Massive PASBR patch March 19th, has 133 fixes

[2ndApex]

As per the whole "I like Smash Bros. cause you can make people fly", that concept in this game would be completely awful. Like PASBR and Super Smash Bros. are apples and oranges. When the game is about combos (like this), having your opponent fly across the map completely defeats any combo-based system. Plus you want to keep enemies close to keep hitting them for AP, and then eventually hit them with an AP attack.

I like Smash Bros. a lot but I can't say I like it more since the two games play so differently. It's kinda like comparing Marvel vs. Capcom to Super Smash Bros. You can't really do that.

Smash has a combo system despite higher than traditional knockback distance , what makes PSAS look and feel stale to a lot of people (other than the lack of content) is the lack of dynamic elements in gameplay. Most traditional 2D fighters get away with fewer of those because they have much more complex control schemes and mechanics. Smash has variable hitstun/knockback by percentage, slight influence in knockback angle by the victim, 6 tech options on knockdown, more mobility options (mostly the second game), higher character weight variety, and more differences between sweetspot and sourspot hitboxes leading to more uses for individual attacks and making every single hit of a combo a complex read. Jump Ultimate Stars (though it's not really considered much of a success) has a extremely diverse team building and assist system (granted the Big 3 are banned) and a ridiculous raw roster size to support it and compensate for simplified controls and slightly more linear character design.

PSAS really have much of this kind of stuff except for the kinda meh super meter system, and while it's cool that they tried something different instead of copying smash or using a generic health bar, they're going to need more and/or redesigned mechanics if they want the game to be interesting. Combos are fun to experiment with in training mode but once you reach a certain level of play there's only one optimal combo for meter or into super for every hit confirm.

 

[MelodieOctavia]

Smash has a combo system despite higher than traditional knockback distance , what makes PSAS look and feel stale to a lot of people (other than the lack of content) is the lack of dynamic elements in gameplay. Most traditional 2D fighters get away with fewer of those because they have much more complex control schemes and mechanics. Smash has variable hitstun/knockback by percentage, slight influence in knockback angle by the victim, 6 tech options on knockdown, more mobility options (mostly the second game), higher character weight variety, and more differences between sweetspot and sourspot hitboxes leading to more uses for individual attacks and making every single hit of a combo a complex read. Jump Ultimate Stars (though it's not really considered much of a success) has a extremely diverse team building and assist system (granted the Big 3 are banned) and a ridiculous raw roster size to support it and compensate for simplified controls and slightly more linear character design.

PSAS really have much of this kind of stuff except for the kinda meh super meter system, and while it's cool that they tried something different instead of copying smash or using a generic health bar, they're going to need more and/or redesigned mechanics if they want the game to be interesting. Combos are fun to experiment with in training mode but once you reach a certain level of play there's only one optimal combo for meter or into super for every hit confirm.

I'd like to clarify a few things if you wouldn't mind. In a previous post, you labelled PASBR as a fighting game. It's as much a fighting game as Legend of Zelda is an RPG. PASBR, Power Stone, Smash Bros, etc... are brawlers. Not fighters. There is a difference.

That being said, saying PASBR needs to be more like Smash Bros is just like saying Mortal Kombat needs to be more like Street Fighter. They have similarities, but they are their own entity.

 

[2ndApex]

I'd like to clarify a few things if you wouldn't mind. In a previous post, you labelled PASBR as a fighting game. It's as much a fighting game as Legend of Zelda is an RPG. PASBR, Power Stone, Smash Bros, etc... are brawlers. Not fighters. There is a difference.

That being said, saying PASBR needs to be more like Smash Bros is just like saying Mortal Kombat needs to be more like Street Fighter. They have similarities, but they are their own entity.

I'm done the platform fighter debate way too many times on general FGC fourms to copy and paste the same paragraphs over and over again, just watch this which is applies to both SSB and PSAS.

That's not really in the area I was trying to get at though, I didn't say that PSAS needed to be like Smash (and I'd certainly be angry if it was) but that PSAS needed more gameplay elements to compensate for simplified controls and cited both Smash and JUS as games that did that well.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

I forgot people still think SSB is a "real fighter" with "real combos".

It's more like "exploits people found in the games that they know say use to claim it's a 'real fighter'". Because balance is being able to make slow characters wavedash so they're not slow. Also nothing screams "competitive fighter" like taking away every element that makes the game unique (items, diverse stages, an entire roster of characters). Fox Final Destination no items.

If a lot of the "fighting game elements" in SSBM were actually meant to be there and not just exploits and glitches, they'd be in Brawl. Simple as that.

 

[ds22]

I forgot people still think SSB is a "real fighter" with "real combos".

It's more like "exploits people found in the games that they know say use to claim it's a 'real fighter'". Because balance is being able to make slow characters wavedash so they're not slow. Also nothing screams "competitive fighter" like taking away every element that makes the game unique (items, diverse stages, an entire roster of characters). Fox Final Destination no items.

If a lot of the "fighting game elements" in SSBM were actually meant to be there and not just exploits and glitches, they'd be in Brawl. Simple as that.

Always love to read this kind of bullshit on the internet.
It says so much about your knowledge of the game (and in general).

 

[Gahars]

Always love to read this kind of bullshit on the internet.
It says so much about your knowledge of the game (and in general).

Super Smash Bros Bawl

 

[emigre]

I'm just here to say all brawlers are shit.

Yes I'm including PASBR and Smash Bros in that.

 

[Felipe_9595]

Hey, another post where Guild McCommunist speaks about Smash as a competitive fighter, despite the fact that he barely knows that aspect of the game.

As you said, le trole 2013 5edgy10me

 

[Eerpow]

I forgot people still think SSB is a "real fighter" with "real combos".

It's more like "exploits people found in the games that they know say use to claim it's a 'real fighter'". Because balance is being able to make slow characters wavedash so they're not slow. Also nothing screams "competitive fighter" like taking away every element that makes the game unique (items, diverse stages, an entire roster of characters). Fox Final Destination no items.

If a lot of the "fighting game elements" in SSBM were actually meant to be there and not just exploits and glitches, they'd be in Brawl. Simple as that.

It's dumbed down just like Mario Kart Wii. Brawl is a much slower game with things like tripping and way more unbalanced characters, the fighting itself excluding exploits is without a doubt less deep by default. There was a reasoning behind why Nintendo choose to do casualize these games that at that time.

You mention exploits but if you cared to do some research then you would find that the only real game changing one is the Wavedash as the other exploits are about cutting the animation by a frame or two, the game would still have a much more complex meta game than Brawl even if these things were patched. Really most of the techniques are basic intentional features.

Sure the games are meant to be fun brawlers and you'll find more depth in a game like SF but that doesn't mean there isn't a competitive scene revolving the game, in the end the gap between a casual smash player and an expert is just so much smaller in Brawl than it is in Melee where the factor of random elements are practically non existent.

Also I want to point out that some of the things in Melee we're certain are exploits could indeed be intentional just like how the advanced techniques used in F-Zero GX are confirmed to be intentional by EAD.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

I just find that SSB is a game ruined by its "competitive tourny players" who think the game is only good if you remove every aspect of the game that makes it unique.

It's like taking Street Fighter and saying you can only play as Ryu and only use certain attacks. Maybe it'll be more balanced that way but that's not Street Fighter. Taking out all the items, all the different maps, and limiting a ton of characters completely defeats the purpose of the game and illustrates it was not meant to be a tournament fighter.

They're fantastic games and frequent party favorites for myself and my friends but the delusion that it's as competitive a game as Street Fighter is what bothers me.

And to say that PASBR doesn't have "as much depth" when it has a lot of the elements of fighting games combined with an original scoring system and a Smash Bros.-esque approach to level design. I don't think it's as tournament-tailored as Street Fighter or Mortal Kombat but it's definitely designed with some tournament ideas.

 

[Eerpow]

I just find that SSB is a game ruined by its "competitive tourny players" who think the game is only good if you remove every aspect of the game that makes it unique.

It's like taking Street Fighter and saying you can only play as Ryu and only use certain attacks. Maybe it'll be more balanced that way but that's not Street Fighter. Taking out all the items, all the different maps, and limiting a ton of characters completely defeats the purpose of the game and illustrates it was not meant to be a tournament fighter.

They're fantastic games and frequent party favorites for myself and my friends but the delusion that it's as competitive a game as Street Fighter is what bothers me.

And to say that PASBR doesn't have "as much depth" when it has a lot of the elements of fighting games combined with an original scoring system and a Smash Bros.-esque approach to level design. I don't think it's as tournament-tailored as Street Fighter or Mortal Kombat but it's definitely designed with some tournament ideas.

Whatever floats their boats I guess, I only occasionally turn the items off not because it's more fun but because it's interesting to see who really is the better smash player from time to time, you know the kind of discussion that pops up when you're with friends. Even if you understandably prefer brawl because of the sheer amount of content, you too have to understand why people dislike it without jumping to conclusions.
The complexity removed from brawl is intentional, not only bug fixes. They wanted Melee to be a competitive game when they made developed it, even if they had no idea to what level of competitiveness people would eventually take it to. Basically the developers behind PASBR had just as big of a intention of making it a competitive experience as Nintendo had when they were developing Melee.

And as a side thought: I'm not entirely sure but seeing as Nintendo once again has changed their view when it comes to catering to their "core" audience and that Sakurai took all the effort to make KI:U balanced I'm almost 100% sure we won't have another Smash title with the same kind of intentional unbalanced or limiting elements.