Super Smash Bros. for Wii U Review - The Cure for Wii U's Doldrums

[chozo_hybrid]

I bought Smash Bros when I bought my Wii U but I haven't played it for more than 30min. Trying to play Smash with the Wii U gamepad is terrible and the Gamecube adaptors are impossible to find right now. If anyone has experience playing the game with the Wii U pro controller I'd love to hear your thoughts because right now this game is sitting on my shelf until I find a decent way to play it.

I've played this game for probably 20 hours with the Pro Controller. It doesn't bother me in the slightest. Took a little while to adjust to the controls compared to the Gamecube controller, but other then that it feels fine. My only qualm with it is the fact that dodge is tied to the Right Button, not Right trigger. I would recommend getting it if you are capable of adapting to a new controller (like me). but if you are like my girlfriend and absolutely refuse to adapt, then wait for the GC controller.

There is an option to change controls attached to a player, make a player name in game and then swap the controls in the options. Presto, layout just for you You just have to select that profile in game when you play.

 

[EbonBehelit]

Another thing I'm not so sure about is the "easy to play, hard to master" analogy, which a lot of people apply to Pokemon as well. Is it really that much of a compliment? Just because a game is "hard to master" doesn't mean you should. There's no real reward for mastering Pokemon, or Smash Bros. for that matter. If something is hard to master, I want a reward to go with it. A good example are games that reward stealth over direct approach, combo-building over button-mashing. You can play either way, but the harder option usually comes along with a reward (i.e. more exp, karmic shift, whatever).

What's the upside to "mastering" Smash Bros.?

Having a competitive multiplayer game be 'hard to master' is an absolute necessity for tournament play. If a game has a really low skill-ceiling, then the overall 'progression' and skills of its player-base will plateau at a very basic level, pros won't be able to distinguish their skillful play, and the game will generally be less interesting to watch.

The competitive smash community dislikes brawl and that's good for them but that doesn't make it objectively "the worst in the series". The things they didn't like (like no more wave dashing or the tripping or whatever) doesn't mean it's the worst game just that a game that was never meant for a competitive audience didn't cater to that competitive audience that latched onto it.

I too quite liked Brawl, but let's be reasonable here - the random tripping was infuriating, and has no place in a fighting game.
Even so, Brawl isn't the worst game in the series, simply by virtue of the original being pretty much unplayable at this point.

 

[chozo_hybrid]

I don't know, this review seems more like advertisement. I highly doubt it's perfect. Even little problems should be mentioned. Does all the characters feel like they have enough smash power?

I feel they do, I have yet to play a character that isn't good in their own way, but that's all up to how someone plays them, which is subjective in a review.

Are all the items functioning well, none of them become really annoying?

That's really a matter of preference, I would say if you don't like items in matches, you can turn them all off or just the ones you don't like. So that can be solved for everyone.

Are the supers a lot more balanced now?

They appear to be, but I'd have to play more to really form a proper opinion on this one. I will say that none stand out so far.

None of the stages are a pain in the ass? The screen doesn't stretch out too far at certain times? C'mon, there has to be something.

That would depend on your TV mostly. But the one stage that seems too big would be The Great Cave Offensive. But over all, haven't had much of an issue.

So most of it is subjective and reviews are bound to the experiences of the person playing it. I would say it's a pretty honest review.

 

[EbonBehelit]

The games aren't necessarily bad, but the Wii U's repertoire lacks variety. The only games that look remotely appealing are ZombiU and Bayonetta 2. And I wouldn't buy the console for either of them.

You had a look at Monster Hunter 3 Ultimate?
For some reason, Monster Hunter's never caught on in the West despite being absoulutely brilliant.

I feel they do, I have yet to play a character that isn't good in their own way, but that's all up to how someone plays them, which is subjective in a review.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm going to assume you haven't tried Wii Fit Trainer yet.

The good thing about the game being truly online capable though is that balance patches are a possibility this time round - a possibilty I'm hoping the devs embrace.

