Board 8 > Is Smash Bros a fighting game franchise?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Tales of Vesperia is actually more similar to Smash Bros than to Dragon Warrior

Note I'm not saying Smash Bros is an RPG or that Tales of Vesperia is a fighter, but if we're talking about elements of the gameplay and presentation it absolutely is.

(You're right that Vesperia is closer to Dragon Warrior than Mario Party though)

---

I actually picked Tales of Vesperia for a calculated reason by the way

It has "fighting game elements" just like Smash Bros has with its combos, dodging/blocking, and techs

In fact if you were to release a version of Tales of Vesperia that allowed for 1v1 battles it'd be a serviceable fighter in that form (again, better than Street Fighter 1, Primal Rage, and all sorts of gutter trash "real" fighters) and I'd welcome seeing it at EVO.

But is it a fighter, even if it had that mode built into the game? Well obviously not.

Now Smash is definitely much closer to a fighting game than Tales of Vesperia is, but the point is that you can have elements from fighting games without actually being one.

---

I remember ads in the mid-2000s trying to argue that Tales "plays like a fighting game" so you're definitely not the first to make that comparison, but it always felt kinda specious to me because like... sure, the combat does. What about the other 50-75% of Tales gameplay when you're not in combat? There's nothing in Smash regardless of which mode you play that's similar to running around towns buying new equipment, for instance. Maybe the campaign in Ultimate if we're very generous.

---

Didn't see that second comment before posting but it doesn't really change what I have to say. I do think it would be very easy to spinoff Tales into a proper fighting game though

---

I'd say it feels like a beat-em-up or action game maybe. While we're at it, Souls actually has PvP, meters, various attack properties and special moves, and fairly large movesets for each weapon, so it'd be a good candidate if not for the fact that it's primarily a PvE game and the PvP only takes place within that same mode.

---

Oh no, I know there's a lot more to it than just the battling.

But that remaining 50-75% of that gameplay doesn't really resemble Dragon Warrior either beyond finding items and leveling up and while you'd say the campaign in Ultimate is "very generous" to compare to an RPG (and I'd agree) I'd call it closer to what is going on in that 50-75% in Tales than anything in Dragon Warrior is.

But at their cores, DW and Tales, they still have the main things an RPG needs. An overarching story and a sense of your characters powering up over time, with the focus on those elements before the gameplay itself, so it's hard to say they're not both RPGs. It's why Metroidvania games, I can at least see where people calling them RPGs comes from as to me it's basically on the border just like Smash is, but I think the gameplay is just leaned in too hard in them for it to really be an RPG.

But for me that's what Smash DOESN'T have with respect to fighters when played "as intended" and without gutting the elements from the game. To me a fighter needs to without exception focus always on your opponent first and foremost.

---

I don't think I've ever played a game of Smash where I wasn't focused on my opponent(s), just for the record. I don't even really know what that would look like because you wouldn't be playing Smash anymore at that point.
---

So I guess you've never played a match on New Pork City or 3M or Spear Pillar or whatever else.

You tell me you're still focusing on your opponent fully when the game is filling the screen with kill boxes and I'm saying you probably lose a lot of matches because the stage kills you

---

Lopen posted...

without gutting the elements from the game.

I just feel like this is really arbitrary especially with Ultmate which allows you to do what you want with the rulesets. If fighting games just added options to the game that let them essentially become party games, I don't think it would ruin their status as a fighting game. Smash 4 had two onlines modes "For Fun" and "For Glory" which is basically Party Mode and Fighting Mode. Who is gutting elements from the game? Nintendo?


---

If a fighting game did it, they would be adding extraneous elements-- and this has happened with other fighters btw. World Heroes 2 had a Death Match mode for example with stage hazards. But the difference is where the defaults are and how the game presents itself. Like just play single player Smash and it's easy to see-- or fire up local multiplayer and see where the defaults are.

I don't care about the elements being gutted and think the game is better for it but you're lying to yourself if you're thinking playing Smash under tourney rules is omitting added elements rather than removing elements

---

Lopen posted...

mash under tourney rules is omitting added elements rather than removing elements

Sure but it's actually sanctioned by a Nintendo as a real ruleset.

Maybe Magic the Gathering might be an appopriate comparison. It's a "game" that has multiple rulesets, some geared towards party casual play, and some for highly competitive play. The creators make the cards balanced around all kinds of rulesets. The tourney ruleset is the most visible (I'd argue it is in smash too, there's no content being created for party smash), but that doesn't mean more people are playing competitive MtG compared to kitchen Magic.

Smash Bros is a game that can be played multiple ways, and Nintendo is not actually railroading you into any of them.

---

I get the point about defaults but it just seems really shallow.

Like if Nintendo sent out an update that changed the defaults to be with items off and stage hazards off the genre of game suddenly flips? I guess that would imply a change in attitude by Nintendo, but that means we're really reaching into "intent" as what defines a genre rather than how people actually interact with the product.


---

It's sanctioned but only as of the last game and there's no doubt Nintendo is railroading towards the other ruleset.

