What do traditional fighting games have over Smash?

Smash isn't exactly the pinnacle of balance, so I'd say

-USFIV
-GGXrd
-SCVI
-DBFZ 2.0
-DOA6
-KoFXIV

And per -UNIST

And as you said
-Tekken

Smash has Marvel beat on balance, I'll give you that. Year 1 DBFZ too, that was a shitshow. It has BBCP, BBCTB, and most old school games beat on balance, but in the grand scheme, it does not impress. It only impresses in the realm of Smash, which I'd say is most people's issue in this topic, Smash players rarely have a decent grasp over anything that isn't Smash, thus overestimating their own game in comparison to the games they aren't really qualified to evaluate. Many will bring uo the amount of viable characters in this massive roster is impressive by itself, and it may be, but that doesn't mean we ignore the couple dozen characters that will never ever show up in Top 8.

Attached: 1518134523267.png (653x533, 253K)

Fighting
Win by damaging your opponent enough that they are unable to defend themselves or at least do more damage before time runs out.

Wrestling
Win by knocking your opponent out of the ring or forcing them to surrender.

Smash is not a fighting game. It's a wrestling game.

good analysis

None of what you said argued for why other fighting games are better. You just argued what your preference is

wrestling isn't just a form of fighting, it's one of the most efficient forms of fighting
all that karate crap is for faggots

>Fluid movement
I'm not playing Soulcalibur
>Creativity in killing
Hoo boy, the one thing that traditional fighting games have the most over smash, Combos, while in smash you have to resort to one of your 2 or 3 hard hitting moves, in a fighting game you can style on your opponent by comboing for tons of damage and finish with a super to close out the round, or be even more creative and branch out into ending your combo preemptively and going for a reset, knocking them down and going for Oki, or zoning them out while they're at petty health, while in smash you're confined to "hit your opponent really really hard or he just won't die"

I wish Smash gave the characters light and heavy tilts and jabs like they gave Ryu and Ken. I'm not really sure why they're all tied to one button though, or at least why we don't have the option to divvy them and Smash attacks up. We have enough buttons to do so.

>sales =/ quality
>sales = broad appeal
Appealing to the "lowest common denominator" meme has always been bad, regardless of media, now add how fighting games work with them literally being better off without scrubs ruining the whole thing for everyone and having a broad appeal with large sales on a game in that genre may bring money but it won't bring longevity, especially in competitive

Deodorant

Why would anyone go for a reset instead of killing?

Almost all moves in Smash can kill if you get someone high enough. You can gimp there recovery, spike them, edge guard or go for a hard read to kill.

Also killing isn't at a set time, you can die at any percent in Smash

>me outunga opponent me win
It's definitely lower IQ than any other martial art

It's the same principle on games with high damage combos, it's just not a matter of rng and "reads" it's about you remembering how to combo your opponent for their remaining health

Well, that's ultimately what this boils down to. These things are my preference, and because of that, I find traditional fighters better than Smash. Smash is not without merit, but it's foundation is clearly antithetical to the classic pillars of fighting game design. Due to this, the Smash community have had to carve out their own version of Smash, and with a decent amount of success. They prefer this over traditional fighters. I prefer traditional fighters over that.

This entire conversation is based on preference because there's no objective answer to competitive design. I'm not really sure what your reply was meant to reveal, this has been an argument of preference from the start. OP asked "what do fighting games have over Smash", and I gave an answer. There is no objective answer, just as there is no objective answer to "what does Smash have over fighting games". The two are too different to make objective comparisons without trying to obfuscate one's preference, so this has to be an argument of preference from the get go.

Attached: FB_IMG_1549391078209.jpg (960x720, 60K)

Then how come nobody says the WWE games are fighting games?

if we're talking about SF5 then smash has much more dynamic combo system

>out into ending your combo preemptively and going for a reset, knocking them down and going for Oki,

But you do all of this in smash

>NO you're not allowed to grab me, I am serious fighting sport, nobody ever grabs in real life

Skullgirls for free. It also has way less characters but it does have a higher move count per character and custom assists

>smash
>combo system

Attached: 1556444710183.gif (202x360, 1.84M)

dont know what to tell you. There are combos in smash.

>implying smash as a whole has fluid movement

Smash doesn't have combos, the combos there are are literal glitches that only very few characters can do, something you can jump in, jab a few times and cancel into special for solid damage, while being completely "true" and uncontested simply isn't in smash, only ken and ryu have it but that's literally the point

Stop making op look less retarded.

I'm not even a Smash fag, but if you hit somebody, put them in hitstun, then hit them again before the hitstun expires, you are comboing them. Don't make us look bad.

Attached: 1523615341966.jpg (750x766, 112K)

plenty of characters have true combos tough, you could argue they are short, but they exist and you will have to cope
>there are literal glitches
just like how combos were unintended glitches at first? ok

That's a string

LOL are you fucking serious? Ultimate is the first “balanced” Smash game, and even it has its balancing issues. Smash is notorious for having a way overpowered top tier in every game except Ult.

Only really agree on the air movement and stages. Maybe moves too because a lot of dominant fucks have obnoxious airs which makes aerial combat pretty retarded. Every time I see Ike or whoever the fuck sword characters it reminds me of Last Blade 2.

user, I...

Did you have an aneurism while writing this post
>muh glitches
Fucking lol

A string is a pre-baked series of moves that flow from one to another naturally.

Jin's 1 2 4 is a string
Guy's LP, MP, HP target combo is a string

Strings can be combos as well, they're not mutually exclusive. King's df2, 1 is both a string and a combo, because it's guaranteed on first hit. However, you can still combo outside of a string. Heihachi doing three EWGFs in a row is a combo, and certainly not a string. Mario doing d.throw into three Utilts is a combo, and certainly not a string.

I agree with every point

Attached: 52612342314311534541.jpg (1420x946, 57K)

>brawl: nothing
>4:shieldgrab/uptilit-up-throw-up-air
>ultimate: 3 or 4 hits at low % , hardly any kill confirms

Better question is, which game has the smelliest player?

Attached: nerd2.jpg (462x527, 39K)

>platformer with attacks
It's not a fighting game. It's like pretending Halo is a fighting game if you ban all guns and stick to melee weapons.

Smash is a fighting game

So what about Slap City and Rivals of Aether?

My friends and I unironically did this on Halo 2 Lockout

Attached: cool_0.jpg (1022x533, 271K)

Smashlikes

Attached: 4_0.png (929x713, 661K)

smash is a fighting game, with or without items to assist you.
the premise is that its a kid playing with his toys. who do you think master hand is?

end of story.

dead games nobody plays