The VG Resource

Both games have a fair share of pros and cons, but for me Brawl slightly nudges itself higher on the list. The two things that push it over the edge for me:

- Brawl's story campaign. I know a lot of people didn't like the Story Mode so I don't expect anyone to agree with me on this, but I really enjoyed it. In particular I find it to be a really good co-op experience; my sister and I have played through it I don't know how many times. Also: Awesome Game Bosses, which is something even the latest Smash is lacking.

- Brawl has Dedede. And I'm just petty enough for that to be a good reason. So there.

read my last two posts in this thread, that's all I have to say. If you aren't satisfied by that then idk what I should say.

If you don't want to put the effort then... graphics. Okay

Iceman, there's no need to be such a butt about it.

I've enjoyed every smash game and have fond memories of them all.

But I would have to say I've had the most fun with Brawl.
It had more modes open to coop, so it gave fun things to do besides just smashing.
Trying to get the high score on Target Smash with my friend is one of my favorite gaming moments ever!

Even though subspace was short and simple, it was so fun to try and do it on intense. Oh boy, I don't think we ever beat Porky.

I also like Brawl because it made my friends become familiar with the EarthBound series and actually like it.
One of them even ended up maining Lucas

(04-05-2015, 07:14 PM)Iceman404 Wrote: [ -> ]A shallow game is enjoyable on site, and dies until the next iteration.

A deep game challenges the test of time.

D... Does that matter?
As long as it's enjoyable that's what matters, right?
I remember my friend and I staying up all night playing some Digimon battle arena game that was shallow as heck, but we had a blast the entire time.
We still play that game from time to time because it's fun. I don't think the deepness of a game really represents its re-playability.
(also Twinkle Queen because I don't know what on earth was up with those girls. like wth punching should not sound like metal scrapping along concrete)

You know, I've enjoyed super smash bros since I tried the original nintendo 64 version at a friend's house and really got into it once I got a nintendo gamecube for myself. And for about 3 years I've been enjoying melee until brawl came out and I actually did enjoy that for a time, but it got old after awhile, it felt like something was missing. Then Smash 4 for the 3ds and Wii U came out I found myself enjoying those games more than I thought I would have, personally.

It feels like I'm playing a melee that has more balance in it and that I know what I'm doing while still enjoying the benefit of competition, something that brawl didn't really provide. If I have to admit one thing right now however is that I'm tempted to play melee again out of nostalgia for the game, that and I kind of missed the fast paced gameplay that made me think about how I could really beat a certain stage, or event, or how far I could get in a multi-man melee game.

I enjoy both equally, but honestly I have to be real on this, a lot of us have different opinions on what's the best smash game. If anything asking whether or not there's a right or wrong in either of them is pointless because smash is meant to be one of those games that you'll find yourself enjoying over time, no matter which version you like best.

(04-05-2015, 07:14 PM)Iceman404 Wrote: [ -> ]A shallow game is enjoyable on site, and dies until the next iteration.

A deep game challenges the test of time.

Honestly I feel like this entire statement is false.

There are a lot of simple NES games out there without a whole lot of substance to them that are still remembered fondly and replayed repeatedly to this day.

Meanwhile there are a lot of modern games that seem to have a ton of depth and thought to them upon release, that are quickly forgotten about within the following year.

I really don't think that it's depth that is the qualifier for how well a game stands the test of time.

People took that statement to me meaning any game instead of games that can be played at higher levels, like... What we're talking about. If I meant any game then I'd question why people are still playing stuff like Pac-Man.

"To enjoy music you need to know music theory"

"To enjoy math you need to know every theorem"

"To enjoy a game you must know every exploit"

uhh... no. none of these really apply.

When I prefer a game, I pick the one I have the most fun with. I have fun with Brawl. I don't have fun with Melee. It's a thing called 'subjectivity', I have the rights of liking a thing different than yours.

I don't care if you think my reasons for it is shallow - you're just being a butt now with no reason because I 'talked shit' about a game that you like.

