DLC 5 tournament

[Xeroma]

Kirby Dream Course. Think golf + kirby + insanity.

[SageAcrin]

Err...I don't really see it.  Most people who are really good at Smash are really good at one of Brawl or Melee.  Using a game that's not one of those two should level the playing field more, not less.  (Same with using a game with a more balanced cast).

Sounds good in theory, but in actual fact, most of our good Smash players have played one or the other(though, humorously, not both that I can recall. Go fig.).

I mean, it would work in most groups, but here it doesn't actually pan out that way. It's more of a specific comment then a general one.

You seem to be claiming TvC is a better choice because nobody knows it and the gameplay is less ridiculous.  I see what you're saying, but I'm not convinced these are positives.

Naaaah I'm saying TvsC is better because it's prettier, skill gaps are smaller from low end casual players to higher end players(Though admittedly I don't know if this matters at all. I forget if we have any serious MvsC2 players), and it has better character balance, and the fact that the ways MvsC2 ended up popular due to how broken it is won't show up particularly well on the level of play we're talking.

I mean, it might for the people that remember who the broken characters are off the top of their heads(Humorously, I'm one!), but even then they have to know why they're considered broken and such. I don't think it'll come across very well is all I'm saying.

These are admittedly not huge differences, though. If people feel strongly about it, obviously MvsC2 should be gone with. I admit to not understanding that but sure.

[Meeplelard]

The recognizability factor is somewhat balanced out by the fact that both have Capcom anyways, and not everyone will recognize every random Marvel character. It's pretty minor. (Never mind that it strikes me as minor to start with.)

This is not a fair statement, that "both have the Capcom factor!"  Look at whose from the Capcom side on both.  I mean, yes, there are some new faces in TvC (Zero, Frank West and Viewtiful Joe), but factor in stuff like Original MEga Man vs. Mega Man Legends Mega Man, Ken/Akuma/Dan vs. No Ken/Akuma/Dan, could go on.  This is just a way to back out and lets face it, the Marvel Side DOES have some recognizable faces.  Yes, not everyone is going to recognize all the obscure faces, but then we have non-obcsures like Storm, Spider Man, Wolverine, etc. that completely override this.    Its especially big since the entire T side I'm sure inspires apathy by a great amount of the DL; at least people recognize Spider Man and Wolverine, but whose going to recognize shit like

Also, I found MvC2 easier to play initially than TvC.  TvC simplifies things to a point where people use to standard fighters do not adapt immediately, oddly.  When I tried throwing a Fierce Punch, for example, I used a Kick instead...cause there's only one Kick and One Punch from what I remember.  Its NOT better in that regard.  MvC2 has a lot of shit in it that makes it crazy, but its also a little more intuitive cause it still has fundamentals.   No offense, but I think you're being a bit blinded by your dislike for one game, and your intrigue with another.  As someone who doesn't really like MvC2 much, I still feel its a better idea than TvC.

Edit: For the record, I mentioned TvC to a few DLers personally, and some didn't even recognize the game.  Yeah, I'm not seeing why its better than MvC2; considering demand is one of the highest points for the tourny, from what I can tell, MvC2 has at least some demand, TvC is mostly just a side thought alternative.

[Excal]

Don't recall enjoying Tekken that much myself on the few occasions I played it, but that was a long time ago.  Either way, not a sticking point.  Definately fine with either Melee or Brawl, with a preference for 4P Limited items (I know it's a tournament, but it's not like we're that serious about the whole thing.  Make it clear what you're doing up front, and make it as much about fun as about being the best, then let the chips fall where they may).

As for MvC2.  Honestly, I can't imagine the DL being that much into fighters that it'll be way more hardcore than the old group I used to play it with here.  And we managed to (with one exception) all be roughly equal so long as we held to the rule of banning Cable.  Because infinite range no travel time attacks for spamming one button with no other skill is annoying.  Given how often the game is mentioned around here, I'd expect that any skills at the game will be rusty enough that the boring level of brokeness won't be too likely to show up, which should leave something entertaining and even.  I mean, hell, we should have a competant Mega Man player at DLC5.

[Ranmilia]

And I, on the other hand, am totally boggled that anyone would even suggest MvC2 for anything other than humor value.  The game's a complete trainwreck of either total mashing or someone who knows what they're doing obliterating everyone else.  

Smash of some sort, MBAA and Blazblue are the three games that stand out to me as the obvious best choices for fighters, with some version of SF2 a bit behind them.  Tekken I forsee working out like VF4 did at DLC2 - poorly.  None of the 3d fighters used so far have really worked, to hear people talk about SC last year.  Smash 64 would be a nice idea but... well, we'd need N64s.  That's unlikely.

Ninja'd by Excal who points out why MvC2 would be terrible.

[metroid composite]

The SO3 comparisons are starting to sound much more similar now, aren't they?

Not...really.  Even people who've played SO3 don't seem to know which characters would be good.  Zone of the Enders is...you tell people "That's the main character, the villain, the zombie villain, and those other five characters are the equivalent of goombas and turtles."

