Leaderboard

I don't know what forums you were member of previously, but responding to few months old post with nothing to add to the thread is not very welcome behavior. Ignoring most of the post and just saying "this is bullshit, so rest of it must also be so", is also rude. If you want to discuss something, please do, but if you don't, just ignore the post, instead of saying that post is not worthy to being responded to. Please, keep your responses up to a higher standard, no matter what opinions of other posters are, it's not a youtube comment section.

Actually agree with you there, hadn't thought about it like that to be honest. I don't know the specific changes between Melee and Smash 4 though. Like Scoots points out though it is something which people in all games adapt to, and while you're right in saying that the SF communities reaction to the changes in SFV are evidence of them being reluctant to change in the same way, I think the difference is that the changes from SFIV to SFV are a change in direction of a series, whereas the changes made in Project M are more akin to a balance patch (you could argue though that because it's a mod of a separate game that it is more akin to a change in a series' direction as opposed to a balance patch, despite still being based on Melee. I don't think I'd argue with you on that point because I think then it's simply that we subjectively see the differences, differently) I don't outright hate E-Sports. Like I said in my post I like the idea that the top players can be paid very highly for their skill, what I dislike is the concept of singular large organizations having control over a games competitive scene and pushing for it to be 'E-Sports', like Capcom has done with Street Fighter V. Saying that all I want to see if blowups and I think if that's how you've understood it then I must have worded it wrong. I use those as an example of the contrast between 'Competetive Gaming' typically found in smaller games and Fighting Games, and 'E-Sports'. The fact that the players have the ability to do so is something which I think is a result of the scene not being controlled by a single company. Like I said, if someone does something like that in League they will get fined, and the example I have with 2GD being removed from all future (major) Dota 2 events because of a single decision by Valve based on one thing he did is something that completely put me off playing Dota, and put me off the idea of E-Sports in general. A recent controversy in SFV was people like Nuckledu and Punk teabagging mid match, when their opponent was stunned but was on very low health (effectively BMing when their win was guaranteed). It was funny at first but eventually happened so much that it became annoying and obnoxious, and the community would turn on these guys who the rest of the time were liked by the majority of fans because it was simply unnecessary BM. I don't want to see these blowups at each and every opportunity, but I do want the players to be in an environment where they can do it and create these memorable moments in the right situations. I think your statement that "Losing is already bad enough" sounds like you're speaking from a personal perspective. The fact is that competitive Fighting Game players lose a LOT, no matter how good they are, that's how they learn, and one of the key pieces of advice given to new people picking up a fighting game is to "stop caring about wins or losses". For the majority of dedicated players losing isn't a bad thing (unless in a extremely high level tournament situation, in which case it's only bad because you lost out on the prize pool) losing is a necessity and it's what helps you get better. I think that with a company holding the control over a comp scene then there will obviously be the motivation on their part to make it seem as friendly and accessible as possible and subsequently to please sponsors and investors. The FGC describe these BM moments as Thuggery but you can call it whatever you want. But I'm of the opinion that these moments are evidence of a scene who love their game and are freely able to express their emotions among others who love the game, without this sword of Democles in the form of a larger company organizing them over their head. The fact is that the FGC is a mature scene, and that's what keeps the fans dedicated, not some "haha wow funny man shouting" level interest that you suggest is all I have. I'll try and sum up my original post to clear things up: I don't like Smash (I put this bit in simply to add context, but to also show that while I'm not a Smash player or even a fan of the scene, that I respect what they're doing and I understand that my own opinion won't stop people from liking the game and playing it competitively, and I'm fine with that) I think that if Nintendo want to support a competitive scene then it only seems right to support There's a lot of things which may put Nintendo off supporting Smash, and to me it feels wrong to not recognize the concerns that they have especially when they have stated that Smash is not intended to be played competitively I do think it's wrong for Nintendo to have an aim to create a competitive scene around games which are yet to be released And here's the most important bit and the only thing I think you should really consider, everything else is simply my subjective view and I don't think you're wrong for disagreeing with it. 5. A 'good' competitive scene is not directly tied to the amount of money or support that a company puts into it The reason I wrote my initial post is because I think that there's an automatic view by many that a games competitive scene is good if it's big, professional, and there's a lot of money (look at how Painkiller had a collosal $1m prize pool back when E-Sports simply weren't a thing at all. It didn't make the game good, it just gave one lucky guy a big £500k payday and then the game died because there was no fan-investment, only corporate) and here's why I made my initial post. Fans of Capcom fighting games and Street Fighter specifically, such as myself, are right in the middle of Capcom doing to their games exactly what Smash players want Nintendo to do to Smash. I picked up Street Fighter 4, and after getting over the learning curve associated with learning my first fighting game I began to love the game, and everything about it, especially the competitive scene. I found this entire comp scene which I had never experienced before. The suits and ties, the panels, the interviews were all gone in favour of just loads of people playing a game and having fun. There are two moments which I specifically attribute to my love for it. Firstly watching Xian win the first ever Capcom Pro Tour (which looking back was the beginning of the E-Sports-ification of Street Fighter) with Gen, a character who was notoriously hard and who in the vast roster of Ultra Street Fighter 4 was good, but wasn't as good as the Evil Ryu's, Kens, Yun's and Cammy's who were all S+ tier. The second moment spans from when I picked up the game at the release of Ultra, all the way to the final SF4 tournament at EVO in 2015. Gamerbee was a player who was known as Mr Second Place. He did so well in so many tournaments (with Yang, a very unpopular character) but could never snatch first place. At the release of Ultra, Elena (a character who was added in Ultra) was generally considered to be low-tier. This was a death sentence for her in many cases, as the roster was 44 characters large so nobody thought she would be able to contend with the best characters. Gamerbee picked her up and launched her from position 32 of 44, to position 11. He player her so well that people recognized that she had been written off too early, and a commentator at EVO 2015 said that in order to be a good player you had to have your main character, and then you had to have Elena. I watched Gamerbee fight his way through the losers bracket, and end up in the grand finals against Momochi, a player who was viewed by many as simply a Japanese robot who played the game so perfectly and calmly that he was near impossible to beat. Gamerbee took Momochi right to his limit, and when Momochi's stick broke half way through a game, the rules stated that Gamerbee could take that round (which would have given him an extra game in his favour in the best of 5 they were fighting). Gamerbee refused, because he wanted to win 'legit'. The tournament ended with Momochi winning the final SF4 tournament that would be run at EVO, effectively leaving him to be recognized as the best player of SF4 ever. Those are the two moments which secured me as a fan of SF4, and they made me hyped beyond belief for Street Fighter V. I defended that game so much at release. I couldn't comprehend that it could be a bad game because I didn't WANT it to be a bad game. But frankly it was an insult to SF4. Little to no single player content (something I dont personally care about at all, but a criticism nonetheless), completely fucked netcode which made it impossible to know whether you won because you played better, or because on the other players end your character was teleporting around the screen and was impossible to attack or defend against, and finally a much simpler combo system than SF4, which made optimal combos so easy to execute that it simply wasn't impressive to watch. That combo simplification is the biggest problem many have with SFV, and it's a result of Capcom wanting the game to be more accessible to a casual player. This appeal to casual players is something Capcom wanted (and still want) because the best thing that can happen in Capcoms opinion is that SFV can rake them in money. That's why you should at least be wary of Nintendo intervening in Smash. Support from a company can come at the expense of the players enjoyment. Now, SFV players like Daigo, Infiltration and Gamerbee OPENLY admit to not liking SFV, but still play it simply because the money put in by Capcom can't be ignored by them, because who would want to turn down some easy money. If you wanna play Smash play Smash man, go for it, have fun. But just know that MY community is going through the negatives of what 'E-Sportsification' can do to a series that I loved, and despite me not liking Smash I wouldn't want the Smash community to have to go through the same thing due to Nintendo.