I didn't insult anyone in any moment here and yet you come acting all defensive over you little precious gamecube game. I don't care about what you prefer, you can like your game all you want, but demanding the same level of understanding you have from everyone is quite upsetting to say the (very) least.

sm4sh > melee > *, more waifus more fun

(04-05-2015, 08:49 PM)Iceman404 Wrote: [ -> ]Your post was more of "why are you offended" than the questions I asked being answered though. This is the third time you've talked about "moves lacking power" and "being too punishing". I'm not offended that you disagree with what I like, I'm offended that the point of the topic is to directly avoid one word posts and that you should probably provide a bit more detail about your statements so some discussion can take place or that your post can be understood.


The last part about pixels and all that jazz is especially like YouTube comments I've seen of people avoiding the point. Please clarify dude

scrolling this thread, may i ask why you're getting so defensive over something that is ultimately an opinion? competitive isn't appealing for everyone, and even beyond that gors said outside of competitive it's too complex for him to get into. that's his opinion and no matter how defensive you get on the internet that's not gonna magically get him into competitive or like the game more

this threads subjective. taste is subjective, enjoyment is subjective, and i don't think the point of the thread is to prove that one game is definitively the best like you're trying to do.

since you enjoy competitive of course you'll pick melee over any other smash, it's mechanically the most intensive smash out and is still active. at that though i want to mention;

(04-05-2015, 07:14 PM)Iceman404 Wrote: [ -> ]A shallow game is enjoyable on site, and dies until the next iteration.

A deep game challenges the test of time.

melee players have been waiting for the next melee for a long time... it's not that melee is the 'deepest' or 'best' smash, it's that all future iterations attempt to shut down competitive. nintendo keeps taking out competitive tricks and adding things and honestly they may never get it right again; melee may always be the go to for competitive - that doesn't necessarily mean melee is the godtier game or objective best you want it to sound like, friend

this isn't meant to sound hostile by any stretch, it's just silly seeing a somewhat 'for fun' thread taken so heavily when in the end you can't really go up to someone and be like 'that thing you like is bad', with a list of reasons you think it's bad - because some of those might be what makes it good to the other person

(04-04-2015, 08:20 PM)recme Wrote: [ -> ]inb4 shitflinging...

You people suuuck. Stop breaking rules.

I'm going with Melee. I've put the most overall time into the game, and I've always enjoyed the content it has to offer. It introduced some of my favorite characters as well. The stages were memorable, and the separate game modes (Adventure Mode , hnggg) were super fun.

Not to say I don't enjoy Brawl or anything, but the combat frustrates me way more than that of Melee.

At work, so I can't type out vast responses, but I don't have much to say anyway.

My preference is largely based on ME rather than the games themselves. I loved Melee for the multiplayer experience, and Brawl for the single player. This is largely because Melee was out when I was a young adult; my family and friends still mostly lived at home and liked to play games together.

Brawl came out when I was more grown up, my family and friends move to different places, and with everyone working and living in different areas, group play wasn't always an option.

I have strong likes for both games, but if I had to choose just one, I'd pick Brawl solely because my Wii U is backwards compatible with it, and I don't feel like hooking my GameCube up for literally one of only four GameCube games I own.

(04-06-2015, 08:34 AM)Gors Wrote: [ -> ]"To enjoy a game you must know every exploit"

Never said this, I personally enjoy Melee on a casual level more than Brawl. You're over thinking it greatly still, of course people don't like Melee and vice versa, that's the reason this comparison is even being made to begin with. You still don't understand that I'm not trying to convince you to like anything, I literally don't get your criticisms toward it and wanted clarification. "Moves lacking power" makes no sense to me, and outside of that it seemed to just be "lol graphics".

Out side of competitive related things then, I found Brawl on a casual for fun level to be not as fun, because...!

>Slow
>Floaty
>Wonky Physics
>Sticky feeling of control in comparison
>All the items are ridiculous
>A lot of terrible stages no one in their right mind would play on
>SSE being terrible
>Metaknight

There

Thank you Iceman I suddenly like Melee now thanks to your enlightening words

Well if you're just going to troll then, make sure not to trip on your way out