To boot, it lacks the easy grasp of SO3 where anyone that has played SO3 can easily pick it up, controls are pretty distinctive.

I, having never played the 1P of ZoE, picked it up in about two minutes.  A lot of the stuff in the versus is very intuitive, like "those shots are aimed at me.  Streaming!" or "get in close and my attacks become punches".

And the only seriously discussed game that is actually getting slammed.

There are many options, but few that are being shouted down.

Umm...Smash is getting a lot of shouting down as well, actually.  (And dissidia is getting a ton of shout-down even though I don't think anyone's posted in support of the game since the start of the new topic >_>)

Are there any guarantees that blindly played ZoE will actually be any better for any of this?

ZoE looks pretty.  Even between say, me and Excal when we'd only touched the game two minutes ago.  The controller can be doing something simple (like hold forward and alternate dash and attack) and yet really shiny stuff will happen onscreen.

Though yes, the other complaints levelled at SO3 probably do apply here >_>

With most games I would, in fairness, assume the opposite, but as someone that has actually played ZoE and messed around with it's competitive mode, I have to say that random button mashing feels like it would make the game take notably much longer, due to the fact that dodging/blocking are extremely effective if done at random, if memory serves and due to the fact that attacks tend to have specific effective ranges they need to be used at to get around this. I mean, yeah, it works if you assume the average skill level of the DL in fighting games is "Doesn't block and truly mashes randomly" but it isn't, honestly.

Well...right, if ZoE got to the point that we were seriously considering it, we'd want to get an accurate estimate of how long a medium skill match would take, and I would coerce a few guinea pigs into testing this, get some decent scientific data.  Haven't seen positive interest in it yet, so I'm not really inclined to go to the effort to actually test.

Wow, a math major that can't understand the idea of averages. I'm stunned. You can't possibly have used that line to be anything but obtuse, given the original source material of why I said BB wasn't a good idea. <_< Strong dislike balances out strong like. Simple.

Probably because I disagree with you about the data....  When did people express strong dislike for the game?  I've seen several people complain about the length, but length-complaints are not the same as "I hate this game."

[Dark Holy Elf]

Since apparently I wasn't loud enough:

Fuck Blazblue; it returning would annoy me.

[Excal]

There's been definite comments against Blazblue as a tourney idea due to a few people disliking the way it hogs time, and a few who just disike it period (The Elf, for one).  But yeah, there's going to be contention regardless of what gets in, with the two most popular games being fairly contentious.

As for what Alex said re: MvC2, I do find it amusing that he's using what I took as a glowing recommendation (I'd honestly love to play a bit against people who're also rusty at it, or who're just picking it up.  I've got some warm nostalgic fuzzies going on here) is a good argument against for him.  Though, I suspect that also matters a lot more for how good the people you played against were.  For me, it was a bunch of people who had no interest in going beyond casual play.  Which means we'd know one or two combos max, and would use people we liked, and not people who were "good".  Shuma-Gorath and Serv-Bot vs. Rock and Roll, anyone?  Or hell, the Dan Fights.  Apparently this new monstrosity cannot even concieve the awesome that is 6 Dans on two teams wailing on each other, and that is just depressing.

[Xeroma]

look at me I'm elfboy and my opinion is the only one that matters.

If people want it, they want it. Deal with it.

[metroid composite]

Err...I don't really see it.  Most people who are really good at Smash are really good at one of Brawl or Melee.  Using a game that's not one of those two should level the playing field more, not less.  (Same with using a game with a more balanced cast).

Sounds good in theory, but in actual fact, most of our good Smash players have played one or the other(though, humorously, not both that I can recall. Go fig.).

Err.......recently?

I mean, I've played SSB64 a lot.  But that was like...eight years ago.  In fact, I remember getting used to Melee, then playing my cousin at 64 again (he never got a gamecube) and suddenly I was losing to him since I kept trying to play like Melee.

[DjinnAndTonic]

We could try a vote? People post what they want to see, rank them 1-5 or something. Take some averages and then we have more solid data.

List of games mentioned so far:

Smash 64
Smash Melee
Smash Brawl
Smash Brawl+
Street Fighter 2
Street Fighter 4
Marvel vs. Capcom 2
Tatsunoko vs. Capcom
Soul Calibur 1
Tekken 6
BlazBlue
Melty Blood
Dissidia
Puzzle Fighter
Zone of Enders
Tetris Attack

Just rank them and then there will be some data on what people actually want to see. And if you hate something, rank it low.

[Grefter]

look at me I'm elfboy and my opinion is the only one that matters.

If people want it, they want it. Deal with it.

Just getting his piece in since voicing dissent seems to be being noted here.  Disagreeing in silence is worthless.

[Xeroma]

He had already voiced it and I'm pretty sure he was acknowledged on that earlier. :/

[Magetastic]

Uhh, mind if I just offer up an idea? If Dissidia is even an option (given it would need multiple TVs anyways), and people have such split opinions on what games to play, is it not possible to split things up so that there are two tourneys going on at once? Also, if time's a huge constraint (mostly for "people are tired of this" reasons), would it be possible to split up a tourney that would be 4 hours on one day, to 2 hours on 2 days?  This does, of course, assume that there are enough people willing to run things that two tournaments would be viable, (even if there's just one TV, you could always split into groups, maybe?) and that there isn't already a tightly-packed schedule of some sort.