But that's not what he said at all. While his post might be in need of a few commas, less brackets and some proof-reading, it is not even close to being incoherent enough that anyone with the most rudimentary level of reading comprehension would conclude what you have in the quoted text. In fact you seem to be entirely mistaken in your understanding of what he wrote. Did you perhaps not read the post in its entirety? Paero doesn't want to see "amateur" competitive players shittalking each other. He wants to see players (of all skill levels) that have a genuine love and deep investment in the game express their passion on the stage as they win or lose, rather than the cold and corporate approach you can find within tournaments that are funded and hosted entirely by private companies, who care more about maintaining their family friendly public image, than they do the game for which they're hosting the tournament. He is saying that he believes, that having competitive communities grow around a game is more rewarding as both a player and a viewer, compared to games that were made from the ground up with esports in mind, because those games have a tendency to sometimes feel soulless and corporate in their approach. He does so as a counterpoint to the idea that Nintendo should "invest" in the competitive scene of Smash Brothers. He admits that he is not a big fan of that game himself, but that he sees merit in having a game where the community dictates the pace of what is going on, rather than having big brother corporate logo hovering over the scene constantly, making sure that no one says or does something out of line. To him that means seeing one of his favourite players beating a fierce rival and getting excited about it. Getting up from his chair, fist-pumping the air, hollering in excitement and perhaps even giving his opponent a smartass comment to really keep that rivalry going. He's not saying that's how it "should be", he's saying that's how he personally prefers it. You present his argument as if he is only interested in the "shittalking" and as if he doesn't think players should receive their due dilligence for their achievements. Where did he ever state that? Please point that part out to me. I personally think it's pretty lame to viciously attack someone's opinions without even having the common courtesy to read and understand their post, but hey, that's also just my opinion.

