This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Is Project M the Result of Brawl Vs. Melee Wars?

#21CyborgSage00x0Posted 4/30/2012 12:06:17 PM
Melee's mechanics were fast, dynamic, and full of opportunities to combo, break out of combos, control space, limit options, gimp recoveries, etc. Brawl is a game of tag until somebody hits 150%. Then they die. Maybe.

Ok, we get it, you think you understand Melee, and you really don't understand Brawl at all. Your overblown idea of of what you think Melee is and your clearly intellectually dishonest and slavish idea of what you think Brawl is shows this. You're not doing yourself a favor by revealing your bias. Move along, people.

Pro-Tip: Those things you listed for Melee? Aren't unique to Melee, and all of them (save for maybe "fast" and the heavy usage of combos, a BAD thing) are in Brawl.
---
Currently playing: LoL, Super Mario 3D, Bastion, Xenoblade, A.R.E.S, FEAR 3, MK7, Kid Icarus: Uprising.
#22Hyper ShadicPosted 4/30/2012 1:02:19 PM
I'm actually quite aware of the "finer mechanics" of Brawl, thank you very much. It comes with hacking the game.

Brawl is a mechanically flawed game in many ways - The inability to DI moves that do not send the player into tumble, DIability in general is determined by your launch angle instead of being consistent due to how Brawl reads inputs, easy grab infinites due to stupid animations (grab release), infinites due to random animations the Brawl designers felt like including (the DownDamageU3 and DownDamageD3 animations resulting in jab/laser lock infinites), planking, etc..

There's also the odd limitations - the player is forced to hold onto the ledge for a minimum amount of time, you cannot perform actions out of the first frame of your jump, character mobility is extremely low, and everybody's favorite: tripping.

Not to mention a general laziness in design. See the hitboxes on Snake's Nair:
http://i.imgur.com/pqyGo.png

For real fun, look at character hurtboxes. Most aren't even centered on the character, and Lucas has peculiarly sensitive toes:
http://i.imgur.com/Ummyo.png

I don't see how any of that is defensible.
---
Project M Developer. Learn more!
http://smashmods.com/projectm/
#23Hero_of_CouragePosted 4/30/2012 1:19:42 PM
Project M didn't happen due to some sort of silly fight. It is a collaboration between advanced melee players who decided to take the best parts of every game and put it in a Melee-like battle system.

In a sense, this is the best Smash Bros. game yet, even surpassing Melee. It has the amazing fast-paced and technical gameplay of Melee, the added movement options from Brawl as well as its (improved by PMBR) content and the greatest attributes of Smash bros 64. It also has the best balance out of every smash game and even removes bugs and nonsensical hitboxes from Brawl.

It even created new ways to play, more variety in the roster's combat typologies, made better stage selection, and it's just a demo. Brawl had tons of glaring issues, and more bugs and senseless hitboxes that we can count. Just take Snake's Up tilt as an obvious example. Brawl was the only game that has a banned character because he's too overpowered. Brawl has trippng. Melee on the other hand also has issues. While more balanced than Brawl, only about 7-8 are really tournament viable.=, and there are infinite comboes that needed to be toned down. Project M fixes these issues and makes a game that surpassed both.

There exist tons of Brawl mods on the Internet, but there is a reason why Project M is the one IGN chose to write about. It's more professional than the games Nintendo themselves made. It's worth checking out.

So please, stop treating this as the answer to Brawl by a bunch of anti-Brawl elitist jerks. If anything, Project M's fanbase is pretty mixed and I am happy to say that I can play with brawlers at a common game while both of our gorups have fun.
#24MetalKirbyPlushPosted 4/30/2012 5:53:51 PM
CyborgSage00x0 posted...
Ok, we get it, you think you understand Melee, and you really don't understand Brawl at all. Your overblown idea of of what you think Melee is and your clearly intellectually dishonest and slavish idea of what you think Brawl is shows this. You're not doing yourself a favor by revealing your bias. Move along, people.

