Zaradi's Prized Debate Tournament Quarterfinal - TN05 vs. Valkrin

It is now my turn to refute opponent's statements. I may respond to these arguments out-of order, as I am responding according to which arguments I wish to address. If they are, I apologize. . http://www.youtube.com...Preface - SingleplayerFirst, I concede that the singleplayer in SSB4 has by far more unlockables than the ones in SSBM, but overall, it won't matter too much. Many veterans in the game can kill level 9's easily in both games, especially pro players who play in tournaments. However, the main goal of Smash is to have fun in the multiplayer it offers, whether it be with friends or other online (in the case of SSB4). Overall, multiplayer simply offers more experience and a new adventure each time, as opposed to the repetitive classic/adventure play. This applies to both games, I feel. I. "Hard" contentionsThe first contention about a game being "hard" is something I believe probably needs to be covered more than the rest, as even the difficulty level can help determine the entire outcome of your playing experience. Allow me to elaborate. As opponent mentions, simply because a game is "hard" it doesn't make it better. However, hard games provide a greater challenge to the easier games. Let me make an example. Suppose a five year old is playing piano. He is happy upon playing the first few lines of "Twinkle Twinkle Little Star". He grows older, and more proficient in his skill. Soon, simply playing "Twinkle Twinkle little star" won't satisfy him. As he grows more proficient, he wants harder challenges that truly test this skill. This is applicable to the SSB series. The more proficient someone becomes, the more challenge he requires; he craves, even. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying SSB4 isn't hard, but it's not as hard as the challenge compared to Melee, where in competitive players need fast fingers, good reaction times, and awareness of the ins and outs of the game, to a much greater extent than SSB4, which is naturally slower-paced. Even though opponent claims "it could be a good thing" overall slower gameplay allows for more time for the opponent to react to a move you made. With less time and less forgiveness, arguably the faster game will be more rewarding than the slower one. And while many casual players still seem to prefer slowness, Melee offers both fast and slow characters, as opponent points out. In exchange for speed, slower characters deal lots more damage than the faster ones, and overall it's a matter of playstyle. I believe Melee is simultaneously easier and harder than SSB4. If you feel confused, let me explain. Overall, the characters are a lot simpler than the alternatives in SSB4. They're easier to understand and don't have zany mechanics like LM's KO punch meter and Robin's magic management. They're easier for a newcomer to pick up. However, with the naturally faster gameplay, this requires the player to be more attentive and faster with reactions and moves than SSB4. As well of the introductions of mechanics such as L-cancelling and wavedashing, while slip-ups in the engine, add to the depth and complexity the game offers as opposed to SSB4. II. ControllerOverall, I bring this point up as a topic of concern. While opponent claims that it has not happenend to him (which I believe), I feel that there is a greater possiblity of the circle pad breaking than a part of the GameCube controller breaking, as the GC controller was more designed to have rapid movements, while the 3DS wasn't. With enough mashing of the controller, it has the potential to break, and render the person's controller useless. While it seems unlikely for it to happen (as opponent says he has logged over 100 hours to no circle pad problem), the possibility is still there for such a problem to arise, and if it does, then the controller is useless. Even though the new 3DS (releasing in February, as opponent pointed out) has a C-stick and two Z-sticks. However, even though something like this is coming out, it seems pointless to mention, as the debate is taking place in late January, and the new 3DS has not yet been released, unable to impact the ones playing it as of now. While it is something to consider in the future, at our current point in time it isn't benefiting anyone, and still lacks a grip and buttons that stand out, optimized for the user. III. Characters I feel opponent brings up a fair point with this topic. Many of the faster characters have a large edge over the slower ones, and they tend to do better. However, many of the faster characters require faster fingers and more inputs, as opposed to slower ones who require a lot still, but noticeably less. However, when opponent mentions this: "At the moment, no character in Smash 4 is in a class above the rest. .. Seemingly any character from the A to C tiers could potentially take the winning spot in a tournament", I have to show him the video. The video