 

[Nazulu]

I don't know, this review seems more like advertisement. I highly doubt it's perfect. Even little problems should be mentioned. Does all the characters feel like they have enough smash power?

I feel they do, I have yet to play a character that isn't good in their own way, but that's all up to how someone plays them, which is subjective in a review.

Are all the items functioning well, none of them become really annoying?

That's really a matter of preference, I would say if you don't like items in matches, you can turn them all off or just the ones you don't like. So that can be solved for everyone.

Are the supers a lot more balanced now?

They appear to be, but I'd have to play more to really form a proper opinion on this one. I will say that none stand out so far.

None of the stages are a pain in the ass? The screen doesn't stretch out too far at certain times? C'mon, there has to be something.

That would depend on your TV mostly. But the one stage that seems too big would be The Great Cave Offensive. But over all, haven't had much of an issue.

So most of it is subjective and reviews are bound to the experiences of the person playing it. I would say it's a pretty honest review.

I'd say it's an uninformative review with all of it shared by Nintendo and other escapee's before. Not one thing here said was new. You've given me more new information.

You keep mentioning subjective like I don't know what it is. In fighting games there is always some character with problems, it's never been perfect, and even then I would've liked more in depth analysis.

I'm very much aware that you can turn items off in matches, but you can't turn them off everywhere, and even then that's not a defense. If an item is broken or whatever, it can be a flaw, and once again I'd like more of an analysis.

The rest I'm fine with, so thank you.

 

[JayRPG]

I do wonder what kind of doldrums the title is talking about though, the Wii U isn't exactly short on quality releases lately. Certainly not moreso than other consoles.

Most of them are either Mario games (Mario Kart 8, New Super Mario Bros. U, New Super Luigi U, Super Mario 3D World, Dr. Luigi, Yoshi's Woolly World, Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker), HD remakes of older games or plain shovelware (Nintendo Land, Wii Party U, Wii Fit U, Just Dance Wii U, Wii Sports Club, Sing Party, Game Party Champions). Also Sonic Boom: Rise of Lyric.

The games aren't necessarily bad, but the Wii U's repertoire lacks variety. The only games that look remotely appealing are ZombiU and Bayonetta 2. And I wouldn't buy the console for either of them.

Well don't forget Pikmin 3, Hyrule Warriors, Sonic: Lost World, Rayman Legends, DK Country: Tropical Freeze, Wonderful 101, and the upcoming Splatoon. Add Bayonetta 2 and Zombie U and I'd say that's a decent variety...

Don't get me wrong, I sort of get what you're saying. But on the other hand...what's the alternative? That library looks really damn good compared to the current variety on the Xbox One and PS4. Right now at least I'd say the Wii U's library is the most superior by far.

But doesn't all of that boil down to "another Pikmin game", "another (bad) Sonic game", "another Donkey Kong game", "another Rayman game" and "another Dynasty Warriors Zelda game"? I don't know, it seems like a console that is constantly on holding pattern. I know every publisher has a bunch of recurring IPs but in Nintendo's case that seems to make up 90% of its repertoire.

Just an FYI, Nintendo has directly created, or funded the creation, of more than 75 original IPs since the year 2000.

There are almost double the amount of Assassin's creed games (since 2007) as there are Super Smash Bros and Mario Karts combined (since 1992).
There are more Farcry games (created 2004) than there are Super Smash Bros games (created 1999).
There are more Assassin's creed games (in 7 years) than there are Zelda games (in 27 years), and that is including Link's crossbow training in the count.

Nintendo go out of there way not to release the same game all the time, they have a solid (relatively small) mainstay of titles and then they use their IPs in new ways, as well as creating (or directly funding) new IPs. Games like Hyrule Warriors, Luigis mansion, toads treasure tracker, mario sunshine, paper mario etc are examples of taking their IPs to different places.

There was 6 years between smash bros, 7 years between mario karts, there will be at least 4 years between Zeldas.

