super smash bros - LEAK TIME AGAIN (RECAP: Yes, they're really adding Krystal from Star Fox, videos - Games

People probably did it before him, but I think alpha was the one that popularized it.

In the case of hungrybox and zero it was the optimal way, hungrybox needs to camp out spacies and zero was trying not to get hit to win the game.

[QUOTE=Itachi_Crow;48393719]its technically playing properly sure but if you think running away for a solid minute is anything but lame then you are mistaken [editline]6th August 2015[/editline] especially because he was losing even by percent lead lol [editline]6th August 2015[/editline] I don't hate zero but it's one of the reasons that clip of him playing brawl and running away as MK only to get caught and smacked out of percent lead at the very last moment is one of my favorite smash clips[/QUOTE] he said in a recent interview that it was probably bound to go to time anyway cause it was 4 stock. his playstyle in smash 4 isn't even campy. he actually has a pretty aggressive style compared to most top players. [editline]7th August 2015[/editline] [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34iSMmqvW04[/media] watch this, you'll probably rethink your opinion on zero

I've warmed up to ZeRo after that E3 tourney, but laming it out is such a bullshit tactic. Like, yeah, it's "viable" and all, but you're literally doing the opposite of what you're supposed to be doing. It's like if a racing game let you win by not driving the car. I honestly feel like there should be refs or other officials present during high-stakes matches, so as to enforce fair play. In boxing, they wouldn't allow one of the fighters to just sprint around the ring until the bell goes off. Smash is meant to be a fighting game; if you're not the better fighter, then you lose. It's that simple. Running away until your opponent loses by default is definitely viable, but it's completely devoid of honor or good sportsmanship. It's a "YOU DIDN'T WIN/I'M TAKING MY BALL AND GOING HOME" mindset that gives off a real air of immaturity you'd think the competitive scene would want to distance themselves from.

[QUOTE=BanthaFodder;48396274]I've warmed up to ZeRo after that E3 tourney, but laming it out is such a bullshit tactic. Like, yeah, it's "viable" and all, but you're literally doing the opposite of what you're supposed to be doing. It's like if a racing game let you win by not driving the car. I honestly feel like there should be refs or other officials present during high-stakes matches, so as to enforce fair play. In boxing, they wouldn't allow one of the fighters to just sprint around the ring until the bell goes off. Smash is meant to be a fighting game; if you're not the better fighter, then you lose. It's that simple. Running away until your opponent loses by default is definitely viable, but it's completely devoid of honor or good sportsmanship. It's a "YOU DIDN'T WIN/I'M TAKING MY BALL AND GOING HOME" mindset that gives off a real air of immaturity you'd think the competitive scene would want to distance themselves from.[/QUOTE] Uh did you even watch the pacquiao v mayweather fight?

[QUOTE=Mr. Zombie;48388825]HBox is still my favorite Smash player. His pop-offs are hilariously awesome, and he's just a really charismatic player who likes to have fun when he plays. That's why I was legitimately angry when he lost at the first tourney because of Zero.[/QUOTE] Were you "legitimately angry" at Armada for beating him at EVO? [editline]7th August 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=BanthaFodder;48396274]I've warmed up to ZeRo after that E3 tourney, but laming it out is such a bullshit tactic. Like, yeah, it's "viable" and all, but you're literally doing the opposite of what you're supposed to be doing. It's like if a racing game let you win by not driving the car. I honestly feel like there should be refs or other officials present during high-stakes matches, so as to enforce fair play. In boxing, they wouldn't allow one of the fighters to just sprint around the ring until the bell goes off. Smash is meant to be a fighting game; if you're not the better fighter, then you lose. It's that simple. Running away until your opponent loses by default is definitely viable, but it's completely devoid of honor or good sportsmanship. It's a "YOU DIDN'T WIN/I'M TAKING MY BALL AND GOING HOME" mindset that gives off a real air of immaturity you'd think the competitive scene would want to distance themselves from.[/QUOTE] It's all part of the game, if you win because you're good at evading then you are better at the game than your opponent. "What you're supposed to be doing" is an idea you've constructed in your head and is completely irrelevant to winning/losing.

