It's not a traditional fighting game. But if the objective of the game is some form of arena tournament fighting, then yeah. It's a fighting game. The setting is what defines the genre. Not the way its played.

Brawl takes skill, end of story. Even with items on.

Yes, the same way I consider Mario Kart a racing game.

Also, Wikipedia says it's a fighting game therefore it must be true.

I should post this at TPS.

goddamn

I'm not even gonna bother to give a serious reply to this thread after reading this mess

It's definitely a fighting game, but also a fusion of a party game.

The thing that makes SSB more fun than most fighting games is simply how easy it is to learn and play with friends and other people. The whole nature of the game makes it easy to play and win, which makes it a perfect game for gatherings. It's also a ton of fun.

And if you really suck, you can always play as Kirby and inhale people and jump off and float away at the last second.

I also have to disagree on the un-replayability of different fighters. I'm a casual fighting fan, but I had MvC 2 for over a year and Street Fighter II on the SNES for 3 years, yet I always come back to them for a quick 10 minute playthrough, even after playing them for years.

Does Metallica play Metal?

yeah, but watch as people say other bands are more metal so therefore Metallica are not

SSB is a fighting game. An unorthodox one geared more towards a casual crowd(not that that's a bad thing), but a fighter none the less.



I understand if you find them boring but that argument has been apllied to every game genre be it FPS, platformer, RTS, sandbox etc. If you're not a fan that's cool, just say so. The internet is already cluttered with enough unfounded broad generalizations.




If that's the case why not just save yourself some money and rent it? Or better yet wait and see if a friend buys it and make a weekend out of it? There are plenty of people who really love fighting games and play them for several months/years past their launch. I always liked them simply because its one of the few genres that I can play it at anytime and get right back into it.

I know what you mean.

it doesn't even matter whether smash games are fighting games or not, your post just shows how ignorant you are when it comes to the genre and frankly I don't think it's worth the effort to try and argue that you're both wrong and expecting something else from it.

unless you made it just to raise the ire of fighting game fans in general. in which case, congratulations, you've succeeded.

Sollah I honestly think that's the point of the entire thread.

Most fans of fighting games are elitist dickbags that think that Smash Bros isn't a fighting game even though it clearly is. For some reason fans of the PS3 and fighting games seem to be the most unstable and batshit insane group of people on the internet. Okay well maybe that's too much but they definitely make a habit of trying to prove something else is sucky (or non existent) in an effort to make whatever it is they like look good.

Anyone with a dismissive or negative attitude towards these groups of people are most like well justified as they have gotten an earful as to why Smash Bros isn't a fighting game or why the PS3 is the best console in this generation.

I think by now we all pretty much agree that Smash Bros is a fighting game and that a lot of developers should think outside the box when it comes to making fighting games.

EVERYONE WHO POSTED ON THIS THREAD IS A SCRUB

Its more like a game of pinball but the balls can beat eachother up.

the core of the depth of most fighting games come not from the game modes, but from the fighting engine itself. there are some games with a decent single player mode in them, but ultimately most companies know that the audience that they're going for, and thus the audience most likely to buy their games, is in it for the multiplayer. the genre as a whole does not need to "evolve", at least in the way you think it should. it'd be nice if a decent single player mode became standard for all fighting games, but honestly if time and resources were better spent on refining characters, combos, and such to make the game more balanced then that's the direction they should go.

also I don't know about the Street Fighter II trivia, but it's fairly obvious that Capcom either wanted a balanced game in the first place or quickly caught on to what the players want. each new edition of Street Fighter II weren't just money grabs or just added new characters, they were filled with subtle improvements over the last game. each character became more and more refined with each new version in an attempt to make the game more balanced. they basically giant patches.

in the end fighting games have a lot more depth then you perceive them to be. they just don't seem to have what you're looking for.


as a side note: most developers that tack on or add multiplayer to their single player games do it because they think the audience they're going for wants that or they want to appeal to a wider audience. that doesn't mean every single player does that though, or should be required to.