Nintendo always seem to get this criticism but from my experience it is almost completely unfounded, people see Pikmin and just assume "it's another pikmin game".. there have only been 3, and they have changed the mechanics in each of them significantly in each title. Likewise with Mario kart and Super Smash Bros, people (who most likely have never and will never play it) just assume it's the same game and don't realise exactly how much work has gone into it and how much was changed, added, and refined from the last title 6-7 years ago.

In recent times I've been glued to my Wii U, I finished infamous second son/first light on the PS4 and haven't touched it since, but I can't get enough of Wonderful 101, Mario Kart, SSB, bayonetta, and hyrule warriors on the wii u. Sunset overdrive kept me entertained for about a day and I haven't touched my X1 since then. Tales of Hearts R on the vita is taking all of my travel/away from home playtime though.

 

[KazeAizen]

And once the game gets boring people will realize that they bought another rather expensive paperweight from nintendo.. just like the wii... atleast this one might get dusted off again now and then for one of the standard nintendo titles.

Someone apparently needs a hug.

 

[chozo_hybrid]

Snip.

Sorry about that, it's just so many people online these days think that reviews should be or are objective and what not. I also wasn't sure how much experience you have had with previous Smash Bros games as well, so I was trying to cover all bases

No problem though, the game hasn't been out long, so sometimes with brawling/fighting games it can take a while before any noticeable patterns show up to tell you who might need tweaking/nerfing etc.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

I do wonder what kind of doldrums the title is talking about though, the Wii U isn't exactly short on quality releases lately. Certainly not moreso than other consoles.

Most of them are either Mario games (Mario Kart 8, New Super Mario Bros. U, New Super Luigi U, Super Mario 3D World, Dr. Luigi, Yoshi's Woolly World, Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker), HD remakes of older games or plain shovelware (Nintendo Land, Wii Party U, Wii Fit U, Just Dance Wii U, Wii Sports Club, Sing Party, Game Party Champions). Also Sonic Boom: Rise of Lyric.

The games aren't necessarily bad, but the Wii U's repertoire lacks variety. The only games that look remotely appealing are ZombiU and Bayonetta 2. And I wouldn't buy the console for either of them.

Well don't forget Pikmin 3, Hyrule Warriors, Sonic: Lost World, Rayman Legends, DK Country: Tropical Freeze, Wonderful 101, and the upcoming Splatoon. Add Bayonetta 2 and Zombie U and I'd say that's a decent variety...

Don't get me wrong, I sort of get what you're saying. But on the other hand...what's the alternative? That library looks really damn good compared to the current variety on the Xbox One and PS4. Right now at least I'd say the Wii U's library is the most superior by far.

But doesn't all of that boil down to "another Pikmin game", "another (bad) Sonic game", "another Donkey Kong game", "another Rayman game" and "another Dynasty Warriors Zelda game"? I don't know, it seems like a console that is constantly on holding pattern. I know every publisher has a bunch of recurring IPs but in Nintendo's case that seems to make up 90% of its repertoire.

Just an FYI, Nintendo has directly created, or funded the creation, of more than 75 original IPs since the year 2000.

And yet their highest-selling stuff continues to be the same games I played when I was 5-10. Again, not saying they're bad, but I prefer new things.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Another thing I'm not so sure about is the "easy to play, hard to master" analogy, which a lot of people apply to Pokemon as well. Is it really that much of a compliment? Just because a game is "hard to master" doesn't mean you should. There's no real reward for mastering Pokemon, or Smash Bros. for that matter. If something is hard to master, I want a reward to go with it. A good example are games that reward stealth over direct approach, combo-building over button-mashing. You can play either way, but the harder option usually comes along with a reward (i.e. more exp, karmic shift, whatever).

What's the upside to "mastering" Smash Bros.?

Having a competitive multiplayer game be 'hard to master' is an absolute necessity for tournament play. If a game has a really low skill-ceiling, then the overall 'progression' and skills of its player-base will plateau at a very basic level, pros won't be able to distinguish their skillful play, and the game will generally be less interesting to watch.

