, Blademaster really stand out in this regard) individual units. That's a great idea, pretty much every single-player action game is a micro-intensive, one-unit game. Also, army management. Mixing troop types, picking which upgrades you need and prioritizing money so you get the most bang for your buck. And additionally, map/economy/territory control. You know, gold mines, expansions, creep camps, neutral structures like merchants/fountains/etc. There you have three pretty solid ideas.

    The beauty of Warcraft is that they combined the elements well. Lots of people here are familiar with Aeon Of Strife/Heroes/etc. games, which later evolved into DOTA. Also, we all know about Tower Defense games, right? Sometimes, a real ladder match will actually turn into a sort of Tower Defense/Aeon match. I've had it happen to me a billion times. You can win by controlling territory, you can win by ingenious use of hero powers, or you can win by outright dominance in field or town battles. The diverse gameplay elements all combine into one game. You don't have to turn heroes off because they're overpowered and make the other two useless. You don't have to turn "food limit" off because it makes massing armies too hard. You don't have to fuck with anything; the game just works. All elements work together, at the same time, with a standard rule set.

    And if you want to fuck around with different features, there are options to do it. And if you really wanna do something creative, you can make mods/maps. But the standard, out-of-the-box ladder match works extremely well and uses ALL of the game's elements.

    Defender on
  • Options
    potatoepotatoe Registered User regular
    edited October 2007
    well, as much as i would like to not agree with defender on this one, i can see where he's coming from, and i have to kind of agree

    from what i gather, defender is the kind of gamer that plays to compete, not just for "ohoho this is fun throwing pokeballs at each other." (correct me if i'm wrong on that one, that's just what i've come to understand)
    from that perspective, SSB has issues. it's why when people set up tournaments, they have to have a page of rules dictating exactly what will go on, and how each match will be set up. it's a flaw introduced by giving the user so many possible ways to set up a given match.

    while, for some people, this ability to fully customize a match is a gift from god, allowing you to play the exact kind of match you want, for other people it is a curse. it forces you to spend unnecessary time setting the rules to what a fair and balanced match would constitute, and even then there will be dispute on whether or not it is an unbiased setup. in this respect, SSB is inferior to other fighters in the sense that it is not "ready to play" right out of the box, it requires set-up.


    so, although it's nice to have all the options, it is a shame there is no way to say exactly how tourny-type matches should be played.

    potatoe on
  • Options
    potatoepotatoe Registered User regular
    edited October 2007
    or i just pulled all that out of my ass, which i'm known to do

    potatoe on
  • Options
    PotUPotU __BANNED USERS regular
    edited October 2007
    Pulling things out of your ass like it ain't no thang.

    PotU on
    2mong9u.jpg
This discussion has been closed.