Do you think Brawl is a fighting game? Here's what US's best SFIV player thinks!

[QUOTE="Metamania"][QUOTE="Nifty_Shark"]

I hate Smash Bros. but it's a fighting game and my friends are more serious about it than any other fighter. The guys that turn off all items and such.

Nifty_Shark

They take them out just so nobody gets an easy kill. Either way I don't understand what makes it not a fighting game. The only thing that makes it different from the standard 1 on 1 fighting is that the stages often allow more than just a straight plane.

Me thinks you need to read the entire thread, because it's been explained already. The newcomers are just too lazy to read it, apparently.

They take them out just so nobody gets an easy kill. Either way I don't understand what makes it not a fighting game. The only thing that makes it different from the standard 1 on 1 fighting is that the stages often allow more than just a straight plane.Nifty_Shark

2 - The game defaults to items on.

3 - There are stages that present gross random elements to a match whether you choose to acknowledge them or not.

4 - Due to the multiplayer default, character moves are not contextual to the location of the opponent (target).

All these facts add up to "not a fighter".

For those who insist on playing semantics with the word "fighter", then consider that the RPG genre defies its definition regularly. That doesn't change the name of the genre. It needed a name and that's the one it got. Same with fighters. The word was not already being used for a genre, so that was it. Doesn't mean it includes every game in which you fight, it is just the name used to describe games of the SFII template.

Remember how we use to discuss whether or not Brawl is a fighting game? Brawl and Wii fans argued it was while a lot of fighting game veterans said it wasn't.

Well, here's what Justin Wong, U.S.'s best SFIV player thinks about Brawl:

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/103/1038350p1.html

IGN: Are you a fan of Super Smash Bros.?

Justin Wong: No, I don't like Super Smash Bros. at all.

IGN: What's the difference between Super Smash Bros. and Street Fighter IV?

Justin Wong: Smash Bros. is more like a family game and Street Fighter IV is actually a fighting game.

Ouch!

But he has credibility. I'm sure Brawl fans and Wii owners won't be happy to read this!

ASK_Story

OMG I totally agree with Wong, SSBx is not a fighting game and it's time for the world to recognize it! because we all know SSBx is a FPS game! no wait...

[QUOTE="ViewtifulScott"] But yep, Brawl is just Melee with better graphics and a (barely functional and bare bones) online mode tacked on. Skylock00

Yup. He completely forgot the stuff like a story mode/adventure, create your own levels, a more diverse character selection and completely re-balanced combat. (Meaning that hardcore Melee fans burst into tears when the Wavedash was taken out) :)

[QUOTE="Metamania"][QUOTE="Nifty_Shark"]

I hate Smash Bros. but it's a fighting game and my friends are more serious about it than any other fighter. The guys that turn off all items and such.

Nifty_Shark

They take them out just so nobody gets an easy kill. Either way I don't understand what makes it not a fighting game. The only thing that makes it different from the standard 1 on 1 fighting is that the stages often allow more than just a straight plane.

From what I gather, it isn't a SF2 clone, so it isn't a fighter. Which is silly, but people can believe silly ideas.

You know, I think it's about time that people actually start reading other people's posts and taking what they're saying into consideration.

I only say this because it's quite obvious that it isn't happening.

[QUOTE="yodariquo"]Words have meaning. If Brawl doesn't qualify as a "fighting game" you're no longer using words to communicate because the term is no longer meaningful.ViewtifulScott

[QUOTE="ViewtifulScott"][QUOTE="yodariquo"]Words have meaning. If Brawl doesn't qualify as a "fighting game" you're no longer using words to communicate because the term is no longer meaningful.yodariquo

You're trying too hard here, and this is ultimately making your analogy fail.

Water is a liquid. Without water, we wouldn't have other forms of liquid.

Fighting is a battle between people. Without fighting, there wouldn't be brawling now, would there?

I guess you could see it as.

Brawl - casual fighter

SFIV - Tournament fighter.