Because it is so enjoyable to see somebody run around after a pot shot. If all you care about is winning or losing, you are not a good player of any game or sport. You are just after results. That raw and selfish pragmatism is better off in stuff that really matters, not in entertainment.

as someone who depends on those results for an income I'm sure he (ZeRo) cares about winning a lot cheap / lame as it may be some people are born to be wieners

Someone else mentioned this before, if pro players have the right to do whatever it takes to win than I have the right to have an opinion on that. And in my case, I respect players that actually try to do something different for a change instead of going with the same strat like everyone else. [editline]7th August 2015[/editline] ZeRo is an amazing player and I really like how he won Evo with Diddy in the end, but the rest of his journey through Evo was boring. I have much greater respect for Abadango, he was the true winner at Evo to me.

My biggest problem with ZSS is that she's incredibly boring to fight, and even more boring to watch in a tournament.

[QUOTE=BanthaFodder;48396274]I've warmed up to ZeRo after that E3 tourney, but laming it out is such a bullshit tactic. Like, yeah, it's "viable" and all, but you're literally doing the opposite of what you're supposed to be doing. It's like if a racing game let you win by not driving the car. I honestly feel like there should be refs or other officials present during high-stakes matches, so as to enforce fair play. In boxing, they wouldn't allow one of the fighters to just sprint around the ring until the bell goes off. Smash is meant to be a fighting game; if you're not the better fighter, then you lose. It's that simple. Running away until your opponent loses by default is definitely viable, but it's completely devoid of honor or good sportsmanship. It's a "YOU DIDN'T WIN/I'M TAKING MY BALL AND GOING HOME" mindset that gives off a real air of immaturity you'd think the competitive scene would want to distance themselves from.[/QUOTE] it just bugs me that people still give him shit for this stuff without knowing anything about his history. watch the interview. zero was really poor growing up and it cost him a lot of money to fly to the larger US tourney's to compete. of course he's gonna be playing to win, there was so much at stake, and him and his family sacrificed a lot for him to be able to compete. also he didn't really have many fans in his home country despite being one of the top players, just because people didn't like seeing a kid win. they literally fucked with the rulesets mid tourney just to sabotage zero from winning, banning the ICs chain grab mid-set. also, you guys seem to love HBOX even though he used a similar strategy against armada at WTFox and EVO (ledge planking). what's different about that? i'm not saying i blame HBOX, he's a competitor, he's playing to win, and it was a legitimate attempt at countering laser camping which won him the set at WTFox. i also don't mind it because armada figured out how to counter it at EVO by d-tilting and low lasering to cover the ledge, so HBOX doesn't even do it anymore. [editline]7th August 2015[/editline] also like i mentioned earlier, zero doesn't even have a campy playstyle anymore.

[QUOTE=Mafia Insider;48396884]My biggest problem with ZSS is that she's incredibly boring to fight, and even more boring to watch in a tournament.[/QUOTE] yeah, she's pretty boring to watch and annoying to fight. kind of unfortunate for me, since i find zss really fun to play that also goes for rosalina. boring to watch and fight, fun to play imo