That's the thing, I remember going to my friend's house who was supposed to be a ninja at the game and beating him several times by sheer luck. And later when I had the game for myself, I beat single player quite easily. My impression was that mastering EVERY character or even just ONE was a waste of time, the kind of self-imposed challenge that had very little effect on the game, with or without multiplayer.

 

[JayRPG]

I do wonder what kind of doldrums the title is talking about though, the Wii U isn't exactly short on quality releases lately. Certainly not moreso than other consoles.

Most of them are either Mario games (Mario Kart 8, New Super Mario Bros. U, New Super Luigi U, Super Mario 3D World, Dr. Luigi, Yoshi's Woolly World, Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker), HD remakes of older games or plain shovelware (Nintendo Land, Wii Party U, Wii Fit U, Just Dance Wii U, Wii Sports Club, Sing Party, Game Party Champions). Also Sonic Boom: Rise of Lyric.

The games aren't necessarily bad, but the Wii U's repertoire lacks variety. The only games that look remotely appealing are ZombiU and Bayonetta 2. And I wouldn't buy the console for either of them.

Well don't forget Pikmin 3, Hyrule Warriors, Sonic: Lost World, Rayman Legends, DK Country: Tropical Freeze, Wonderful 101, and the upcoming Splatoon. Add Bayonetta 2 and Zombie U and I'd say that's a decent variety...

Don't get me wrong, I sort of get what you're saying. But on the other hand...what's the alternative? That library looks really damn good compared to the current variety on the Xbox One and PS4. Right now at least I'd say the Wii U's library is the most superior by far.

But doesn't all of that boil down to "another Pikmin game", "another (bad) Sonic game", "another Donkey Kong game", "another Rayman game" and "another Dynasty Warriors Zelda game"? I don't know, it seems like a console that is constantly on holding pattern. I know every publisher has a bunch of recurring IPs but in Nintendo's case that seems to make up 90% of its repertoire.

Just an FYI, Nintendo has directly created, or funded the creation, of more than 75 original IPs since the year 2000.

And yet their highest-selling stuff continues to be the same games I played when I was 5-10. Again, not saying they're bad, but I prefer new things.

You just kind of answered your own criticisms though... their best selling stuff are tried and true mainstays, so why wouldn't they continue to make them?

Just because they are the best selling doesn't take away from the fact that Nintendo do create new IPs, quite often, more often than any singular company does these days.

You also have to remember that some of the mainstay titles were created at some point, Nintendo didn't just wake up one morning with all these IPs.

Pikmin was released in 2004, there have only been 2 other pikmin games since then. I've heard the term "another pikmin game" thrown around quite a lot.
Farcry was also released in 2004, there have been 8 subsequent Farcry games since then. I've scarcely ever heard anyone say "another farcry game".

That is about as objective as it comes. Nintendo gets criticism for Pikmin, Ubisoft/Crytek do not get criticism for Farcry. Both were released in the same year, Ubi/crytek have released quadruple the amount of games that Nintendo have in their respective franchises.

The last Metroid game released over 4 years ago, there is scarcely ever a Nintendo thread that hasn't got people in it calling for another Metroid game. The community wants these games, Nintendo does it's best (and far better than any other company at the moment) to not give them the same crap every year, often waiting 4-8 years between releases, and when Nintendo finally do give the community what they have been asking for, the community criticises them for releasing it.

There is a new Star Fox on the way next year, the last new title in the franchise was released all the way back in 2006, it was in the traditional format, but released along side it was something that changed the format from aerial combat sim to a 3rd person action rpg, it was, for all intents and purposes, a completely different game. When the new one releases next year there will have been 9 years between Star Fox titles.

I just cannot even begin to understand why Nintendo gets constant criticism for something they don't even do. The industry is overflowing with AAA annual releases, and none of them are from Nintendo.