coincidentally that's Valve's development philosophy for TF2

Only just seen this so I'm gonna write a bit about my opinions on the Smash competitive scene, about competitive gaming and 'E-Sports' in general and about the new games that Nintendo are releasing and whether it's a good thing or not that they're pushing for a competitive scene. Edit: Just read through your comment again and I realized I don't directly address a lot of stuff you talk about but fuck it I wrote all this and it's a discussion I like having so gonna leave this up xd. I'm just gonna outline a few things first of all before I get into this. I think the Smash games are fun, but I absolutely hate the competitive Smash community who hold the game as one of the greatest competitive games ever created and actively want it to be 'E-Sports'. I think the people who are really into the scene (Melee specifically, I think Smash 4 players in general are more bearable) and extremely childish as evidenced by the fact that they refuse to use anything other than CRT TV's in a competitive environment because anything else apparently creates too much input lag (a criticism I have never seen raised by any other community around a game), the fact that high level players have specifically requested that they be automatically allowed past the pools stage, and immediately be put into top 32, 16 or 8 because they knows and everyone else knows that they are so good that the pools are simply an inconvenience (which may be true, but it's against the spirit of the FGC which Smash players consider themselves to be a part of) and due to the fact that the game is completely and utterly stale, and that the top 4 players in Melee in EVO have been comprised of 3 guys (Mango, Armada and Hungrybox) for the last 4 years that it has been regularly run. Those are my reasons for hating the game, alongside generally finding the players to be obnoxious, but all that aside I recognize that Smash has a competitive following and that it's only been really since the advent of League of Legends that companies have been actively trying to create competitive scenes in their games, and that in a lot of ways Melee is much the same as Street Fighter II in that the scene developed around the game, and not the other way round. I hate Smash competitively, I have no interest in it, and the fans actions at tournaments make me wish that it just wasn't there at all, but I recognize that the scene is there and it would be wrong to try and stifle it. So, if Nintendo already has this scene then it seems: A. Right to support it, and B. Wrong to try and push other games to be competitive instead. Well my response is (as a general principle) No, and then Yes but not simply because there is an existing scene around Smash. (Edit: I wanna point out that it does make more sense for Nintendo to support Smash than it does to support games like Arms that aren't even out yet, and despite all the points I make I understand how you think it's a bit off that Nintendo won't recognise Smash but will recognise these games which aren't out yet) Is it right to support the Smash community? Firstly, in relation to point A, we can assume from what you have said that Nintendo wish to have some stake in a games competitive scene or in 'E-Sports' as a whole, and Nintendo being Nintendo it seems pretty logical that the game they support is one that they have developed (this is obviously the route that most companies take, and I doubt you're going to see companies supporting games that they haven't developed, or had a hand in developing any time soon). Nintendo want to have a stake in a competitive gaming scene and therefore Smash seems the obvious answer. Well honestly if you look at the Smash community then frankly I don't blame Nintendo for wanting nothing to do with it. Aside from the points I previously mentioned as to why I personally dislike the Smash Community, there are things that Nintendo as developers need to consider in the process of supporting a competitive scene. This could be a few things such as: A. The visual spectacle of the game for a casual viewer - someone who doesn't play Smash may not fully comprehend all of the tech the players are putting into a match) B. The personality of the high level players - entertaining people can prop up a boring game, just look at the recent blowup in Street Fighter V involving KBrad and Wolfkrone, a game which relative to its predecessors and competitors (eg, Guilty Gear XRD, King of Fighter XIV, and Tekken 7) is generally considered to be more boring, but which with the right players can be entertaining. If Smash had no 'cool' players, Nintendo may not like that. And; C. In which countries the game is most popular - The King of Fighters series for example is specifically popular in South America and China, because KoF 97 and KoF 98 could be put alongside other games on one single arcade cabinet, whereas the arcade board for Street Fighter II only supported 1 game on each board. This lead to a rise in popularity in countries where arcade owners had less money, as they effectively could run 3 games for the price of 1 (the 1 being SFII). Nintendo may view the fact that the Smash Comp scene (to my knowledge, and I may be wrong) isn't as popular in Asia as a mitigating factor when determining if it's a good idea to directly put money into supporting said competitive scene, as most Fighting Games have a larger following in Asia when compared to the West. These are all valid reasons to not support a game, but I personally think that the main factor as to why Nintendo hasn't shown any interest in supporting the competitive scene for Smash is that: D. Smash players are openly opposed to change - One of the key features found almost, if not all competitively played games in the current day is the idea of game balances and patches being applied to make the game fresh. There is direct evidence that Smash players do not like change, and it's found in Project M for Brawl. A mod released with the intention of taking Brawl, applying how Melee played TO it, and then from there balancing characters, fixing bugs and modernizing the features found in Melee to create a 'better' game. A concept which I personally like, but which from what I have