Smash Bros. Director Justifies "Clone" Characters, Dismisses Complaints

[karloss01]

"This is like a free dessert after a luxurious meal that was prepared free of charge. In a restaurant with this type of service, I don't think there's anybody who would say, 'Change this to a meat dish!!'"

The problem with that analogy is that the desert would be a different character and asking for it to be a meat dish is to ask for clone characters. having three course meal where the're all meats is the same as having three of the same character whilst having a salad, Meat and cake course is having three entirely different things.

either it was a bad translation or he just talked himself into a corner. so much for that "there will be no clone characters" promise they had a year ago.

 

[r0seyp0m]

For the record, the game looks great and I'm planning on getting the Wii U version when it comes out. However, that doesn't mean it's perfect and exempt from critique.

"This is like a free dessert after a luxurious meal that was prepared free of charge. In a restaurant with this type of service, I don't think there's anybody who would say, 'Change this to a meat dish!!'"

Perhaps it's a case of mistranslation, but this analogy is bollocks. Nintendo is not just giving away copies of the game, ergo it was not 'prepared free of charge." Moreover, the customer paid for the entire game including the unlockables, so the whole "free dessert" bit doesn't work either.

That's not what he meant at all. He's saying the clone characters are a dessert that was prepared free of charge. They didn't spend a lot of time and resourced on them. They just added it as a neat little thing on the side.

 

[major_chaos]

I should've been more clear. EA would be doing terrible DLC where as Nintendo is starting and doing DLC the way its supposed to be done.

That's a matter of opinion. I like or can easily ignore the DLC in pretty much every EA game I have ever played. And don't bring up Dungeon Keeper, that was a shitty game but it was also totally on par for the type of game it was, not some unique sin. Mobile games being awful did not start or peak with EA.

Oh boo hoo. A game is not competitive. Whatever will we do. So Project M is basically people throwing a hissy fit because it wasn't Melee.

"I'm going to marginalize the huge effort of others and make them out to be children because they added more depth to a game"

Brawl is still a much more substantial game and overall better game than Melee is.

My brain cant even process this statement. Without specific examples of what makes you think this I'm just gonna go with a blanket "I disagree with that statement on every level."

Should every single fighting game be nerfed to the point of no fun for the sake of competition?

How does depth and balance equate to not fun? I think the issue here is expectations. I wanted Brawl to be a unique but well designed fighting game and was thus severely dissapoined. If I want a game based around luck instead of skill I think I still have an old dusty copy of Mousetrap somewhere.

They didn't kneecap the game.

>implying tripping, among other slightly less glaring things isn't kneecapping in a deliberate effort to minimize skill.

 

[JayRPG]

snip

I think what he was trying to say was, and don't take this the wrong way but, smash wasn't meant to be competitive.. it never was. Some fans just decided it should be.

Not everything has to be competitive these days, sometimes games can just be random and fun... I mean look at pokemon. Gamefreak couldn't give 2 shits about competitive pokemon battling and they constantly produce fun games. "Experts" at smogon try to make it more competitive by making rules that attempt to take out the RNG from an RNG based battling system. Not only does it not work entirely, but that was not the vision of the developers, it was not how it is meant to be played.

Look at WoW and what PVP has turned into because of competitive play and esports. PVP used to be fun, large scale battles with lots of chaos and randomization and then they decided that PVP would be better in a tiny cage with the amount of players limited to 3 on each team... and now it's shit, because they don't put any resources into battlegrounds anymore; and not only that, but because of this competitive pvp style, they are continually trying to balance a game based on 2 entirely different playstyles (PVE and PVP) essentially meaning that changes made to make the game more competitive (in pvp) actually ruin other parts of the game (pve).

Smash wasn't meant to be a competitive fighting game, and trying to turn it into one is taking at least some of the fun out of it. I mean, what next? Competitive Mario Party? they take dice rolls out and replace them with some kind of skill check to get a higher number?

 

[Shingeki no Gingerbeard]

Oh boo hoo. A game is not competitive. Whatever will we do. So Project M is basically people throwing a hissy fit because it wasn't Melee.

"I'm going to marginalize the huge effort of others and make them out to be children because they added more depth to a game"

Brawl is still a much more substantial game and overall better game than Melee is.

My brain cant even process this statement. Without specific examples of what makes you think this I'm just gonna go with a blanket "I disagree with that statement on every level."

Should every single fighting game be nerfed to the point of no fun for the sake of competition?

How does depth and balance equate to not fun? I think the issue here is expectations. I wanted Brawl to be a unique but well designed fighting game and was thus severely dissapoined. If I want a game based around luck instead of skill I think I still have an old dusty copy of Mousetrap somewhere.

The underlying issue here is that neither you, major_chaos, or Project M have specifically addressed any grievances with how SSBB turned out. The modding project simply is, with no explanation as to why. No complaints about how the game turned out are on the page, or how the mod hopes to address them. Heck, when going over how they got rid of the Pokemon Trainer and made Squirtle, Ivysaur, and Charizard into separate characters, I found only one reference to a new Down-B move. You criticize KazeAizen for lacking specific examples while offering up none of your own to justify your position.

You say it's to make the game more competitive, even though Nintendo fought to keep it from EVO. Nintendo never intended the franchise for for competitive play, and even if an iteration of the game was accepted at international competitions (like EVO), a modded version (such as by Project M) would not be permissible. If Project M's purpose is what you claim, then it's self-defeating.

But all of this pales in comparison to the fact that your little exchange, which I have now interjected in to, has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the topic of this thread. I suggest you drop it, and if you want to continue then you take it elsewhere. Maybe to another thread, or maybe to private messages. I don't care, but don't disrupt the forums with your tantrums and spats.

And that goes for EVERYONE.

 

[major_chaos]

I mean, what next? Competitive Mario Party? they take dice rolls out and replace them with some kind of skill check to get a higher number?

Hark! I see smoke on the horizon! Why, its a burning strawman!
Mario Party is a digital version of old school board games, the fact that its more luck than skill is expected, and Pokemon, as a RPG, is assumed to have a certain amount of RNG. Smash Bros on the other hand is a fighting game and thus assumed (at least to me) to be highly skill based. Also I think there is a misscomunication about how I'm using the word competitive. I'm not terribly concerned with EVO (although Nintendo trying to keep Smash out of EVO and adding tripping as a blatant middle finger to the competitive scene was a stupid move), when I say competitive, I mean tight, skill-centric and mostly balanced even if you are playing against friends or bots.

Smash wasn't meant to be a competitive fighting game, and trying to turn it into one is taking at least some of the fun out of it.

That is entirely subjective. To me large amounts of RNG is just frustrating. I think with both you and KazeAizen the issue is that compared to me you entirely different standards of fun and we are all just going to end up agreeing to disagree.
I think a good way to sum up how different our views on games appear to be: to me Mario Party is the antithesis of fun, a horrible luck based exersize in frustration that I either lose and walk away angry, or win and walk away unsatisfied, while on the other hand League of Legends is amazing and one of the most enjoyable multiplayer games i have ever played, a raw, intense contest of skill both in thought and reflexes, where every loss is a chance to improve and every win is worth jumping out of my seat.

 

[Glaice]

You don't have to be a douche about this, Sakurai..

 

[Svarr]

Game gets bonus characters, game developer gets a bit pissed that people act like children over not getting what they want in bonus characters, people complain more about the game developer getting angry at immature acts of fanbase.

Face it people, Ridley is not gonna get in Smash, sorry to disappoint so lay off, lol. XD

 

[ckam]

>Says there won't be clones in this time, trust him.
>Makes clones, anyway.
>gg