[Dark Holy Elf]

Yeah given that my more polite input was going unnoticed by mc, I felt I needed to be more blunt.


Also Xer, chill the fuck out. I am seriously sick of you going off the deep end and sniping at me passive-aggressively whenever I voice an opinion different than yours. Not everyone agrees with you about game quality, grow up and deal with it.

[Meeplelard]

Xer, I'll be honest; while Elfboy may have been a bit harsh...he wasn't slamming anyone, he was merely stating his distaste for a game.  Coming off the way you did is just a great way to start a flamewar, and doesn't help the situation, just makes it 5x worse.

...Ninja'd by elfboy on that regard...

[Xeroma]

My apologies. Life has been stressful recently and I didn't mean for it spill out like that.

[Ranmilia]

Excal:  Yeah, that's the point.  You'd have to limit everything to supercasual play, and that's going to annoy the competitive folks who LIKE things like spamming with Cable.  I'm kind of jawdropping at the notion of banning him for the reasons given there, and if he was banned and I was playing, well I'd read up on Magneto or Sentinel or whatnot and pick them and do roughly the same "cheap skillless no fun" stuff with them, because I'm interested in playing competitively and winning the tournament.  Danfights are awesome, to be sure, but not the point of an organized tournament.  Unless you ban competitive play in general, or ban me from playing altogether/I choose to sit out - which is where a lot of this discussion seems to be heading, unfortunately.

Djinn's idea is good.  Personal list:

1.  Melty Blood
2.  Smash Brawl
3.  Street Fighter 2
4.  Blazblue
5.  Smash Melee

Strongly don't want to see:
- Tetris Attack (horrible skill gaps, not very fun to watch to me)

[SageAcrin]

Err...I don't really see it.  Most people who are really good at Smash are really good at one of Brawl or Melee.  Using a game that's not one of those two should level the playing field more, not less.  (Same with using a game with a more balanced cast).

Sounds good in theory, but in actual fact, most of our good Smash players have played one or the other(though, humorously, not both that I can recall. Go fig.).

Err.......recently?

I mean, I've played SSB64 a lot.  But that was like...eight years ago.  In fact, I remember getting used to Melee, then playing my cousin at 64 again (he never got a gamecube) and suddenly I was losing to him since I kept trying to play like Melee.

Well...no, not recently. Brawl+ is pretty recent for the players of that, but no, SSB I doubt anyone's played recently. I last played it like four years ago or something. So, you've got a point there.

[metroid composite]

Uhh, mind if I just offer up an idea? If Dissidia is even an option (given it would need multiple TVs anyways), and people have such split opinions on what games to play, is it not possible to split things up so that there are two tourneys going on at once? Also, if time's a huge constraint (mostly for "people are tired of this" reasons), would it be possible to split up a tourney that would be 4 hours on one day, to 2 hours on 2 days?  This does, of course, assume that there are enough people willing to run things that two tournaments would be viable, (even if there's just one TV, you could always split into groups, maybe?) and that there isn't already a tightly-packed schedule of some sort.

Splitting into multiple simultaneous tournaments kinda defeats the purpose (everyone splitting up and playing their own games is kinda what we do the other 60 hours at DLC).

[Grefter]

Alright, so can we get this back on track to discussing about how shit the entire Smash series is?

[SageAcrin]

Oh, and as much as I hate to do this:

If this topic degenerates into namecalling or even discussion of other people's tastes in any negative light anymore, or of any game negatively without a real amount of thought put behind it-every time, not just random ragging on it with your opinion as previously known, etc-I am going to lock this topic and any further ones made on this forum, and let people do exactly what they did during DLC2-decide the damn thing themselves, as one person, and anyone who doesn't like it can not play. Or someone can make it on General Chat so another mod can police it, because I am seriously not putting up with this.

This is ridiculous.

Edit: Wow that color didn't look right. My old color doesn't appear to be on here. I'll use teal for now.

[Meeplelard]

I do want to state that regarding Alex's list...are you seriously suggesting 2 Smash Games?  Or is that just a general top 5 or something?  Cause 2 Smash Games = Definitely no.  I don't care how popular it is, 2 games of the same genre, let alone same series, of fighters is just going to get old FAST.

[Xeroma]

Alex was having a preference list, not a "projected games" list I believe.

[Excal]

Well, the issue with the vote is that we don't have any room for Smash style fighters guaranteed.  So it isn't a vot for your fighter of this style, but vote for this to get it in.  Which means that you either can make multiple votes for that style of fighter and then pare out the excess, which means that some fighters that would get 3-5th place votes get downplayed by those who just want their favourite system in.  Or you just say only one vote for a series, in which case the vote can fracture because people vote for different parts of the series.

Though, I suppose we have enough time that we could get around that by just saying here are some series, vote for these.  And then do sub-votes after the fact to determine which game in a series gets in.