|
|
 |
« Reply #15 on: August 10, 2011, 05:52:43 PM » |
|
I still hate how they're making some characters COMPLETELY different, while some go back to being clones again...
I don't care if Brawl Falco doesn't "fit in" as well, if they can make Lucario THAT much cooler, why not the clones? I personally HATE this part of P:M... Can't they be creative there? Instead of Ganon being a Falcon clone yet again?
...
Personally, if I get P:M, I want someone to make a PSA for all the clones to make them NOT clones... Plus, I still hate how they got rid of Pokemon Trainer... Why? I don't get this... I thought that was actually pretty creative, why not take that concept, and make it rewarding? Rather then take it out altogether?
Brawl+ did it better, they just took out the stamina system.
I mean... Pokemon Trainer is the only human character representative from Pokemon in Smash... And they got rid of him... That just seems really, really lame... Plus, that's a good waste of Pokemon Trainer hacks, well done, your team made all those models worthless. *Golf claps*
...
And Wario's animation edits are bad. <_<
Alright, I've done enough ranting, I've ranted all I needed to.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
« Reply #16 on: August 10, 2011, 06:00:52 PM » |
|
Pokemon Trainer removal was a hard (and long to take) decission (in my outdated alpha, he's still there), but the majority saw better to get rid of it, cause it was useless to play. If you have the pokemon characters with a move less, they're worse than other characters. If you get the 3 pokemon at once as always, you're using the rest of the pokemon even if you don't want to use them (when you're killed you're switching). I personally don't care about him. That 'creative' thing could have been better, and not just an annoying character on the background. Getting rid of him isn't a big deal.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
« Reply #17 on: August 10, 2011, 06:05:23 PM » |
|
Well, there are codes to... Oh I don't know... PREVENT switching when KOed?
Seriously, also, how about when switching, wouldn't it be possible to hold a button to switch in a different order?
Like say you're Squirtle, normally, you would switch to Ivysaur... What if you could hold L button, and instead switch to Charizard?
Or even hold L or R button when KOed to switch? This would have been interesting...
And honestly... Charizard's new down B seems... Redundant, it works like an up B... Couldn't that have been his new up B? Rather then a down B?
Plus... I had an odd idea for fixing the switching problem... Why not add a set knock back hitbox when switching for the first few frames?
This way, it would get the foe away from you if you hit, but if you miss, or they dodge it... Well, whoever you switch in will get hit like normal...
It follows the risk/reward logic. Since your reward would be getting the foe away when switching, and having another character to take the place of the one you were using, and the risk is them punishing you...
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: August 10, 2011, 06:19:10 PM by _Data_Drain_ »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
« Reply #18 on: August 10, 2011, 06:41:22 PM » |
|
Or just increase the speed they're replaced...
I dunno... PT has some cool possibilities...
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: August 10, 2011, 06:42:43 PM by Shirosan »
|
Logged
|
ㅤlㅤ
ㅤlㅤ
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
« Reply #19 on: August 10, 2011, 06:44:10 PM » |
|
Or just increase the speed they're replaced...
*Sigh* But there is a problem with that though... I think Brawl doesn't let that happen, since it has to load the data for the Pokemon as it's being sent out...
...
...Wait, actually... You might have a point, wasn't there a instant switch code somewhere too?
Okay, that would also work. Since actually... My idea might have been odd, since it could be comboed into possibly. ._. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
« Reply #20 on: August 10, 2011, 06:45:43 PM » |
|
...After reading all of that, I think I might try P:M when a new demo is out.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
 3DS Friend Code: 2895-6640-9302 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
« Reply #21 on: August 10, 2011, 07:04:52 PM » |
|
Most of the arguments here regarding PT have already been uttered in the backroom, and still we decided to go for removing PT and allowing the Pokemon to be developed independently from each other (and this for a large part because of the hardcoding PT has).
And about the clones, Falco is the only clone who was brought back to Melee status, due to how good he was in Melee.
Ganon can hardly be considered a C. Falcon clone in P:M, due to how he is a mixture of his Melee and Brawl incarnation with both major and minor improvements.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: August 10, 2011, 07:08:19 PM by ds22 »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
« Reply #22 on: August 10, 2011, 07:43:45 PM » |
|
Seriously, also, how about when switching, wouldn't it be possible to hold a button to switch in a different order?
Like say you're Squirtle, normally, you would switch to Ivysaur... What if you could hold L button, and instead switch to Charizard?
Or even hold L or R button when KOed to switch? This would have been interesting...
The hard coding prohibits this from happening as switching is programmed to only happen with Down B and forced death. Or just increase the speed they're replaced...
I dunno... PT has some cool possibilities...
The speed he's replaced is dependent on the Wii's ram as it doesn't preload the character like Zelda and Sheik in Melee, something we can't really change ATM. :/ |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
« Reply #23 on: August 11, 2011, 01:54:27 AM » |
|
Well, there are codes to... Oh I don't know... PREVENT switching when KOed?
