Jump to content


Photo

Metaknight Banned in Brawl


  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

#1 melatonin

melatonin

    (Evil) Secretary

  • Club Executives
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 443 posts

Posted 04 October 2011 - 10:11 AM

http://www.smashboar....php?p=13439900

I approve. Hopefully this will help balance the game out and make it more viable for tournament play.

Posted Image
Posted Image

Wii Council Leader
HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT

Secretary

Tunnel Snakes Rule!


#2 MasterP

MasterP

    Gaming Club Adviser

  • Club Advisers
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7320 posts

Posted 04 October 2011 - 11:45 AM

Glanced through the first 6 pages, couldn't find a reason. Besides thinking he's overpowered, which is an argument that could be made about any of the high tiers, was there a reason given for it?

I never had a problem killing metaknight. Then again, I didn't use any of the "high tiers."
Mitch/MasterP/Kip

Posted Image

#3 Ephraim

Ephraim

    Secret, but fun.

  • Club Executives
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2644 posts

Posted 04 October 2011 - 02:03 PM

Meh. I never really cared for competitive gaming. It sucks the fun right out of the games. I know we host tournaments, but I always got the feeling that most people were there for the fun of it.
Posted Image
I met Flute Link!

#4 MasterP

MasterP

    Gaming Club Adviser

  • Club Advisers
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7320 posts

Posted 04 October 2011 - 04:16 PM

Shooting Nickname and Kuros in the face is what kept me going to LANs all those years :)

Oh, and winning DoDS, but then they got tired of me winning and stopped playing it :(
Mitch/MasterP/Kip

Posted Image

#5 Oh Malley

Oh Malley

    Boss Battle Podcast Co-Host

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1073 posts

Posted 04 October 2011 - 05:58 PM

I mainly went for fun too, but some things can make the game and tournament un-fun, such as one character having one exploitable glitch that a "pro" player uses or what have you. Then I think a character should be banned.

#6 MasterP

MasterP

    Gaming Club Adviser

  • Club Advisers
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7320 posts

Posted 04 October 2011 - 06:23 PM

Not to troll or argue but doesn't that apply to a number of Melee characters as well?
Mitch/MasterP/Kip

Posted Image

#7 Oh Malley

Oh Malley

    Boss Battle Podcast Co-Host

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1073 posts

Posted 04 October 2011 - 07:21 PM

I don't care. Personally, I don't like the fact that there's so many "fighters" in the LAN and EVERY fighter has some sort of character or characters that are broken in some regards.

With the way our LANs go, the pros really don't gain much from winning at our tournaments other than jerking their own... chain.

#8 Bloodedge

Bloodedge

    Knight

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 90 posts

Posted 04 October 2011 - 08:09 PM

Not to troll or argue but doesn't that apply to a number of Melee characters as well?

Actually no, wavedashing and whatnot was apprently intentionally put in. http://www.pokemonel...ad.php?t=79756.

#9 Bloodedge

Bloodedge

    Knight

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 90 posts

Posted 04 October 2011 - 08:12 PM

And honestly, if hearing Luigi repeating his awesome "ya,ya,yahooo!" phrase while sliding across the stage like a lunatic doesnt make you smile or laugh, then you sir are insane!

#10 Ephraim

Ephraim

    Secret, but fun.

  • Club Executives
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2644 posts

Posted 04 October 2011 - 08:37 PM

I spent many, many hours arguing with Brawl-haters about the differences in the games. I truly don't want to get involved with that again, but after reading Sakurai's quote, it really doesn't sound like he was confirming that he knew about wavedashing before Melee was released. Instead, it sounds like he's saying his team found out about wavedashing before production began on Brawl, and they had no problem removing it, because appeasing competitive gamers was not a high priority for them. It actually sounds like he has a negative opinion of wavedashing.

Edit: I guess it depends on which game the 'development period' mentioned in the first sentence refers to. Regardless of whether or not it was intentional, it certainly sounds like he grew to dislike wavedashing, since he and his team were so confident in their decision to remove it from Brawl.
Posted Image
I met Flute Link!

#11 MasterP

MasterP

    Gaming Club Adviser

  • Club Advisers
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7320 posts

Posted 04 October 2011 - 09:00 PM

You can bet the next SSB game will be patchable. Tbh, I'm surprised that Brawl wasn't.
Mitch/MasterP/Kip

Posted Image

#12 Bloodedge

Bloodedge

    Knight

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 90 posts

Posted 04 October 2011 - 09:38 PM

You can bet the next SSB game will be patchable. Tbh, I'm surprised that Brawl wasn't.