read was rejected by Melee purists because they didn't want to learn more matchups as a result of re-balances, and didn't like the fact that the characters that they enjoyed playing got nerfed (from what I read one of the top 3 players I mentioned earlier dropped the game as a result of Fox's ability to enter and exit an invulnerable state being nerfed? I don't know the specifics on that one as like I say, I'm not a Smash player). This (and admittedly in combination to being a mod and therefore maybe not being seen as 'legit') lead to Project M becoming simply a side tournament at events which was just a cash grab for the good melee players, and now as I'm sure you know development had ended on Project M. Nintendo may take the view that this shows Smash fans are not willing to accept the mandatory balances that all modern 'E-Sports' have associated with them, and honestly I do not blame them for not wanting to be involved with bending over to the will of Smash players who have shown that they are honestly find supporting and regulating themselves, and playing the game in the same state that it's been in since the release date. That's why I don't think Nintendo would want to, and why I don't think they should support Smash IF they want to be in the position where they exercise control over a game. So, lets move on to; Whether or not it's wrong for Nintendo to support a DIFFERENT game they make in being competitive The word of the day is E-Sports (although really it's been the word of the last few years). E-Sports is one of the greatest things to happen to gaming from the perspective of a developer of a multiplayer game EVER. Here you have passionate players, playing your game, showcasing the intricacies of it to an audience of (potentially) millions via websites like Twitch. Everyone wants a slice of the E-Sports cake because it is probably the best way to advertise your game IF it succeeds. Riot Games notoriously lose money by running the League Championship Series, but make it back as this scene keeps League in the limelight and causes player retention, and since the LCS is run by Riot they therefore have direct control over how their game is showcased in a competitive environment. Contrast this to the opposite which is Starcraft: Brood War, which is still one of the most popular games in South Korea (which as I'm sure you know is the 'home' of E-Sports) but where KESPA hold the keys to how it is run competitively. Blizzard have no control over SC:BW to my knowledge (aside from simply distributing it) and therefore rely on KESPA to keep it relevant. If KESPA don't do SC:BW anymore then that game is realistically dead competitively. So, those are the benefits of E-Sports, and it makes sense as to why Nintendo as one of the largest gaming companies in the world, want in. But is it a good thing for the consumer? I always make a distinction between E-Sports and Competitive Gaming because I think it's important to realize who has the investment in the game, and where the investment comes from. To me and many others the distinction in the two lies in who is supporting the game. In Competitive Gaming I'd argue the community supports the game. They make the events, they enter the tournaments and they are the viewers, they run the ship. They do this because they like the game and they want to play it. In E-Sports a company (be it the devs, or people like KESPA) runs the events, they make the prize pools, and they allow the players or teams to enter based on previous merits. They invest the money so the players don't have to, and the players seem to reap the rewards of multi-million dollar prize pools. The caveat is that they have ulterior motives, primarily making money. 'E-Sports' is an investment, and PERSONALLY I think that such an investment with an intention to make money off of the backs of players and viewers takes the 'heart and soul' out of the game. It results in people like James "2GD" Harding, veterans of competitive games like Quake being ostracized for not being 'professional'. Maybe this is just me, but I think that Video Games of all things SHOULDN'T be professional. I don't wanna see 'Sports Analysis' I want to see people like Viscant telling people like LowTierGod to wash the taste of his dick out his mouth. Because that's the community showcasing how much they care about the game. E-Sports tries to remove the personality from players, and pushes too much, in my opinion, for professionalism. If someone in the LCS does something rude, then Riot will fine their team thousands of dollars. If someone like Viscant talks shit and backs it up then they get held in high regard by the community. If Nintendo want into E-Sports for Arms or Splatoon or whatever game they come out with than so be it, but I don't think it's a good thing, and I don't think forcing E-Sports onto a game results in the game being good (just look at Street Fighter V). If you're a Smash player, or just a fan or supporter of the Smash scene then I think in a round about way the best thing Nintendo has done is to stay as far away as possible from the game, because I personally don't have any faith in companies to directly support their community in running a games competitive scene. And that's because I think ultimately the companies will bend to the will of sponsors or anything that is more mainstream than the games community in order to retain money and an aura of professionalism, and I think if you care about your game of choice then that's not something you should want. You say "the scene is thriving now more than ever" and I disagree with that, but if that's what you think then I believe Nintendo getting involved is a bad thing. I'll end this by saying I don't hate E-Sports as much as I've made it out. It's cool that the best players can be millionaires as a result of their skill. But if you gave me as a player and a viewer, the choice between a tournament ending with a guy or a group of guys shaking hands with their opponents, hoisting a trophy or a cheque and uncomfortably smiling for photos on some news site OR telling their defeated opponent that they got bodied, or telling them to get good, or as Infiltration did simply saying "download complete", I'd choose the latter every time.