Ravirr

Brawl's more a party game than a fighting game...Melee, however, is a fighting game.

From what I gather, it isn't a SF2 clone, so it isn't a fighter. Which is silly, but people can believe silly ideas.Pixel-Pirate

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]From what I gather, it isn't a SF2 clone, so it isn't a fighter. Which is silly, but people can believe silly ideas.ViewtifulScott

I simply cannot argue with someone who says Brawl is not a fighter. It's like arguing with someone who says the sun is cold.

[QUOTE="ViewtifulScott"][QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]From what I gather, it isn't a SF2 clone, so it isn't a fighter. Which is silly, but people can believe silly ideas.Pixel-Pirate

I simply cannot argue with someone who says Brawl is not a fighter. It's like arguing with someone who says the sun is cold.

If that's the case, you're just being ignorant, because it isn't. =/

This is no different from the debate of JRPGs being it's own sub-genre because they don't deliver what RPGs are supposed to be.

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

[QUOTE="ViewtifulScott"] Try reading the replies again, and seeing them for what they actually are, rather than seeing what you want to see.MadVybz

I simply cannot argue with someone who says Brawl is not a fighter. It's like arguing with someone who says the sun is cold.

If that's the case, you're just being ignorant, because it isn't. =/

This is no different from the debate of JRPGs being it's own sub-genre because they don't deliver what RPGs are supposed to be.

Whatever you say. I guess I was just never a big fan of having a sub-genre for every game.

Brawl isn't a traditional fighter. I don't understand why people want it to be one.

Calling Brawl (and Smash Bros.) a "fighter" is like calling Metroid Prime a "shooter."

Brawl isn't a traditional fighter. I don't understand why people want it to be one.

Calling Brawl (and Smash Bros.) a "fighter" is like calling Metroid Prime a "shooter."

foxhound_fox

Metroid Prime, in reality, is a first-person adventure with "shooter" elements in it. But it's not completely an FPS.

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]

Brawl isn't a traditional fighter. I don't understand why people want it to be one.

Calling Brawl (and Smash Bros.) a "fighter" is like calling Metroid Prime a "shooter."

Metamania

Metroid Prime, in reality, is a first-person adventure with "shooter" elements in it. But it's not completely an FPS.

Exactly. It took what was done by it's predecessors then applied it to a 3D environment, then put it in a first person view. So if anything, it's a 3D platformer.

On the bus on my way to pick up Tekken and Forza, so I won't be my usual verbose self, but, just a little something to think about.

Before Street Fighter II, there were games that were technically fighters.

Before Street Fighter II, there was no fighting genre.

I invite everyone to do the math.

DarkCatalyst

No, there was a fighting genre well before Street Fighter II existed. The difference is that Street Fighter II's popularity helped establish certain standards because it refined the concepts that eariler games introduced..

The concept of energy gauges, one on one bouts, special moves(those were in SF I), and other stuff like that.

If you wanna know more, check out this link http://www.hardcoregaming101.net/fighters/fighters.htm

[QUOTE="DarkCatalyst"]

On the bus on my way to pick up Tekken and Forza, so I won't be my usual verbose self, but, just a little something to think about.

Before Street Fighter II, there were games that were technically fighters.

Before Street Fighter II, there was no fighting genre.

I invite everyone to do the math.

caryslan2

No, there was a fighting genre well before Street Fighter II existed. The difference is that Street Fighter II's popularity helped establish certain standards because it refined the concepts that eariler games introduced..

The concept of energy gauges, one on one bouts, special moves(those were in SF I), and other stuff like that.

If you wanna know more, check out this link http://www.hardcoregaming101.net/fighters/fighters.htm

I'm confused, a Game where you choose a character and fight other characters isn't a fighting game if it's considered "family friendly"?Treflis

[QUOTE="Ravirr"]

I guess you could see it as.

Brawl - casual fighter

SFIV - Tournament fighter.

ShadowedSight

While I understand that SF games are wildly accepted and Smash Bros. games are not I don't see why it has to necessarily be like that.I mean there are people who are very serious about Smash Bros. and paly at a very high quality. They don't use unbalanced as an excuse either.

Bassically my issue with the statement is that these games can be taken as seriously as a person wants. Sort of like how Blitz can be more serious than Madden I suppose.

[QUOTE="ShadowedSight"][QUOTE="Ravirr"]

I guess you could see it as.

Brawl - casual fighter

SFIV - Tournament fighter.

While I understand that SF games are wildly accepted and Smash Bros. games are not I don't see why it has to necessarily be like that.I mean there are people who are very serious about Smash Bros. and paly at a very high quality. They don't use unbalanced as an excuse either.

Bassically my issue with the statement is that these games can be taken as seriously as a person wants. Sort of like how Blitz can be more serious than Madden I suppose.

[QUOTE="ShadowedSight"][QUOTE="Ravirr"]

I guess you could see it as.

Brawl - casual fighter

SFIV - Tournament fighter.

Nifty_Shark

While I understand that SF games are wildly accepted and Smash Bros. games are not I don't see why it has to necessarily be like that.I mean there are people who are very serious about Smash Bros. and paly at a very high quality. They don't use unbalanced as an excuse either.

Bassically my issue with the statement is that these games can be taken as seriously as a person wants. Sort of like how Blitz can be more serious than Madden I suppose.

But all of that is irrelevant, and people just can't seem to grasp that fact.

A fighting game is fit perfectly under the genre when it meets the fundamentals. Yeah, it has the concepts of beating up your enemies, but almost everything else disqualifies it from a true fighting game. I'm not going to bother listing them, because DC has conveniently done it about 2 or 3 times at this point.

And for whatever reason, people are taking it as an attack on Brawl about it being a bad game, when no one in truth has actually said that.

[QUOTE="Nifty_Shark"]

[QUOTE="ShadowedSight"] That's all it is. He said it pretty bluntly, but i think he's trying to say that SFIV has a deeper fighting strategy than Brawl. I doubt he' s so dumb that he truly thinks it is not a fighting game.MadVybz

While I understand that SF games are wildly accepted and Smash Bros. games are not I don't see why it has to necessarily be like that.I mean there are people who are very serious about Smash Bros. and paly at a very high quality. They don't use unbalanced as an excuse either.

Bassically my issue with the statement is that these games can be taken as seriously as a person wants. Sort of like how Blitz can be more serious than Madden I suppose.

But all of that is irrelevant, and people just can't seem to grasp that fact.

A fighting game is fit perfectly under the genre when it meets the fundamentals. Yeah, it has the concepts of beating up your enemies, but almost everything else disqualifies it from a true fighting game. I'm not going to bother listing them, because DC has conveniently done it about 2 or 3 times at this point.

And for whatever reason, people are taking it as an attack on Brawl about it being a bad game, when no one in truth has actually said that.

Exactly!

Brawl, in itself, is not a bad game whatsoever. None of the Smash games are. But it's just not a fighting game. End of story. People need to understand that point.

Well im sure this has been said but Super smash brothers takes no skill really, Im sure there is no grand master of it,

Street fighter takes alot more skill.

Well im sure this has been said but Super smash brothers takes no skill really

johnnystarr

Metroid Prime, in reality, is a first-person adventure with "shooter" elements in it. But it's not completely an FPS.

Metamania

Well im sure this has been said but Super smash brothers takes no skill really, Im sure there is no grand master of it,

Street fighter takes alot more skill.

johnnystarr

OK. So Super Smash games are brawlers then? Fine. I'm fine with that. But if that's the case then I demand it be a sub genre of fighters :D

[QUOTE="johnnystarr"]

Well im sure this has been said but Super smash brothers takes no skill really, Im sure there is no grand master of it,

Street fighter takes alot more skill.

DarkCatalyst

As a kid, MK was the greatest thing ever. Now, I can't stand playing it for more than all of 5 seconds. :x

What's even more infuriating is when someone has the lack of brains to compare it to franchises like Street Fighter or Soul Calibur. Or even worse, brag about how good they are in MK. It makes me kringe.

OK. So Super Smash games are brawlers then? Fine. I'm fine with that. But if that's the case then I demand it be a sub genre of fighters :D

Nifty_Shark

OK. So Super Smash games are brawlers then? Fine. I'm fine with that. But if that's the case then I demand it be a sub genre of fighters :D

Nifty_Shark

EDIT: For example, here are your sub-families of action-arcade games.

Action Platformer - Shinobi, Ninja Gaiden, Contra...
Beat-em-up - Double Dragon, Final Fight, Streets of Rage...
Fighting - Street Fighter II, Virtua Fighter, Mortal Kombat...
Brawler - Power Stone, Super Smash Bros, Kung Fu Chaos...

OK. So Super Smash games are brawlers then? Fine. I'm fine with that. But if that's the case then I demand it be a sub genre of fighters :D

Nifty_Shark

That's what I have been suggesting people to do for a while now, but of course no one wants to listen.

Instead, people insist that Smash is entirely a fighting game and take offense, whether or not its merit had even been insulted.

[QUOTE="Nifty_Shark"]

OK. So Super Smash games are brawlers then? Fine. I'm fine with that. But if that's the case then I demand it be a sub genre of fighters :D

MadVybz

That's what I have been suggesting people to do for a while now, but of course no one wants to listen.

Instead, people insist that Smash is entirely a fighting game and take offense, whether or not its merit had even been insulted.

You and many others here...

Why is this still going on? Is the title of "fighter" really this important for this game? Frankly if you are playing SSBB as a fighter, then you are not playing it right.

Just because some fanboy says it isn't doesn't make it so, even if he is a so-called professional player. A true professional wouldn't spout fanboy nonsense like that in the first place. It is a fighting game, just a little different.

Bigboi500

[QUOTE="chaplainDMK"]

Fail...
Just cuz he spends 3/4 of his free time playing SF4 in his basement with his mom doesent make him the judge of anything

ViewtifulScott

Well im sure this has been said but Super smash brothers takes no skill really, Im sure there is no grand master of it,

Street fighter takes alot more skill.

[QUOTE="DarkCatalyst"][QUOTE="johnnystarr"]

Well im sure this has been said but Super smash brothers takes no skill really, Im sure there is no grand master of it,

Street fighter takes alot more skill.

Metamania

Just to add to my previous point, Power Stone is the real victim here. If Brawler players could get off their "we deserve to be at Evo" delusion, and start their own thing, Power Stone and Power Stone 2 would be excellent contributions to the Brawler scene. Instead, you have Smash hogging all of the genre's attention by trying to squeeze itself into a much more crowded space.DarkCatalyst

I consider Power Stone a 3D fighting game.

[QUOTE="Metamania"][QUOTE="DarkCatalyst"] Neither true, nor a valid point. There's this Ken kid who tears people up on Smash like nobody's business. He could end up being the Justin Wong of brawlers. Also, there are plenty of real definitive fighting games that are unskilled and poorly-developed (see: Mortal Kombat, Primal Rage, Bloody Roar, Killer Instinct, etc...). I reiterate, Smash's quality is not on trial here.DarkCatalyst

The reason why I asked is because the original thought was that you didn't give much time to the games, just merely took the same stance that the hardcore community had on them without giving them much thought. Of course, I spoke of this to you on AIM last night, so the issue shouldn't go any further than it is. Just wanted to explain, to the others, as to why it was brought up.

That said, I do agree that those games did not gain a lot of competition, due to how they turned out to be. But that doesn't mean they are bad games...well, except for Mortal Kombat these days, especially with the way how the series turned out. Killer Instinct and its sequel, Gold, were fun games, even better when you had friends to play in your neighborhood (which was the case for me when I lived overseas). As for Primal Rage? Love that game. The story and characters is what did it for me, plus the violence and gore was super sweet. :D It may not be one of your favorite fighters, but it is certainly one of mine!