Forum:Competitive history

Forums: Index → Proposals → Competitive history

This is a closed discussion about an accepted proposed change on SmashWiki. It remains for archival purposes.

We have a "History of competitive Melee" article; why don't we have such articles for the other Smash games? RickTommy 01:29, 18 October 2016 (EDT)

Support

1. RickTommy 01:29, 18 October 2016 (EDT)
2. As long as someone is willing to do it, I don't see why not. Serpent King 01:40, 18 October 2016 (EDT)
3. Good enough for me Poultry(talk) the God-Slayer 06:47, 18 October 2016 (EDT)
4. My only concern is the potential lack of content for Brawl and 64, but if they can be done properly, I'm all for it. Smash 4 should have one either way. Nyargleblargle (Contribs) 18:33, 19 October 2016 (EDT)
5. Support, leaning towards neutrality. As for what Trip is saying below, I do believe we can make articles for the history of competitive Smash 64 and Brawl; 64 has a short but easy to understand history and few things that allow it to not be barebones, while Brawl has quite the history too. An "infamous" one to be exact... heheh... heh... But for real, I also echo Trip in the fact doing them could take some work and nobody wants to write them, because while the story for 64 is easy to understand, it is a bit hard to find the entire history because of the lack of people playing the game. As for Brawl, it is quite lengthy, at seven years, and most points would talk about how Meta Knight was, is and has always been good. On a last note, let's give SSB4 some more time for it to develop, just another tier list, alrite? There's not ENOUGH history for the game yet. -- Merry Christ... I mean, Happy Halloween from BeepYou... (talk) 18:24, 28 October 2016 (EDT)
6. Support, leaning to neutral. I'm with BeepYou. Smash Master 19:02, 28 October 2016 (EDT)
7. Support. I'm all with the idea. We could definitely get down SSB4, and while Brawl may be a bit of a ditch, I'm sure there's something for it. As for Smash 64? Well, it can be done, at least. Pika, Poyo poyo poyo 16:05, 9 November 2016 (EST)

Neutral

1. I'm kinda torn to be honest. I'm fairly certain that the main reason Melee has one is due to how lengthy it is and how much has happened over the past decade or so. I mean, a lot happened throughout Melee's lifespan. SSB4 certainly does have quite a bit, but here's where the issue sets in: SSB64 and Brawl. Yeah, SSB64 does have some noteworthy stuff to mention, but AFAIK it's not a lot compared to Melee and SSB4, and with the fact that people immediately ditched Brawl after they realized that it sucks competitively, there's not a whole lot for Brawl to cover either. With that being said, I'm neither supporting nor opposing this, but I'm at least getting my opinions out there for those who intend to vote in the near future. Disaster Flare (talk) 19:28, 18 October 2016 (EDT)

   Yeah this is pretty much "we don't currently have them because no one's made the effort yet", as opposed to "we don't currently have them because we're against them" as the original suggestion kinda-sorta implies. Toomai Glittershine The Orchestral 07:15, 19 October 2016 (EDT)

   Contrary to popular belief, Brawl was not "immediately ditched" at all; its tournament scene had numbers equivalent to Melee up until 2013. Yes, the Melee players who didn't like the game left, but everyone else stayed for the most part. When 2014 came around, only a handful of Brawl players switched to Melee (like Mike Haze); as for a good amount of the Brawl-focused players, they generally either played PM while waiting for Smash 4 to come out or took a break from the scene. PokemonMasterJamal3 (talk) 19:10, 28 October 2016 (EDT)

   Gotta echo Jamal: the scene was infamous, but Brawl players never immediatly ditch the game. They slowly moved as PM arised, then the move became quicker as SSB4 came and PM was on its apex of development. -- Merry Christ... I mean, Happy Halloween from BeepYou... (talk) 19:23, 28 October 2016 (EDT)