Congratulations for being a massive hypocrite. You don't even understand the fundamentals of either game yet create a poor defense for Brawl anyways. You're just as biased although I'd hardly say Shadic is biased in the first place. Most of what he posted is factual details about Brawl's engine and inner workings. I would know considering that I've been following Project M since the first day the thread was created.
---
Samus ruined Metroid forever. She keeps killing them. ~CTsChoco
#25CyborgSage00x0Posted 4/30/2012 6:51:20 PM
Brawl is a mechanically flawed game in many ways - The inability to DI moves that do not send the player into tumble, DIability in general is determined by your launch angle instead of being consistent due to how Brawl reads inputs, easy grab infinites due to stupid animations (grab release), infinites due to random animations the Brawl designers felt like including (the DownDamageU3 and DownDamageD3 animations resulting in jab/laser lock infinites), planking, etc..

Incorrect, and everything you listed is either wrong, or extremely overblown (such as jab locks/laser locks, which are not practical to pull off, and not even that great), or something like plnaking, which is also in Melee, and is banned in both competitive settings.

The rest of your post is a simple listed off of what is inherently different between Brawl and Melee-this is NOT a bad thing. The game was meant to change and evolve, and this was inevitable. Mortal Kombat II doesn't play the same as modern Mortal Kombat, Street Fighter II doesn't play like Street Fighter IV, so I don't understand why it's impossible to concieve that Brawl does, and is supposed to, not play like Melee. That's simply what happens, and no one game can objectively be called better (except for tripping-tripping is awful).

Anything you think that is a bizzare ambuguity in Brawl is the same for the numerous glitches/oddeties that were in Melee, and will be in SSB Tussle, or whatever they will name the Wii U Brawl. What I don't get is the desire to transform Brawl into Melee, when you already have Melee. Plus, I find it ironic that you complain about chain grabs or infinites, when all PM did was add NUMEROUS amounts of these for practically every character.


Congratulations for being a massive hypocrite. You don't even understand the fundamentals of either game yet create a poor defense for Brawl anyways. You're just as biased although I'd hardly say Shadic is biased in the first place. Most of what he posted is factual details about Brawl's engine and inner workings. I would know considering that I've been following Project M since the first day the thread was created.

Whoa there junior, calm down before you wet yourself. Them be some mildly strong accusations-care to back them up with evidence? Where have I shown bias? I haven't stated my preference for either game, just that overzealously adding the bad parts of melee and magnifying them to Brawl characters seems like a pointless endevour. And I haven't even yet to begun to discuss mechanics, besides my statement that set-up and guarenteed combos cheapen and weaken fighter games, which is 100%.

If you're going to come at me bro, bring actual complaints, not your foaming at the mouth fanboyism.

For what it's worth, I do enjoy screwing around with PM, and I applaud the prowess of the people who put the time into it, and there's definitely a market for it. I question the thought process of putting the worst aspects of fighters into this game, with the mentality that we need to bring back the "goold old days" that a LARGE portion of this community seem to have.
---
Currently playing: LoL, Super Mario 3D, Bastion, Xenoblade, A.R.E.S, FEAR 3, MK7, Kid Icarus: Uprising.
#26TheGreatWEEGEEPosted 4/30/2012 7:18:37 PM
Going to go out on a limb here and say that you really don't have a clue what you're talking about or are just blatantly trolling for disregarding recorded coding finds in Brawl's engine.

And 60% combos? Do you even know what DI is?
---
http://assets.knowyourmeme.com/i/1676/original/WEEGEE.jpg
#27Hyper ShadicPosted 4/30/2012 7:30:08 PM
Incorrect, and everything you listed is either wrong, or extremely overblown (such as jab locks/laser locks, which are not practical to pull off, and not even that great), or something like plnaking, which is also in Melee, and is banned in both competitive settings.
Point out a single factually incorrect statement that I made in that post. Just one. And do try and back up your statement, instead of just making accusations.

