Smug cynicism only carries you so far, even on the internet.

What, precisely, do you find "pleasantly ironic"? That I would prefer Smash Bros. to stay the way it is, instead of trying to emulate regular fighting games? And that if I want to play a "Deeper fighting experience", I'll PLAY one of those regular fighting games? I fail to see the "irony" in whatever you're attempting to point out.

None of the Smash Brothers games have been aimed at experts. They've just found their way to the game because it's fun as hell. (Apparently even with boring ass 1-2 stage no item games).

Competitive gaming doesn't stem from games having the most balance or being aimed at professionals,, it stems from the games being fun themselves.

The "Pros" will do a better job at regulating their expert scene then the companies anyway.

League of Legeneds is an EXTREMELY casual game as far as MOBA's go... yet competitivly it's a crown jewel.

TF2 has a pro league... and it's own balancing rules.   (No more then 2 of any character... 1 medic... I think. or  Demoman, i dunno, I kind of think Pro TF2 is dumb.  I'd think Higherlander mode pro games would be more indicitive of skill.)

Just to chip in on the Starcraft discussion.

Soleron: Muta stacking and the like did open up a lot of new strategies in the game, and made it more fun, even on the lower levels. You don't need super pro mechanics to do it at all, but you do need super pro mechanics to get the most out of it.

I don't like how you assume that Starcraft has a high skill cap. Anyone can play it against an average opponent and have a blast. Free For all games are crazy fun too. Just like all good games, the depth doesn't ruin it for the ones who don't want to become pro at it, because the fundementals are accessible.

Also, the guy that you're arguing with is wrong about the death balls. The death balls comes from the bad pathfinding of the game and how all units push each other like fluids. Units being able to block each other without sliding and better collision detection would fix that.

Unlimited unit selection is a natural way to evolve the RTS, but other things in the game ruins the mechanic. SC2 just isn't designed by as talented people as SC:BW.
The hard counters, and Blizzard's zealousness in removing unintended but fun and balanced stuff (like the archon toilet) are much bigger problems.

The irony is that for many Smash is serious business, it has a VERY competitive community, and the game has very advanced techniques that are much more difficult to pull off than the advanced techniques in most fighting games. I know, I regularly play Street Fighter IV, and I can tell you that some of the advanced concepts in smash just as cancelling lag, zoning, reflecting, catching and edge-guarding/recovery are very difficult to fully master.

The irony is that you know nothing yet call people in this thread morons. That's the ironic part. Street Fighter and others are not more serious business than Smash is for any logical reason I know of.

Yes, i know a few of people who bought sc1/sc bw just because of jaedongs 3 hatch into fast mutas. Or Bisus sick shuttle/reaver micro and multitasking.

Hvaing a healthy competitive E-Sports scene does so much more for the game and its overall sales than dumbing it down and makin it more accessible(which doesnt guarantee any sales btw, this is just a myth).

Thats why he brings up LoL which is a free to play game and because it has naturally a big userbase(most free to play games usually do).

Yes he is actually comparing a Free to Play MOBA to the most competitive online RTS which costs 50$ per expansion at retail and somehow thinks hes making a point.

And no SC2 doesnt have bad pathing, it has actually much "better" pathing meaning units will clump up in millliseconds and the unlimited unit selection(aka put my entire army in control group 1) makes it much worse.

Removing key mechanics from games and replace them with nothing is bad, no matter how much u spin around it.

very true, and nintendo is already miles behind MS/Sony in the online department, but it seems the want to widen the gap even more, all in the name of MAKE THE GAME EASY MOAR SALEZ myth. Or remove key competitive gameplay features because little 11 y old timmy doesnt use them, so removing these features makes little timies experience somehow better?

Yeah, I think OP is saying that won't happen and they're making sure the game is tight and pick-up-and-play all at the same time.

Wat? If anything the online mode of the new SSB will be better than the one of SSBB. How did you reach this conclusion? And what has the online mode to do with the depth of the game?

sounds like he's talking about every other smash bros game as well as the new so I don't expect to see a huge decline in difficulty.

This is the same reason why KOFXIII got so much flack in the beginning, but it was wisest choice if you wanna broaden the appeal. The core mechanic hasn't changed much and that game is still the best there is in the diehard KOF fandom!
Tripping is something I really wanted to go! And I'm glad just for that! ;)

Title of the thread is a bit misleading, though... :/