And for the record MtG railroads you into Type 2 (it's literally called "Standard" I mean come on now) as well so not sure what you're talking about. This is for obvious profit reasons (and because Type 1/Vintage is a trainwreck)

---

pjbasis posted...

Like if Nintendo sent out an update that changed the defaults to be with items off and stage hazards off the genre of game suddenly flips? I guess that would imply a change in attitude by Nintendo, but that means we're really reaching into "intent" as what defines a genre rather than how people actually interact with the product.

Yes it does change it. Completely.

And that's largely because it's not just defaults either. Like all of the single player content gravitates towards the things you're claiming Nintendo doesn't favor, and you can't turn that off in single player.

Also like, for the more casual players, the defaults make a TON of difference. You know how I said "I've played Smash with hundreds of people and haven't ever played with items off except against b8ers" that story changes immensely if the default is items off, no clown stages. Why? Because many people who play that way aren't willfully turning items ON, they're just not caring enough to turn them off, you get it?

---

Lopen posted...

Like all of the single player content gravitates towards the things you're claiming Nintendo doesn't favor, and you can't turn that off in single player.

Yeah this is also true of Weapon Master mode in Soul Calibur II.

Lopen posted...

Also like, for the more casual players, the defaults make a TON of difference.

Hmmm but you're also gonna say that you're railroaded into Standard despite nothing forcing you to play standard if you're a casual who just bought some decks at wal-mart (decks that often include non-standard cards) and would likely not know of Standard's existence?

---

pjbasis posted...

(decks that often include non-standard cards)

Unless it's a Commander Deck this is false. And if you're playing Commander that's specifically a different format.

The product at Wal-mart in terms of boosters/etc will all be Standard too

pjbasis posted...

Yeah this is also true of Weapon Master mode in Soul Calibur II.

One single mode yes. Not every mode.

---

And I'm pretty Sakurai thinks he's making a fighting game. He was inspired by beating novices in King of Fighters and wanted to make an easier fighting game.

Also I found this cool game

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Outfoxies

Apparantly smash bros before smash bros. Has items and everything but also health bars.

---

Lopen posted...

Unless it's a Commander Deck this is false. And if you're playing Commander that's specifically a different format.

The product at Wal-mart in terms of boosters/etc will all be Standard too

Duel Decks are not Commander. They do seem discontinued though, so it might not apply today.

---

Duel Decks were also not all that common to find at Wal-mart tbh you kinda had to go to hobby shops specifically for those usually

---

Lopen posted...

One single mode yes. Not every mode.

No it was more. Versus, arcade, and time attack all allowed for special weapons to be used in a certain mode. Or rather I think they split them all up into two modes, one with and without.

---

Oh you mean just the weapons?

Those hardly changed the feel of the gameplay at all so it doesn't really matter. They were basically just like "isms" from Capcom vs SNK/Street Fighter Alpha etc. The problem is they screwed with the game balance so obviously they'd need to be off for competitive play. Casual play I see no reason not to just use them though.

---

Also how recent have you played smash with people?

I have a theory that casuals are turning to competitive rulesets because competitive smash is just becoming bigger and more likely to be seen.

---

A few months ago. I've played plenty of Ultimate with people. Has always been with items.

---

Even clown stages??

Like my first step into competitive smash was realizing no one wanted to play on the Ice Climbers level. Slippery slope to just playing on FD.

---

I also think you're grossly overestimating how visible competitive Smash is. Or competitive gaming in general. I'm not sure I've told anyone about going to EVO (or watching EVO) not from this board and had them recognize it yet aside from "oh is that where the Street Fighter 3 clip you showed me was from"

And I know some pretty hardcore gaming types-- just because they play Smash casually doesn't mean they don't know about things

---

I mean it's definitely growing and more visible than it ever was before.

Give it time. The fighting game mode will be the true mode eventually.

---

pjbasis posted...

I mean it's definitely growing and more visible than it ever was before.

Give it time. The fighting game mode will be the true mode eventually.

The darkest timeline

---

pjbasis posted...

I mean it's definitely growing and more visible than it ever was before.

Give it time. The fighting game mode will be the true mode eventually.

Unsure as I feel there was more hype for Smash in general during the Brawl days (which is a shame since Ultimate is the best Smash game since 64) than there is now

So while competitive has a bigger piece of the pie now it's a smaller pie they're cutting from

---

I don't think I've ever played a game of Ultimate with items on with the 30+ people I've played it with, except when doing the Isabelle AT glitch

---

I agree with Lopen on a lot of the qualities of smash (items are a part of smash and are fun cause they are stupid) and that the competitive ruleset isn't necessarily representative of what smash is. I disagree that those traits are good reasons to disqualify smash from being a fighting game. Cause some things don't match up, it just means it's not a traditional fighter, but it is still a fighter. A platform fighter is still a fighter. A party fighter is still a fighter. Why not both

---

Party fighter why didn't I think of that.

Lopen posted...

So while competitive has a bigger piece of the pie now it's a smaller pie they're cutting from

https://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/en/finance/software/index.html

I don't know about hype but each smash game sold more than the previous so the pie ain't getting smaller.

---

This goes on too long.

---