I dont know I mean hell, Im pretty sure Brawl WAS patchable, I think Nintendo just didnt care because they had other games they needed to work on (Zelda, Metriod, Mario Galaxy, you know, that shit). I just wish that they would have thought a little harder about movesets and whatnot because no matter what your "playing preference" is, hardcore, casual, neutral, whatever, Metaknight made that game 50% less fun.

#13 Ephraim

Ephraim

    Secret, but fun.

  • Club Executives
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2644 posts

Posted 04 October 2011 - 09:58 PM

Nintendo didn't care about online play until very, very recently. It kind of looks like they are trying to bring their online multiplayer (and graphics) up to 360/PS3 standards with the Wii U.
Posted Image
I met Flute Link!

#14 Bloodedge

Bloodedge

    Knight

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 90 posts

Posted 04 October 2011 - 10:12 PM

Nintendo didn't care about online play until very, very recently. It kind of looks like they are trying to bring their online multiplayer (and graphics) up to 360/PS3 standards with the Wii U.


That would be nice. Also not having $200 controllers would be nice too lol.

#15 melatonin

melatonin

    (Evil) Secretary

  • Club Executives
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 443 posts

Posted 04 October 2011 - 10:32 PM

Glanced through the first 6 pages, couldn't find a reason. Besides thinking he's overpowered, which is an argument that could be made about any of the high tiers, was there a reason given for it?

I never had a problem killing metaknight. Then again, I didn't use any of the "high tiers."

The last time I checked the numbers, Metaknights won over 40% of competitive Brawl tournies. In a game with 35 characters, having one that dominates that badly is ban worthy.

Posted Image
Posted Image

Wii Council Leader
HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT

Secretary

Tunnel Snakes Rule!


#16 MasterP

MasterP

    Gaming Club Adviser

  • Club Advisers
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7320 posts

Posted 05 October 2011 - 12:20 AM

The last time I checked the numbers, Metaknights won over 40% of competitive Brawl tournies. In a game with 35 characters, having one that dominates that badly is ban worthy.

Yeah but those players are simply going to move to the next "highest tier" character and you're just going to have a repeat of the same thing. Those metaknight players are going to be looking for new "balance issues" to take advantage of and they're going to find one.


[general ranting - not directed at anyone here]
The problem isn't that the characters are "broken" so much as the mindset that to be "the best" you have to take advantage of that. Even if Nintendo had patched and "fixed" meta knight, those people would have moved to another player. It would become a constant struggle to keep the game "balanced" and once that happens you can forget the SSB series because it'll be too high maintenance for them to bother with.

Since the original SSB, some characters have been vastly superior to others. A good Fox or Pikachu player could destroy any other character, often regardless of the other character's skill. We used to test this crap all the time back in middle school. It's just the nature of the series and it isn't going to change. If you can't cope with that there are plenty of other fighters, maybe you should pick one and stop whining.
[/rant]
Mitch/MasterP/Kip

Posted Image

#17 melatonin

melatonin

    (Evil) Secretary

  • Club Executives
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 443 posts

Posted 05 October 2011 - 01:36 PM

It's just the nature of the series and it isn't going to change. If you can't cope with that there are plenty of other fighters, maybe you should pick one and stop whining.

I haven't heard anyone on campus complain about the ban. People I've talked to are relived that MK is banned.

Posted Image
Posted Image

Wii Council Leader
HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT

Secretary

Tunnel Snakes Rule!


#18 MasterP

MasterP

    Gaming Club Adviser

  • Club Advisers
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7320 posts

Posted 05 October 2011 - 01:48 PM

Like I said, I never had a problem killing metaknight with either Ike or Falco. In fact, I had a whole lot more trouble with the mid-tiers than I ever did the high tiers. The high tier characters are only high tier because of a very limited number of strengths or moves, once you learn what those are it's very easy to adapt your gameplay to counter them. If you've mastered a mid-tier odds are your playstyle will not be from the same cookie cutter mold that the high tiers characters have to use which makes you much more deadly.
Mitch/MasterP/Kip

Posted Image

#19 melatonin

melatonin

    (Evil) Secretary

  • Club Executives
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 443 posts

Posted 05 October 2011 - 10:57 PM

You cannot argue with the statistics. Meta Knight deserved the ban.

Posted Image
Posted Image

Wii Council Leader
HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT

Secretary

Tunnel Snakes Rule!


#20 MasterP

MasterP

    Gaming Club Adviser

  • Club Advisers
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7320 posts

Posted 06 October 2011 - 12:44 AM

Snake or Diddy Kong will be next. Once you cross that line it becomes a moving target and you can never get back on the right side of it.

Not trying to argue, just saying how it usually is.
Mitch/MasterP/Kip

Posted Image




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users