Edit: They get flak from Pokemon a lot too: "Oh another pokemon game that hasn't changed", even if I ignore how incorrect that statement is, nobody ever seems to mention the pokemon mystery dungeon series, or the pokemon ranger series, both of which were popular enough to spawn multiple games.
Then there is Pokemon trozei, pokemon conquest, pokemon snap, pokemon pinball, pokemon TCG, Pokemon stadium, pokemon XD, pokemon dash, pokemon puzzle challenge, pokemon rumble...

All of those games are radically different from both the main series titles, and each other, what more do people want?

There are, on average, 2 years between each main series pokemon title, and there are tons of original games with the pokemon IP intertwined with those releases.

 

[Nazulu]

Snip.

Sorry about that, it's just so many people online these days think that reviews should be or are objective and what not. I also wasn't sure how much experience you have had with previous Smash Bros games as well, so I was trying to cover all bases

No problem though, the game hasn't been out long, so sometimes with brawling/fighting games it can take a while before any noticeable patterns show up to tell you who might need tweaking/nerfing etc.

Really? People think reviews can be objective? That's funny.

I was hoping my specific complaints would reveal my knowledge of the series. I've been a fan from the beginning. The first Smash Brothers ad is still my favourite game ad.

Anyway, with my knowledge I've noticed some things could be better, but you're right, more time would be needed to narrow certain imperfections down. I still don't like this review. I just don't see the point without adding a little depth into it, and I personally like when they are opinionated, it adds character to me. Well, better than sounding like an advert.

 

[chozo_hybrid]

Snip.

Sorry about that, it's just so many people online these days think that reviews should be or are objective and what not. I also wasn't sure how much experience you have had with previous Smash Bros games as well, so I was trying to cover all bases

No problem though, the game hasn't been out long, so sometimes with brawling/fighting games it can take a while before any noticeable patterns show up to tell you who might need tweaking/nerfing etc.

Really? People think reviews can be objective? That's funny.

I was hoping my specific complaints would reveal my knowledge of the series. I've been a fan from the beginning. The first Smash Brothers ad is still my favourite game ad.

Anyway, with my knowledge I've noticed some things could be better, but you're right, more time would be needed to narrow certain imperfections down. I still don't like this review. I just don't see the point without adding a little depth into it, and I personally like when they are opinionated, it adds character to me. Well, better than sounding like an advert.

No worries. I agree with your sentiment over all.

 

[shadowstriker86]

5 stars? But it doesn't even have adventure mode!

So much this. The Wii U version pales in comparison to the 3DS version in terms of solo replayability. Online matches are always laggy as hell for me even though ive never had problem gaming with other games on my PC so there's nothing appealling for me online and smash tour is a damn joke. not to mention that a lot of the challenges that are unable to be broken by hammers are just hard as piss and are pretty much the reason why you have the hammers in the first place.

 

[JonB]

I'll enjoy it even if I hate fighting games eh? Hmm.... I don't know if I believe you. I didn't like Brawl. The original was fun at the time and I still like it for nostalgic reasons. Melee was alright, but I still didn't mind fighting games at that point.

Also, this is one of the shortest reviews I've seen in a long time from this site. What happened? Usually they are hugely detailed multi-page epics. That's something I've always liked about this site. It's not just some quick overview like IGN. I guess there's it's not necessarily wrong to do that though.

Hey Fred, yeah, we decided that since it went up so far after launch we would go for short and sweet. Don't expect this as the new normal or anything.

 

[RedDeadFred]

I'll enjoy it even if I hate fighting games eh? Hmm.... I don't know if I believe you. I didn't like Brawl. The original was fun at the time and I still like it for nostalgic reasons. Melee was alright, but I still didn't mind fighting games at that point.

Also, this is one of the shortest reviews I've seen in a long time from this site. What happened? Usually they are hugely detailed multi-page epics. That's something I've always liked about this site. It's not just some quick overview like IGN. I guess there's it's not necessarily wrong to do that though.

Hey Fred, yeah, we decided that since it went up so far after launch we would go for short and sweet. Don't expect this as the new normal or anything.

Ah, that makes sense. Good to hear that we'll still be getting the highly detailed reviews.

Thanks for the response!