displays many characters in Melee with their amazing plays. You'll notice that there are many "low-tier" characters on the video, or ones opponent has not mentioned, including Marth, Jigglypuff (these two are somewhat slow yet still play extremely well), Yoshi, Young Link, Peach, Ganondorf, and Pikachu. Not all matches are "95% Fox only" as opponent seems to believe. Players can still play seemingly low tier characters very well. For instance, aMSa plays a great Yoshi, ESAM Samus, Armada Peach, and the list goes on. This goes to prove my point that while the character matters, it doesn't nearly matter as much as what the player can do with the character. This is mostly why I believe Melee is superior to SSB4. SSB4 does provide great characters, but overall it comes down to what players have the potential to do with characters. While Shulk has a lot of options with the Monado Arts, and Rosalina manipulation of Luma, these rely on other factors, and rely on the characters to win the game for the player (*cough cough* Diddy Kong *cough*). But with Melee, what wins mostly is pure skill. It's been shown again and again the "rejects" of Melee, it seems, get picked up by players and they master them to such a degree they destroy the seemingly "top tier" picks. As well, many of the characters opponent mentioned seem highly projectile-reliant, and this only promotes the sad act of camping, or simply spamming projectiles so your opponent can't come near you. This is a sad strategy, that seems to be endorsed by characters such as Duck Hunt and Megaman. Take this as opposed to Melee, who the only projectile-heavy characters I can think of would be Link (or Young Link) and Samus. While the rest probably contain at least one projectile it's not enough to be considered camp-heavy, while SSB4 has Samus, ZSS, Link, Toon Link, Duck Hunt, Megaman, etc. To wrap this point up, the characters in Melee promote more skill, while the characters in SSB4 promote almost melee or ranged combat exclusively, forcing the player to conform to that strategy. IV. Art StlyeWhile I tried to raise the point of the power of the system in the last argument, opponent returns to the idea of "Art Style". Combining this with soundtrack, I feel that both art style and soundtrack tastes are totally up to the player itself. While the rest of the debate is focused on mechanics and characters, the art aspect of it it seemingly pointless, as each person has a unique and individualized taste on which music they prefer and which arty style they prefer. Some prefer the cartoony style of Melee, while others seek a somewhat more realistic approach of SSB4. Overall, this is a matter of taste as opposed to a factual, reasonable debate of "which is better", and I feel both conflicting ideas need to be dropped on both sides. V. Competitive SceneOpponent, in this argument, states that while he agrees Melee has a better competitive, he believes the 3DS version will find its own "niche" and it could be greatly expanded upon in the future. First of all, customized moves are, more often than not, banned in competitive tournaments. While it gives some players more opportunity to explore, most of the custom moves will be near useless in a competitve scene. Secondly, while SSB4 does indeed have a competitive scene, it's nowhere near the extent of Melee, PM, and SSB4 Wii U version. More players practice and play on a console as opposed to a 3DS, and it feels a lot better playing on a huge screen rather than a small device (then again this is a matter of taste), and there are a lot of better features on the consoles that simply aren't present on the 3DS. While the 3DS will indeed occupy it's own area, as does every game, Melee, PM, and SSB4 Wii U will continue to shine against the 3DS' dim glow. VI. Critic Reviews I did not bring this point up to try a plea to authority, rather I bring it up to show a majority of critics believe it to be a better game. While this alone does not make it the better, I believe it helps my case, by showing that a majority prefer one over the other. Overall, here is what my argument boils down to:- Fastness, or the harder ability of a game, rewards more competitive players, with enough slow characters and easier character understanding to keep the game interesting for casual players. - The competitive scene of Melee keeps the game alive, while almost no competitive matches of SSB4 3DS are livestreamed or recorded. Not to mention there are little to no live events of it. - Melee promotes the player working hard as opposed to having a character that almost exclusively promotes one playstyle, limiting the player's decisions and actions. As well, opponent concedes that many of the important elements that should be present in a fighting game (competitive scene, controller, etc. ) are better in Melee than SSB4 3DS. As I am running out of text I will refute more of your statements in the final round. I await opponent's refutation, and good luck in R4.