Seriously, also, how about when switching, wouldn't it be possible to hold a button to switch in a different order?
Like say you're Squirtle, normally, you would switch to Ivysaur... What if you could hold L button, and instead switch to Charizard?
Or even hold L or R button when KOed to switch? This would have been interesting... As EternalYoshi said, hard coding makes it so that only the Down B works. In an ideal world what they would have liked to do is keep Pokemon Trainer and have all three of the Pokemon gain new Down Bs as well. They spent months trying to get it to work but to no avail. So they went for the better compromise. Make all three fleshed out individual characters that actually have their own viability, rather than having three indy characters.
Another reason why they did this was because in tournament settings, literally almost nobody used Pokemon Trainer, and even if they did they'd stick to just one Pokemon anyway. Here are a couple of quotes from Smashboards (these guys are some of the lead devs) to further explain what I mean:
We wanted to include Pokémon Trainer and the individual Pokémon. I don't think there's a single person in the BR that didn't want to. But it wasn't possible. We would have been given **** regardless of which way we went, so we decided to go with the option that would give us the most competitive depth. The individual Pokémon are able to flourish and shine on their own, and with their new designs are able to compete at a high level with even the best characters. For all of them, their new Down-B's are crucial for them. I don't expect you to suddenly accept our decision, but at least know that a lot of thought went into it and we that we originally wanted what you wanted, but it wasn't possible.
I hope you're more understanding now that you've learned why we did what we did. Under ideal circumstances, we wanted PT to be unique where you would be using all 3 pokemon frequently and were entirely separate/unique from wild-types. However, we ran into several issues:
-Load time is a significant limitation in how a switching character can work
-A true clone engine would be required to separate wild types from indies
-Module coding is still largely a mystery, limiting any changes we can make to diversify their movesets
However, none of those solutions are addressable, despite us having some of the best coding talent out there. It would be entirely unprofessional (lets face it, B+ was anything but professional) to put out a game which has a character that is 3 of the current characters, without downBs, and just autorotates them. The fact is, 95% of players in B+ stuck with one indy-pokemon, and would rather have a fully fleshed out character than PT. So we decided that we would further pursue unique downB's than leave in a character which really adds no value and can be barely modified.
Really, we have hundreds of reasons (and an extremely long argumentive thread in the PMBR) as to why we decided to axe PT. It wasn't an easy decision, but it was clearly the best option available.
The fact is that while we make a lot of cutting edge changes, we aren't writing a game from scratch. We have limitations in character development (i.e. olimar / ice climbers / PT) that will more often than not have simpler re-designs than say a lucario, and while you might not think we are being "innovative enough" it's really us just being as practical as we can be. Unless you can create some cutting edge ASM codes, I think its hard for you to critique our decisions. They aren't made up stats. I ran dozens of Brawl+ tournaments (in fact, I'd be willing to bet I ran the most period) including the largest, the side events at Pound 4 and Apex. I knew a LOT of Brawl+ players, especially on the East Coast, and I knew of exactly 1 person (GuruKid) who ever used PT in tournament. There were dozens of people who used indy pokemon. I used quite a bit of Squirtle myself.
As for the PMBR, just because the vast majority of us prefer playing indy pokemon doesn't mean we didn't want to try to find a way to keep PT. It just didn't work out, for reasons already stated. And honestly... Charizard's new down B seems... Redundant, it works like an up B... Couldn't that have been his new up B? Rather then a down B? Oh contraire. Without his Down B, Charizard is significantly worse. If it was his Up B, he'd still have to go helpless afterwards and thus it would remove the point of it. Charizard is designed now to be a character that focuses on stuff like juggles and chasing, and his Down B acts as a perfect tool for this. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
« Reply #24 on: August 11, 2011, 04:20:21 AM » |
|
Well, this might be risky to ask, SDoom, but... since you can't actually give us the character files, could you at least go to a couple subactions and you know *Print Screen button* and then send the pictures to us so we can see without you actually giving them to us?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
« Reply #25 on: August 11, 2011, 05:05:46 AM » |
|
^ nope.avi, that's basically asking someone to give instructions on how to do something secret. Why do you need to see this stuff anyway?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
« Reply #26 on: August 11, 2011, 05:09:31 AM » |
|
I'm curious to see the structure of the actions and subactions We could be able to use them to exceed P:M.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
« Reply #27 on: August 11, 2011, 05:28:09 AM » |
|
Well, this might be risky to ask, SDoom, but... since you can't actually give us the character files, could you at least go to a couple subactions and you know *Print Screen button* and then send the pictures to us so we can see without you actually giving them to us?
| <![CDATA[<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lITBGjNEp08" target="_blank" class="aeva_link bbc_link new_win">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lITBGjNEp08</a>]]> | |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
« Reply #28 on: August 11, 2011, 05:31:14 AM » |
|
Alright... I guess...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
« Reply #29 on: August 11, 2011, 07:43:03 AM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