Plus, I find it ironic that you complain about chain grabs or infinites, when all PM did was add NUMEROUS amounts of these for practically every character.
Considering we removed the most egregious chain grab in Melee, (Sheik's NTSC Dthrow) I'm going to say you're spouting off more falsehoods here. I'd like to see examples of these numerous infinites for "practically every character," as well. (There's this thing called directional-influence that helps break combos. Just because it's a broken, inconsistent mechanic in Brawl doesn't mean you should ignore it in Melee or Project M.)
---
Project M Developer. Learn more!
http://smashmods.com/projectm/
#28LunarApplePosted 5/1/2012 1:46:00 AM

From: MetalKirbyPlush | #024
You don't even understand the fundamentals of either game yet create a poor defense for Brawl anyways.


This.

No matter your argument, Cyborg, this bit will stay true regarding all you say about either game and PM. Without such knowledge, you are unable to make formulate an argument that could possibly hold any ground.

Not only that, but you're arguing against facts and thing that were directly ripped from Brawl's coding (I don't know the terminology here, so I apologize if I skew anything by saying this). There isn't much to argue on this point.


From: CyborgSage00x0 | #025
or something like plnaking, which is also in Melee,


The difference is that planking offered a stupid advantage that shouldn't have been present in the first place (in Brawl).

The game was meant to change and evolve,


I don't think that change and evolution was to lead towards stagnant, passive play. This is proved by the fact that planking is a more beneficial and advantageous strategy than any sort of aggressive tactic (barring MK, but even then he does it fantastically).

so I don't understand why it's impossible to concieve that Brawl does, and is supposed to, not play like Melee.


It really wouldn't have been so bad if it weren't made to be so inherently passive. The only reason people resent the change at all is because of this. Going from Melee's metagame to Brawl's definitely felt like a step backward, precisely because of its slow place.

That's simply what happens, and no one game can objectively be called better


That's essentially true, but I'd be hard pressed to argue Brawl as the more entertaining setting to battle it out.

What I don't get is the desire to transform Brawl into Melee, when you already have Melee.


Wrong.

People want more for Melee, with Melee's essence, because they found Melee fun. Not sure what's so hard to understand about that.

set-up and guarenteed combos cheapen and weaken fighter games, which is 100%.


"Guaranteed" combos can be misleading--it's always up to player execution, unless you literally give a character a single-button-press combo.
---
A little rudeness and disrespect can elevate a meaningless interaction to a battle of wills and add drama to an otherwise dull day.
#29InnerscopePosted 5/1/2012 11:37:46 AM
Can I get an explanation of how combos are cheap and ruin fighters please?

Because that 60% excuse isn't enough.
#30JetAurionPosted 5/1/2012 2:53:14 PM
Habefiet posted...
And no, the whole concept of P:M was not just to bring Melee in to Brawl, and yes, you are blatantly choosing to ignore that fact (no disrespect intended). One of their stated goals from the beginning of this entire project has been to balance the cast. It's not like I'm inventing that. They're buffing and modifying both Melee and Brawl characters a crapton to try to make them all as good as the spacies.

Yes, I'm well aware of all that. I just didn't want to go on and on and on and on about what I knew P:M does.

I don't understand why you insist on repeating that "the whole point" of the project is one thing when it's pretty blatantly not. It's a point, yes, and I'll concede that it is the most important of the points to try and make a Melee successor, but you're ignoring HUGE points about the project. Ex. Bowser. They didn't just give him his Melee characteristics, you know? They've changed ****tons about him, not for Melee's sake or Brawl's sake or whatever, but for the sake of making him equal to his peers.

Yes, that was poor word choice on my part. I should have said "major point". My apologies.

I would encourage you to look into the project more, and I would encourage you not to use a word like "gimmicks" to describe Melee's advanced techs unless you're also willing to apply that word to Brawl's advanced techs, since each game has some whacky-ass ATs.

Gimmicks are gimmicks. Melee's advanced techs are not so sacred as to be untouchable by the word "gimmick". The techs clearly stand out from the rest of the series. Same goes for Brawl's AT's.
---
No bra can withstand the might of Haku's heaving chesticles.
-UriChan