People can claim that the Melee guys will get left behind but the stream figures don't lie. They're not being and it's difficult at this point to see how they will be. 

Because it's a game that's impossible to play online at a high level they're always going to need to organise community lans to keep the game going and that'll protect the community. I think there's probably room for the latest Smash game and Melee to coexist side by side. It's just a shame that developers still haven't seen the value of making their competitively viable games as competitively viable as possible. Melee can be played as a casual game, without getting anywhere near the depths these top guys reach, and it's no less fun than the current Melee game. Making a game shallower doesn't impact the bottom end guys, but it does the top end guys. Unless of course you're forcing the bottom end guys to play the top end guys but since Nintendo aren't a big fan of online anyway and since the skill gap in Smash is ridiculously high anyway dumbing the game down for the very highest levels is a complete waste of time. There's no point blaming the competitive scene for this, it's on the developer. In x number of years time, when competitive gaming is mainstream and developers are making games that are as fun to watch and difficult to play as possible for that market it'll be difficult to believe what we're currently experiencing could ever have happened. 

As for Nintendo opposing the competitive Smash scene... it was never going to work and it just made them look like the bad guys. Don't try and crush the most devoted fans of one of your games. It's madness. And the reason they tried to do so wasn't a dislike of the competitive 'scene' so much as an odd opinion of what sort of game Smash is. They wanted it to be a party game for everyone to enjoy and not one for uber nerds to compete for money in. What they failed to realise was that they'd made one which was both, and they should have been celebrating their genius because that is a very difficult thing to do. 

Blue Swirl, you need to go a game or two further back for the Halo game the competitive community wish they'd stuck with.

It was at the end of a round or match in one game. I saw it live, unless there was more during pools.

Whoever it was got a ko with the opponent face towards them at their feet and double tapped down before the winning pose kicked in.

I tried the Smash Controller app for 3DS this weekend. Works great.

Not really. The most clued in, long standing people in the competitive scene will tell you H:CE was the most competitive Halo game. There are still people LANNing it 10/15? years after it was realised, these guys haven't got rose tinted spectacles on, they're still playing the game, lots.

There may be some rose tinted glasses with H2 mind. I suspect no bloom, no sprint Reach had a higher skill ceiling than H2 did. Much better maps in H2 though.

Knight wrote:

Not really. The most clued in, long standing people in the competitive scene will tell you H:CE was the most competitive Halo game. There are still people LANNing it 10/15? years after it was realised, these guys haven't got rose tinted spectacles on, they're still playing the game, lots. There may be some rose tinted glasses with H2 mind. I suspect no bloom, no sprint Reach had a higher skill ceiling than H2 did. Much better maps in H2 though.

Seems odd to me to call a set of rules more competitive. Surely it's about the players, the rules (the game) could be anything.

mistercrayon wrote:

Seems odd to me to call a set of rules more competitive. Surely it's about the players, the rules (the game) could be anything.

Nah, this makes sense to me. Consider Chess compared with Snakes and Ladders, for example. People can be competitive regardless of game, but a 'competitive game' needs a rule set that rewards skill.

tigerswiftly wrote:

So... it does depend on who you ask.

Heh.

"The most clued in" in your opinion, Knight. Odds on you can find just as many players, with just as good reasons, who prefer H2 or H3 to CE. Heck, as you mention yourself, Reach with the right settings was quite good*, but H2 had really good maps. I watch Ninja (Halo pro from 3 onwards iirc) on YouTube, and he's frequently playing Anniversary with H2 settings. He's very "clued in" and a long time player - is he wrong for prefering H2? Or does he just have a different opinion to you?

As a complete aside, but I did find it funny how often the community at large would whine about Reach not being competitive, then watching Instinct go 21-0 at one tournament and winning the rest without breaking a sweat. It's almost as if the better team won consistently or something. MADNESS.

*I still stand by my position that bloom was too big but removing it completely was stupid. With Reach's sticky hit boxes it turned DMR fights into "who can pull the trigger fastest" competitions.

Opened on Thursday. Done a bit - they're great

Pretty cool. Smash is my neglected Wii U game sadly.

Rumours of Layton coming too which would be wonderful.

Much more likely, Inklings are supposedly coming via future DLC too.

mk64 wrote:

zero lost his 53 tournament winning streak last week

?