[QUOTE=Y'all.;48395369]he said in a recent interview that it was probably bound to go to time anyway cause it was 4 stock. his playstyle in smash 4 isn't even campy. he actually has a pretty aggressive style compared to most top players. [editline]7th August 2015[/editline] [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34iSMmqvW04[/media] watch this, you'll probably rethink your opinion on zero[/QUOTE] I've warmed up to zero quite a bit, he seems like a genuinely cool dude and knows his shit, and I have a ton of respect for him. I understand that going to time against hbox was the best option, but I'm still of the opinion that evading to time out is lame. it's lame to watch, and really, really lame to play against. it's part of the game, I accept that. I think the most optimal way to avoid it is get rid of time limits altogether, but that won't happen because tournaments are on a schedule and matches have to move along. I'm sure there's some other problems with removing the time limit, but I honestly wouldn't have the insight to know. I don't really BLAME zero for timing out hbox, especially if the match was 4 stocks (jesus christ), and especially because he wanted to win, I just personally dislike the tactic in general. the only time I ever got salty at a tournament was one of the small local ones in my town, when the TOs introduced a 3 minute time limit for a 2 stock game, and I got run to time by a ZSS. Only one of the games there DIDNT go to time. one. and during my set, for that full minute of chasing around a zss, I came close to just saying fuck this and sd'ing. I guess that would be the actual problem with taking out the time limit, though. I can see it actually PROMOTING campy playstyles now that I think about it [editline]7th August 2015[/editline] But yeah, literally every top player has done it, and when I saw that e3 match I was only just getting into watching competitive smash. so the old saying "don't hate the player. hate the game" applies. it's just a part of smash that isn't going away, so unfortunate as it is, it's something I just gotta deal with being there

[media]https://youtu.be/1Ac38T5m-8I?t=126[/media] I don't know what Falco was trying to do at 2:04

He's trying to fly obviously. Didn't you know he prefers the air?

jfc I swear the only characters I run into online late at night are Dedede Link and Mario dear god make it stop.

[QUOTE=IliekBoxes;48397297][media]https://youtu.be/1Ac38T5m-8I?t=126[/media] I don't know what Falco was trying to do at 2:04[/QUOTE] dude stop spamming pk fire and grabs into fair

[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3yj8ZXVw94[/media] This is why you should learn your rest percents

[QUOTE=icemaz;48399156][media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3yj8ZXVw94[/media] This is why you should learn your rest percents[/QUOTE] heartbreaking

sakurai's latest famitsu column on "unnecessary content" (nothing new, still an interesting read) [quote] [b]I recently took a look at user reviews for Fire Emblem Fates, and what stood out to me was the overabundance of comments saying “I don’t need this; I don’t need that, either”,[/b] especially in comparison to reviews of other titles. [b]One such feature users commented on was the ability to invite your companions into your house and stroke their heads and faces to raise your affinity level[/b]. Basically, you bring them into your room—regardless of whether you’re married or not—and give them a rubdown. Even I chuckled to myself the first time I played: “What is this, Pokémon? Nintendogs!?” Some reviewers, however, went one step further and said, “We don’t need this!” I’m not a big fan of dating sims myself, so I can’t say I don’t understand their disinterest to a certain extent. At the same time, however, [b]the feature in question doesn’t have any impact on one’s ability to complete the game, so if it bothers you so much, then don’t use that feature[/b]. [b]Say you buy a boxed lunch and it happens to contain a variety of foods, including one you hate. Even if you love everything else about the meal, are you going to single out the one food you dislike and lambast the entire meal for it? What about the people who happen to love that food? Is a meal only worth it insofar as it caters to your each and every preference? Developers include all sorts of bonus features simply because they want to provide a little something extra for the fans. Even if one were to remove these bonus features from the game, it doesn’t mean that would “make room” for something else. That isn’t how it works. If you approach game development with a demerit-based mindset, it doesn’t leave much room for anything extra, and games become pretty dry—and that’s just no fun. Even Smash Bros. is one big ball of bonus features, jam packed with unnecessary content[/b]. “I don’t need this; I don’t need that, either,” some may say. To take an extreme point of view, everything aside from Free-for-All Mode is technically “unnecessary”: all the items, all the Final Smashes, all the stages aside from Final Destination. But [b]if you were to take all of those extra features away, all you would be left with is a bare-bones, niche-market game. I think there are some people who actually want that sort of game. There’s something appealing about a minimalist approach. But I think it’s painfully obvious Smash Bros. is not being marketed toward that niche market. I’ve intended to create a fun and exciting party game—the exact opposite[/b]. I mean, parties themselves are “unnecessary” to begin with. That said, there’s plenty of value in a game jam-packed with extra content. And while some people demand the removal of various “unnecessary” features, there are also plenty of others who feel the exact opposite about the same content. I think it’s perfectly fine for a game to include a variety of content, even if some of those features appeal to others more than yourself. The bonus features used to plump up a game are admittedly not designed with all users in mind. [b]People are going to play the way they find the most enjoyable, and some users find more enjoyment in certain features than other people do[/b]. At the same time, games are a form of entertainment, so I sincerely hope people realize that “user abstinence”—not using unwanted content—is also a valid option. From a developer’s point of view, [b]I suppose it’s better not to force users to play these extra features in order to beat a game[/b]. Making users play a bunch of minigames only invites unwanted criticism, and I think that makes sense. However, [b]so long as that bonus content isn’t integral to completing a game, I think developers should be free to create what they like[/b]. After all, even if you don’t use a certain feature, someone else out there might absolutely love it. [/quote] [url]http://www.sourcegaming.info/2015/08/07/dont-need-this-dont-need-that-sakurais-famitsu-column-vol-485/[/url]

