I don't really think it matters if Smash Bros is a fighting franchise or not. It is fun. It brought something new to the table and it continues to be a great game to play alone, with friends, or competitively.

Games like Street Fighter, Mortal Kombat, Tekken and Soul Calibur just recycle the same things over and over and just update the graphics. These games may have been fun 10 years ago but the crappy combos and annoying characters have worn thing and become boring.

Gsig

Smash is cool, but that in no way means true fighting games are somehow lacking. It's funny you'd say something like that during the biggest revival of fighting games in the history of gaming.

[QUOTE="ShenlongBo"]

[QUOTE="ZenesisX"] Your logic is understandable, but im going to have to say no. Why? because yes you play the role of mario in mario tennis but you have no custom characteristics you can change within the game unlike your basic rpg.

ZenesisX

See?

Some of the differentiating factors are the items, randomness of said items (good pokeball or lousy one?), the randomness of stages (a fishy eated me?), the fact that it's not one player against another. Yes, I realize you can tweak the settings to make the game seem more like a fighting game, but that's all you're doing. Just because it seems more like one doesn't mean it is one.

At any rate, I love Smash, and I think its community would grow much stronger, much sooner if they'd stop clinging to the fighting gamers and do their own thing.

/Begins rant/ If there is one character that I think is a bit too strong, I would vote for Ryu. He is the only character in the game that has absolutely no flaw (Sagat is very strong, better than Ryu in many areas, but his slow speed can hurt him in many situations. Akuma has an insane amount of tools, but his low stamina can be key in making him stoppable, Balrog and Rufus also are very strong but have some notable flaws that can be targeted). Ryu is just good at everything, there is nothing that can be used against him to exploit any kind of weakness. Almost anything he does can be ended with an ultra, and most of his options are extremely safe. I am really starting to dislike him. I understand that he is the main character, and he should be very good, but man give the guy some sort of notable disadvantage. A really good Ryu is just a nightmare to face /ends rant/

I agree that SF4 did a good job of balancing in general, it managed to bring me back to fighting games (and a few others too)and it had enough of the good to cover for the few flaws in it (Although I have to admit I am slightly biased to it since I really like its style of gameplay, it suits me very well). I am hoping SSF4 will build on that and create a far superior experience, I have a feeling I won't be disappointed.

games_soul

I'd rather they make the other characters better as opposed to making Ryu worse, but other than that, I agree with you. There isn't any situation in SF4 that Ryu isn't perfectly comfortable in. I really felt the impact of this after training with Sakura, but then playing as Ryu against Kreatzion. Usually, we go back and forth. As Ryu, I won like 4 straight before he started coming back, and I was just floored. I never trained with Ryu. The dude's moves are just ****ing good.

[QUOTE="ShenlongBo"]

[QUOTE="ZenesisX"]

What nonsense,

Brawl is a fighting game regardless of what most people think. Its not as serious in depth as other fighting games but i believe the objective in the game is the same. You are there to beat up the other player.

ZenesisX

See?

[QUOTE="ShenlongBo"]

This is true for damn near every topic ever created on these forums. How's about the people who aren't interested in it just don't chime in? That's how I go about my foruming.

Anyway, this particular topic matters, to me, because I like being able to define and understand the things into which I pour so much of my resources to whatever extent I can. More specifically, how people in the fighting/Smash community view this game affects a lot, starting with the things DC already very aptly pointed out. But it doesn't stop there. How Smash is accepted almost certainly will affect games to come.

It's a gaming forum. If this topic is pointless, they all are.

GabuEx

I suppose, but isn't the real question with respect to what one likes or doesn't like about it? What you call it seems entirely immaterial; what it is strikes me as the real importance of the matter that ought to be discussed.

I'm not going to argue against this guy, due to the answer I see to a very simple question: why do I even care whether or not Super Smash Bros. Brawl is a fighting game? Would the game play differently if the US's best SFIV player like it? This is like the people who argue over whether Alice in Chains is metal or grunge - it's not as if the music is going to be different depending on what you choose to call it.

GabuEx

Anyway, this particular topic matters, to me, because I like being able to define and understand the things into which I pour so much of my resources to whatever extent I can. More specifically, how people in the fighting/Smash community view this game affects a lot, starting with the things DC already very aptly pointed out. But it doesn't stop there. How Smash is accepted almost certainly will affect games to come.

It's a gaming forum. If this topic is pointless, they all are.

Super Smash Bros may not be a traditional fighting, but it is a fighting game nonetheless. It just breaks too many rules for most fighting games fans to accept SSB as a legit fighting game series. It still takes skills and reflexes to come out on top of SSB, minus memorizing countless number of combos.hiphops_savior

[QUOTE="DarkCatalyst"]Because the argument, at least with Smash in general (Brawl seems to be under question here), is not whether it's a good game or a competitive game - it is very much both - it's whether it's a fighting game. This is important because fighting game status wins it a lot of perks like being at Evo (and maybe even SBO someday, ugh), being seen as a peer to fighting games by the development community (which might set out to make a fighting game and instead turn out a brawler), and so on. The thing that must be noted is that the fighting community only has a problem with Smash being considered a fighter, not with it being considered a good or competition-worthy game. We'd just like to see them try to get their own thing going rather than rely on us. Evo's downsizing its roster year by year these days, the spot Smash always seems to get would be much better spent on another real fighter to keep things strong, but the Smash community is always insistent on occupying its corner of the event center. It's a damn nuisance.LikeHaterade

I'm good friends with one of the local clans around here for Brawl specifically, and it can be a very competitive game, when playing competition rules. It is legit. The best easily stand out from the rest, just as you see at other tournaments. I'm not trying to defend Brawl or say it should be tournament play btw. Just conversing I suppose.

What nonsense,

Brawl is a fighting game regardless of what most people think. Its not as serious in depth as other fighting games but i believe the objective in the game is the same. You are there to beat up the other player.

ZenesisX

[QUOTE="ShenlongBo"]

[QUOTE="LikeHaterade"]

Super Street Fighter 4 is going to be good! Can't wait!

LikeHaterade

The balance issues aren't "bananas" IMO. There are a select few of characters that are high above the rest. It could be a lot worse, like many other fighting games. I hear they are fixing some of the primary balance issues. Input shortcuts are a problem though.

Doesn't make sense, and this is only one example. Personally, I'd have preferred if the balancing issues were because of the all-too-true "know way they could have predicted" element, rather than the, "yeah... that is pretty boneheaded" one.

EDIT: Also, Ryu is S tier. Anyone else ready to admit this yet?