--OkeyDokey-- said:
Khuutra said:
The_vagabond7 said:
Then I'm just going to claim powerstone is the winner and walk away.
Knowledge of the system is paramount, but if there is a deeper system then there is more to know thusly creating a larger gap. That is why your statement "The gap between great and good players will be roughly the same in both games." isn't really correct. Or on a technicality is correct. The gap may be the same, but the amount of knowledge, investment of time, and skill to create that gap will be drastically different.
|
If you want to claim Powerstone as the winner, you will ned to create a topic in which it is one of the games being discussed. This is not that topic.
Depth is not quality, but the argument can also be made that a knowledge of Brawl is just as hard to come by as one of Street Fighter, because thee are many more elements to it than the traditional ighter: each stage and its unique traits (layout, sometimes physics, interactive features), items and item physics and usage, priority of certain special moves over others, the way gravity affects each character differently, the inherently different scoring strategies for Stock matches versus Timed matches...
Even if you want to make the argument that depth is equivalent to quality, the answer to that question is not clear-cut, and the many, many, many different ways in which Brawl can be played only compounds that.
|
Fun is subjective, depth is not.
Street Fighter is deeper than Brawl, that's a fact. I agree that deeper doesn't necessarily mean better, but in this genre it's very important.
|
Depth is objective, but an oversimplification of one game obscures that. Brawl as a fighter is not especially deep, but it's also got a lot of depth for a plaformer - it's layered in many ways, and the absolute plumbs of its depth are murky and not well understood.