Can we have a gentlemen's agreement that we all just use "upvote" instead of "like"? really walked into that one huh

Done!! I think this one really turned out well : )

(aka I broke things again while trying to fix them) The forums have been updated to the latest version to apply security patches, among other things. Unfortunately, it seems like the update introduced a few new things that I wasn't expecting as part of a "minor" update. If you notice any things which have changed and might need to be fixed, please post them here so I can address them. Known changes: chat removed by IPS. Should probably use Discord anyway. clubs added. Apparently a way to have private/public groups. Currently requires admin approval to make one. reputation replaced by "reactions". Apparently it enabled downvotes for all. We can discuss whether this is something we want. minor theme changes. Not sure what I can do about those.

Your heroic restraint is noted and appreciated.

I didn't contend that. You're confusing me trying to outline more clearly what I believed Paero's point was with my own opinions. You seem to be arguing with me from a totally different base of understanding. You haven't showed why anything is bullshit, all you've done is jump down the throat of another user without reading his post properly, misrepresenting what he said in his post out of either ignorance, laziness or malice, given him unwarranted attitude for no fucking reason other than your own misplaced outrage and then continued to argue points that no one with half a brain would ever disagree on. By the way, it's been several posts now and you still haven't showed us where Paero stated that he didn't want high level players to receive their "due renumeration" . Do you really think that this conclusion is an honest summary of Paero's original post. Do you really think that? You should probably retract your last four or so posts in this thread as a whole tbh.

someone's been spending those skill points

I am the most powerful human being alive.

I got voted to give the graduation speech for my Master’s class :D

Just got my driver's license!

It's cool to not care about things you're cool man wow apathy is the most attractive character trait a man can have you must be drowning in pussy wow

*level 1 Blood Elf warrior logs on next to me* Me: It's a boy!

No one cares. Keep your notes to yourself in the future for the sake of the rest of us, thanks.

Because I believe in white (spuf) power(ed)

For those wanting to take a look at DD's E3 presentation, here you go.

I felt inspired

I was going to wait until the last second to join up (i.e. when SPUF had actually officially died) but it's almost impossible to post anything with those database errors.

So the company I worked for over the summer just offered me a job once I graduate. 5 months until Doctor Pan, Rail Engineer is true, in both sides of the Atlantic's meaning of the word.