I don't mind bonus content if the content isn't shit. It takes development time and resources to make that extra content, that could have otherwise been spent on other parts of the game. Although, I do agree with the part about how other people may enjoy that extra content. I imagine many of us would have preferred Smash Tour to not have been made, but there must be loads of people who love it just the way it is and wouldn't want something else.

[QUOTE=ElderLolz;48401128]What is it with Sakurai comparing everything with food? :v: [editline]7th August 2015[/editline] On the other hand he is the creator of Kirby and food is something we can all relate to.[/QUOTE] And the guy who spends weeks photographing various kinds of food in perfect lighting conditions so he can use them for hyper-realistic health pickups.

[QUOTE=ElderLolz;48401128]What is it with Sakurai comparing everything with food? :v: [editline]7th August 2015[/editline] On the other hand he is the creator of Kirby and food is something we can all relate to.[/QUOTE] The man's certainly an enthusiast at the very least. The plot to Kirby's Dreamland was getting all the food back from Dedede.

[QUOTE=ElderLolz;48401128]What is it with Sakurai comparing everything with food? :v:[/QUOTE] Japan is probably the only country that loves food more than America does.

[QUOTE=EditOutJ;48401141]I don't mind bonus content if the content isn't shit. It takes development time and resources to make that extra content, that could have otherwise been spent on other parts of the game. Although, I do agree with the part about how other people may enjoy that extra content. I imagine many of us would have preferred Smash Tour to not have been made, but there must be loads of people who love it just the way it is and wouldn't want something else.[/QUOTE] I think less people would care about the gameplay quality of Smash Tour if it wasn't necessary to play THREE TIMES to unlock a stage which was kinda lazily made while simultaneously having a relatively barebones single-player mode compared to Melee, Brawl and even the 3DS version.

[QUOTE=Keychain;48401470]Japan is probably the only country that loves food more than America does.[/QUOTE] I don't know, there are plenty of European countries that feel the same way about food.

I hear Japan has really small portions [sp]at least compared to the US[/sp], maybe it's because Sakurai is really hungry?

[QUOTE=_charon;48401735]I hear Japan has really small portions [sp]at least compared to the US[/sp], maybe it's because Sakurai is really hungry?[/QUOTE] I think you mixed up cause and effect there :v: [editline]t[/editline] [video=youtube;Rq_M7IPLqP4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rq_M7IPLqP4[/video] But Falcon, you ARE anime

hey check it out some IMPORTANT KNOWLEDGE [video]https://youtu.be/a8rpifNUEYo[/video]

Looks like I'm not going to Smash Con after all :frown: