Today, I felt like doing something none of the bigger
websites would ever consider writing about... or even know about. I am doing this because I felt like it would be interesting to delve into the history of one of Nintendo's more obscure characters. 2014 marks
the 25th anniversary of Princess Daisy, whom most know as the tomboy
princess from Sarasaland.
Those who know me are
aware that I have been using Princess Daisy as my go-to character in Mario Kart, Mario Party, Mario Tennis, and other multiplayer Mario experiences that
feature her. It started off as her being my “troll character” following her
infamous “Hi! I’m Daisy!” quote from Mario Kart Double Dash. I would indeed
pick her on the character select screen and proclaim “Hi! I’m Daisy!” very
loudly in order to annoy my friends. At times, I would randomly shout it while
I was racing past them in Mario Kart. Me picking her was initially a joke, but
I eventually grew fond of her as a character, likely as a result of her
becoming my go-to character.
Origins:
Princess Daisy was created by Shigueru Miyamoto’s mentor,
Gunpei Yokoi, creator of such important pieces of history as the Game Boy and
Game & Watch. He acted as the manager of Nintendo R&D until he departed
from the company. He is also the creator of Metroid and all of its initial
characters, Kid Icarus and all of tis initial characters, and Wario and the
Wario land series. More closely related to the topic at hand, Princess Daisy
was created in the context of the Game Boy title “Super Mario Land”.
In this 1989 title, the plot resolved around an alien
invasion of her desert kingdom. The tyrannical alien Tatanga kidnapped her in
order to go through his plan of forcefully marrying her and gain control over
her land. The player controlled Mario and traversed a variety of levels in
order to free her from the alien despot. Little is known about how she came to
be as a character and why Daisy was specifically designed the way she was.
Little is also publicly known about her kingdom, its denizens, and her history.
With her creator dead, much of this information may well be beyond our reach.
Her first game has also spawned a comic book series, where
she was featured prominently as an uncooperative damsel in distress. She tried
to help Mario in her own restricted way and struck at Tatanga’s ego at times.
The comic is a well-known “so bad it is good” sort of thing. It featured a real
world human villain that was at times evil beyond redemption, and at other
times, portrayed as a victim of circumstances. He set the enemies of Super
Mario Land free from his Gameboy as they wreaked havoc on the real world of the
early nineties and stylish mullet hairdos. A smurf-sized Mario set out to
defeat Tatanga with the help of over-eager teenagers. The twist: In real life,
you only die once.
In the 1993 live action film, she was portrayed by Samantha
Mathis as an archeology student who captures the heart of Luigi. The movie
again is a “so bad it’s good” and bears absolutely no weight on the canon of
the Mario universe. However, it is interesting that a non-canonical piece of
media has paired Luigi and Daisy together before Nintendo had even canonically
hinted at the idea... or did they...?
Following appearances:
Princess Daisy next appeared in NES Open Golf Tournament,
where she has acted as Luigi’s caddy, as opposed to her cousin, Princess Peach
who was Mario’s caddy. This may have been the earliest possible hint of a
relationship blossoming between Luigi and the fiery-tempered princess. However,
with this being released two years after Super Mario land (1989) in 1991 where
she was rescued by Mario and not Luigi, no one had any reasons to suspect a
future relationship with the awkward but beloved plumber. Her appearance
alongside Mario in Super Mario land 2: 6 Golden Coins has also served as a
counter-argument for that theory.
She was put aside for a long time until she was brought back
in Mario Tennis on the Nintendo 64 in the year 2000 by Camelot Software
Planning, the studio responsible for many Mario Sports games and the amazing
Golden Sun series. This was also the first time that she was ever playable.
Following this game, Daisy became a mainstay in more Mario-themed sports,
racing, and party titles, with a few exceptions such as Mario Party Advance, or
Mario Tennis on the Game Boy colour where while she is not playable, she
appears and a non-playable character.
Redesigns:
The desert princess has had several redesigns, both in terms
of appearance and personality:
Super Mario Land:
She has an appearance much more similar to Peach, but you
can already see the floral patterns on her dress and ornaments. She served the role of the damsel in distress and much like her other princess counterpart, and was a bit of a blank slate. Little was known about her personality.
It is assumed that there are feelings between Daisy and Mario. However, future titles don't seem to refer to an actual romance between them and it seems that he is more of a good friend to her. Perhaps they have had a relationship that ended, or perhaps there was never anything more than friendship, Perhaps there was a relationship that was removed from canon in future games. It may be that there is no clear continuity in Mario games. Pauline is also often forgotten for example. Most likely, her potential relationship with Luigi was added in in order to give Luigi a potential female doubles partner in sports games to mirror the Mario and Peach team (male balanced, female technical). Again, this is merely conjecture.
The comic book series and the live action movie both has interpretations of her personality, but none of them were considered canon.
Mario Tennis:
She wears a shorter dress and lacks her gloves, which makes
sense considering she is playing tennis. Most noticeable however is her skin
tone. She has darker skin than Peach, showing her origins as someone who lives
within a warmer climate; a desert nation. Of notice is that she also has
minimal makeup compared to Peach. This was the game that began portraying her
as a tomboy, which could very well explain that difference.
In this game, she was portrayed as being very close friends with Princess Peach, but her as for her potential relationship with Luigi, nothing had been really hinted at yet. She was a bit more demure as her current portrayal
Finally, she is a technical character in Mario Tennis, a trait that seems to follow her into most sports games. In Mario Tennis 64, she is the best net-player in the game.
Mario Party 3:
Mario Party 3 was her second appearance, and a particularly meaningful one. First, it had depicted her in her normal royal attire, being the first time she has worn her full dress in a game since the Game Boy days. Her crown was noticeably lighter, and the jewel on it was also a different shade. She was otherwise fairly unchanged from her her Mario Tennis depiction.
Furthermore, she was shown to have some charm and feminine traits, but also shown to be a very strong and temperamental person; even capable of just slapping Bowser away with relative ease. This has pushed her further into a more tomboyish as opposed to Princess Peach's more "proper" decorum. She also seems aware of her charms and is willing to use them to achieve her personal means.
Super Smash Bros. Melee (Trophy):
Super Smash Bros. Melee marked the earliest depiction of her on that generation of the system. She was very similar to her previous appearances down to the tiniest details. However, it would not be long until future Gamecube games would redesign her completely into the design that is currently used in 2014. We will cover these physical changes a bit later.
The Gamecube era has also solidified the possibility of a relationship between Daisy and Luigi. The picture above comes from Super Smash. Bros. Melee (2001), and the description clearly hints at a possible relationship. Mario Party 4's (2002) official manual also states that Luigi has a crush on Daisy, at the very least supporting that Luigi has an interest in her. Mario Power Tennis which came later in 2004 also has Luigi holding to her trophy for her in her ending, but then again, Both and Mario and Luigi are clearly seen to be attracted to Peach when she blows them a kiss in her ending. Some believe that Luigi and Daisy might be a complicated relationship. This is not helped by the idea that Luigi is often seen running to save Princess Peach, or even ask Mario to talk about his contributions to Rosalina in Super Mario Galaxy, also sharing an ending credits screen with her; albeit, it may also be that he simply wants some recognition. Then again, it may be that different companies working on Mario titles treat this relationship differently.
Mario Party 8:
The Gamecube era had changed her drastically with games following Super Smash Bros. Melee. Her dress was more homogenized to look like Peach's. She lost the floral white rims at the bottom of her dress, and she instead had two sets of orange rims. However, the dress shape itself was much more similar to Peach's overall, including the shape of the orange portion at her hip level. The jewel on her chest was changed from a more blueish hue to an aqua green, making it the same colour as her earrings and the gem on her crown. He crown also became golden as opposed to red or pink. He face was slightly rounded more, and her hair was cut much shorter. Most importantly, she has lost her tan. While her complexion is slightly darker than Peach's, she has a very Caucasian skin tone. While the hair and colour of her clothes was a big differentiating factor from Peach, the rest of the changes made her look more similar to Peach in other respects. The skin tone, the changes to her dress and her crown undermine the efforts they have taken to make her look more different. The Wii games, and Mario Kart 8 for the Wii U have kept this design so far and it seems to have stuck.
Her tomboyish personality has also been greatly solidified in the Gamecube era past the Super Smash Bros. Melee breaking point and it has continued from the Wii onward, which shows in the way she demonstrates her frustration whenever she loses, and the development of an increasingly sassy personality. This has been reflected in her use of a Dixie accent, valley girl speech or even ebonics at times.
Her good rapport with Peach seems to have continued throughout the series. In Mario Kart 8 for instances, one can spot a "Peach and Daisy's" storefront in one of the many courses. Mario also seems to have a continued positive relationship with her throughout the series, albeit it may be worth mentioning that Mario and her share no chemistry in Mario Superstar Baseball and its sequel. Perhaps this means that they are good friends but don't share enough chemistry to be lovers? Her relationship with Luigi seems even more evident with Daisy's Circuit in Mario Kart Wii, which clearly had conspicuously large statues of Daisy and Luigi as well as Baby Daisy and Baby Luigi dancing together. Since this is Daisy's domain, this is good evidence to assume that Luigi's feelings might be returned.
Conclusion:
I'm happy I could give some attention to a more obscure Nintendo character. I am personally more inclined to like her earlier aesthetic designs, but I do appreciate that she has more spunk than Peach. They clearly have different temperaments, and I do like the idea of Luigi having a princess of his own. However, she has not mostly appeared in multiplayer games and she has not had a chance to grow much as a character. Some look at Daisy and consider her to be a blank slate, and while I disagree, I cannot fault anyone from thinking of her that way.
Much of her is a mystery. Sarasaland has not been explored again since Super Mario Land, and she has yet to appear in a game with even minimal amounts of canonical narrative since her Game Boy days. Her lack of relevance to the main series is only slightly overshadowed by Waluigi's. In all of the years she has existed as a character, even a newly-introduced Rosalina has received more narrative attention and been given a spot in the latest Super Smash Bros. roster.
I do not believe that the issue is with the character herself, but rather that she has never had a chance to grow into a full-fledged character yet. It could be interesting to see Daisy and her kingdom appear in games involving Luigi. Perhaps a future entry in the Luigi's Mansion series, or a new Luigi-based platformer. One could says that she is a young lady I'd like to get to know better.
I would be remiss to not mention my most influential sources of information:
You can find items in chests like other Zelda titles.
Hyrule Warriors has caught my interest when it was initially
announced. I have always been a big fan of the Legend of Zelda series and I
have discovered the Samurai Warriors series fairly recently, which is pretty
well-made as a blend of strategy and 3D beat them up gameplay. The idea of
mixing Zelda and the Warriors series together has really made me curious, as we
would basically get an action-based strategy Zelda game.
The response to this collaboration has been very mixed,
ranging from excitement to flat out anger. Indeed, it appears that some fans
have instantly grown to hate this game; some admitting to never having even
played a warriors game in their entire life but hating it nonetheless. As a
very curious individual, I have wondered “why?”.
First case and point: The existence of Hyrule Warriors does
not prevent Zelda fans from getting the experience they want. Nintendo has
stated that this was not a main entry in the Zelda series. The flagship Zelda
for the Wii U is well under development and will be revealed at E3. Hyrule
Warriors is being made by Techmo Koei, and while Mr. Eiji Aonuma is in the role
of a supervisor, that mostly means that he is taking a fairly passive role, and
that he is mostly there to look at how the game has progressed while making sure
that it follows certain standards. He is neither a producer, nor a director.
Techmo Koei is doing most of the heavy-lifting. It is very unlikely that Hyrule
Warriors has contributed in slowing down the release of Zelda Wii U.
Impa, playable for the first time.
Second point: Hyrule Warriors can only “help” Nintendo in
their current software drought. There is very little room for misinterpretation
of the facts here: Hyrule Warriors is an exclusive Warriors game for the Wii U
with a heavy Zelda flair and influence. If anything, Wii U owners should
logically be happy about this. All this means is that they are getting an
exclusive Zelda-themed side game on top of getting an official Zelda title in
the future. While a strategy beat them up Zelda may not necessarily be for
everyone, it still adds to the software library, which is a positive.
Third point: In days where third parties have given up on
attempting to crack the Nintendo home console market, Techmo Koei is making a
conscious effort to market its games on those systems. Nintendo system owners have
been very vocal about the third party issue; calling out third party publishers
on making half-baked ports for Nintendo system, or giving Nintendo timed
exclusives only to release a better version of the game on another system a
month later. The distrust Nintendo consumers have of third parties is quite
understandable, and that frustration must no doubt contribute to their terrible
sales. When one thinks of Warner Bros. removing its Wii U DLC season pass for
their latest Batman game, forcing Nintendo to reimburse every single person who
bought it in the eshop, distrust runs rampant. However, when a company makes an
honest effort to provide a quality exclusive experience to Nintendo consumers,
it may be in our best interest to keep an open mind. After all, if Hyrule
Warriors succeeds and Nintendo gamers become interested in exploring other
entries in the Warriors series, this could very well secure Techmo Koei as a
long-term partner, add a bit of third party support for the platform.
Wizro, a vilain working for Shea. This sounds a lot like Wizrobe. He also looks a lot like a Poe. Perhaps Koei drew inspiration from these?
No one is advocating buying a game that does not spark your
interest. However, third parties will never support Nintendo systems if all we
do on Nintendo consoles is buy Nintendo games. It would most likely be to the
advantage of Nintendo console owners to sometimes explore games from other
companies; perhaps an Atlus RPG, or something made by PlatinumGames. Companies
go where the money is. If they can make a decent buck out of Nintendo systems,
they will develop for them.
Valga, an honourable vilain. Looks strangely like a human Volvagia. Heck, even the name is similar.
In conclusion, there does not seem to be any reason to take
offense of Hyrule Warriors that is grounded in logic. I for one am excited for
it. Techmo Koei has brought in team Ninja in order to make more compelling one
on one combat action against boss characters, while Koei will be focusing on
the large-scale combat aspect. It will also utilize a Zelda lock-on system,
dodging mechanics, various weapon choices, items, heart collecting, and more.
It seems to be a Warriors game that also wants to have that special iconic
Zelda touch. Knowing this, it seems clear that it will play sufficiently
differently from Dynasty or Samurai Warriors and develop its own identity.
Getting several of their teams on board also demonstrates that they are taking
this game seriously. This may not be a main series Zelda title, but it seems to
have much promise at being a new, unique experience.
I know they were talking about Link finding chests but... yeah... By the way, this is the witch Shea, main antagonist... perhaps until they reveal Ganondorf?
Hyrule Warriors is set to appear and be playable at E3 next
month. I have high hopes that a third party game will perform well on the Wii U.
With the slow release schedule, this game will be able to tide Wii U owners
over for a little while.
A comical, but amusingly accurate representation of dual-layered design in Smash Bros.
When observed at face value, Super Smash Bros. is most often
described as a party game. The general consumer sees it as an opportunity to
pick up their favourite Nintendo character and duke it out in a chaotic environment.
Random elements such as items and stage hazards contribute to making battles
unpredictable. Adding to that unpredictability is the possibility of 4 player
free for all matches, where pretty much anything can happen. It can cater to a
style of fun that I like to refer as “On the couch fun”. It is less engaging,
but it is very much a laid-back social experience. The game is not taken
seriously, but it is enjoyed as a nice distraction. The average new smasher
will generally get to know and experience this style of play first because this
is the game’s default setting.
However, a subset of players that was very passionate about
the game decided to take the gameplay a step further. One element of Super
Smash Bros. that many seem to forget to mention is competition. Even at its
default chaotic settings, matches end with a clear winner. Someone is standing
triumphantly in the foreground of the victory screen while the rest clap for
the winner in the background even at non-competitive levels; you still strive
to be victorious.
More competitively-oriented players, out of desire to have a
more definite clash of skill have decided to reduce the chaos in favour of a
more leveled playing field. Thanks to in-game options, they were able to adapt
the games to their needs and play without random interference from items and
match-changing stage-hazards.
Why reduce
randomness?:
It took a long time for the community to agree on what was
considered fair, and just for Melee alone, we even used to have debates on whether
items should be permitted in tournaments or not. We have chosen to remove their
use due to how they are randomly-generated on the playing field, and on how
polarizing of an effect they can have on a match. When a bob-omb is set to
appear right in front of your character while you are in the middle of an
attack, no amount of skill or probability-calculation can save you. It will
blow up on you, and you will gain a disadvantage, sometimes, a very major one.
While playing with items can be very fun, it has no place in a tournament
setting.
Random tripping, a mechanic that is infamous in both competitive and party play. This reduces Brawl's ability to be a legitimate a competitive game.
In terms of stage-selection, the current rulesets we use for
Smash in general has players begin on a “neutral stage”. These are a group of
stages that confer less polarizing advantages to specific characters. There are
several to choose from, and both playing parties go through a stage-striking
process. That allows one side to ban a stage that is to their disadvantage,
then the other side to do the same, and go back and forth until they reach a
commonly agreed-upon stage. It allows both players to get rid of stages that
they feel would put them at too much of a disadvantage, reaching an acceptable
middle ground between players. After the first match, the loser chooses the
next arena. In a set of 3, if Player A beats Player B, Player B chooses the
next stage. If Player B wins, then Player A chooses next. If Player A wins, he
won 2 out of three matches and is declared the victor.
This is balanced
because even if one player wins due to stage advantage, the other player can
retaliate with a stage advantage of his own.
Competitive smashers have chosen to reduce random
occurrences because when playing to figure out who is the best player around,
it would be a shame for the outcome of a close match to be influenced by
unforeseeable factors.
Why compete?
In my case, I started off as a party smasher. I played many
free for all matches with items on. I was very passionate about this series and
played it quite a bit. I eventually gained some degree of skill which made me
noticeably better than my friends at the time. This was merely a result of my
playing the game much more than they did and being more passionate about it
than they were. I reached a point where the gap in skill and interest between
my friends and I had become quite wide. I wanted to play more, but they wanted
to play other games as well, and that was quite understandable. They also did
not have the drive to improve at it, while I had figured out very basic things
like short-hopping and fast-falling, but I had never gone to smashboards, so
techniques like L-cancelling that would have allowed me to truly capitalize on
that knowledge were beyond my knowledge at that point.
Nevertheless, I wanted to keep playing it, and at some
point, I went to a Smash event at a convention and I learned how little I
actually knew about that game. I would see players move in innovative ways. I
asked someone there how he managed to move that way, and he explained
L-canceling to me. He then guided me to Smashboards and told me to start reading
up on advanced techniques guides; stressing on how it really helped him get
better. I listened to the young man’s advice and I was enlightened by just how
much deeper this game was. It had revitalized Super Smash Bros. for me.
When I thought that I had reached my challenge ceiling, I
was given an infinite source of new challenges and new play styles to clash
against. I was given an opportunity to meet people with similar interests and
get more mileage out of my favourite game of the time, until Project M replaced
it a decade later.
Love for the game:
Picture taken from a Super Smash Bros. Melee tournament.
Smashers all have different origin stories, but my story is
very typical. Competitive smashers often began to play the way they do because
they loved the game so much that they felt compelled to take it to the next
level. There is a strange misconception that competitive smashers take the game
seriously to the point of losing sight of the fun. However, it would be more
true to state that competitions are their means of keeping the fun alive.
Human beings avoid pain and seek pleasure. It’s a generally
accepted rule of science, and we share this trait with most of the animal
kingdom. When pain is not avoided, it is because the perceived reward is
greater. Competitive smashers are not miserable. They are having fun in their
own way. While it is completely legitimate to take a laid back approach to
playing Super Smash Bros., there is something to be said about the exhilarating
rush of a very close match between two evenly-matched players. Playing while
feeling that one mistake could cost you the game, and that you are always on
the ropes adds a level of excitement that one would never get from playing
Smash as a party game. The rush could be compared to a runner’s high.
While competitive combat is taxing both mentally and even
physically due to the heavy pressure game and high levels of concentration and
reflexes that this game demands at high levels, it is stimulating. People keep
coming back to tournaments because they have a lot of fun. Often, when they are
not playing bracket matches, tournament players will take that time to seek out
players they want to play with, or even seek out random players they don’t know
and play friendly matches together. Players who were eliminated will often stay
the entire time just to be spectators for the finals.
Competitive smashers seek out new challengers because each
human player has his or her own unique play style. Each match is a fresh new
puzzle to solve. Fighting one person’s Marth is completely different than
fighting another person’s Marth. For example, if you know a players and you
watch a video with just their gameplay, you should be able to tell if it is
them from the gameplay style alone. This ties to the next topic.
Expressing oneself:
Super Smash Bros. is unique, not only due to its platformer
influences, but also because it gives the players an incredibly extensive
amount of control on their character’s mobility. You can run, jump dodge,
shield, roll, wavedash, jump a second time, fall faster, short hop, dash dance,
DI (Directional influence), etc... This game lends itself incredibly well to
self-expression. A Smash character becomes an extension of yourself, and in
more responsive games like Melee and Project M, it truly feels as if your
character moves on command.
A really technical player can input around seven separate
commands in a second, which allows for incredibly elaborate combo setups.
However, some players are more mindgame-oriented, and use their mobility to
ensnare opponents into moving into their setups. Some are innovators who create
new ways to approach combat. Other players are naturals that play solely on
instinct. Some also have a mixture of some or all of these elements. The key
point here is that there is more than one way to play this game effectively.
Watching someone play and comparing that gameplay to their baseline level of play tells you a
lot about their psychology. One with enough knowledge can tell how confident
the other player is, their level of stress, how aggressive they are, their
reticence, if they are distracted, etc... mindgames players use these cues with
great efficiency.
Players will often claim some level of “ownership” to their
characters and identify with them. You often hear things like “My character”,
very often at events. Players often don’t notice, but their characters become
an extension of their self. “Roy main” is now part of my identity as a smasher.
Let us also not forget that many of us are also Nintendo fans and pick up characters based on the affection we have for them.
I would main this guy.
Intrinsic motivation:
Sometimes, the act of engaging in something can be its own
motivator. For instances, if you play a game and you are having fun, the fact
that it is fun is motivating by itself and it encourages you to engage in that
activity some more. Intrinsic motivation has much to do with continuous party
smashing, but when we bring it competitive smash, there are several aspects in
which we utilize this concept.
That guy was motivated to learn and thus learned more effectively.
The first aspect is the same as party smashers. Competitive smash
is engaging, and that is a good motivator by itself. However, the second reason
is most prominent in the competitive environment: Mastery. The process of improving
at a task can be a motivator on its own. For instances, just the concept of
learning a new technique, seeing it in action and realizing that you are a
better player because of that can be a great motivating force. It fosters a
great deal of pride in the individual who is sharpening his skills. When
competing, you also have a whole catalogue of other players to compare your
performance to. For instances, let us say that Player A is not as good as
Player B and he knows it. However, he meets Player B again later in a tournament and
barely manages to snatch victory away from him. Through the use of
comparison, Player A reasons that he has improved, and he is proud of his
achievement. This model would even work if Player A had narrowly lost to Player
B. While he did still lose, the match was much closer that time around and he
feels good about himself because he can see that he has improved. In a sense,
you could say that for these people, just playing the game and getting
progressively better over time is rewarding.
Community:
It is common knowledge that human beings have a need to
belong. Smashboards can be seen as a sort of hub where passionate Super Smash
Bros. players can discuss about that said passion. People also use that
communication platform to organize tournaments and other events such as smashfests.
These are our opportunities to meet these people that we have been talking to for a
while. However, it is also a good opportunity to meet people you’ve never even
spoken to directly. For instances, when I went to the latest Polybash, I met
Sprawlers, a very nice person who traveled all the way from Boston to participate
in the Project M tournament over here in Montreal. We hung out, played a few
Roy dittos and kept in touch. This happens to me all of the time. I meet individuals
that I would never have met otherwise and build connections with them.
Picture taken from my trip to Virginia with fellow Project M developers and playtesters.
The Smash community is special in that it is very open,
unusually so. As I walk around venues, I observe experienced smashers helping
newer contestants hone their skills. I see random people walk up to each other
and ask “Can I play with you?”, sit down, and have a good time. I’ve even seen
smashers support each others on a very deep, personal level. For many, this
community has served as a confidence booster, or even a second family. The
truth is that at events such as these, we are brought together by a common
trait: Our love for Super Smash Bros.
If you ever went to a convention, you know what I am talking
about. People are friendlier, more open for dialogue. It’s a festive
environment. For all of the serious thought that goes into playing this game
competitively, there is a clear celebration of this part of our identity going on. We
are smashers, and we are proud of it, together.
Challenge:
Human beings tend to be motivated with challenge, but that
challenge has to be moderately difficult and the player must believe in his
chances of success. The reason games like Dark Souls have achieved success is
because it understood that while a game can be challenging, it must always give
you the impression that you are progressing bit by bit. For instances, through
your repeated failures, you gather souls, which you can use to strengthen your
character. You also gain more knowledge of the terrain and enemies you
encounter, and thus you end up progressing farther each time until you succeed.
However, games that simply offer no real challenge or goal like Wii Music are
bound to fail.
Sun bros at the best.
The Player is not engaged because he or she knows that they don’t
have to provide any kind of effort. Games like Kirby’s Epic Yarn have a
clear goal, but they are mind-numbingly easy to achieve and provide sub-optimal challenge that keeps
you from achieving the level of engagement that a challenging game would. Then
again, a game that is punishing as opposed to challenging, like Battletoads makes
the player eventually lose their hopes of improving to a point where they can
see the possibility of some progress, and they will simply give up. For most games, difficulty
settings help alleviate some of those issues, but for fighting games, it can be
a hard issue to tackle. Traditional fighters often have an unusually high skill
floor to even play the game semi-effectively. Exceptions exist like Persona 4
Arena, which anyone first getting into traditional fighting games should try,
but as a general rule, it is very difficult to approach competitive fighters as
a newcomer. Only the most motivated will keep on playing.
Super Smash Bros. has a very low skill floor for party play.
It is easy to approach, and the basic commands are easy to understand. This
makes the transition between party to competitive gameplay much easier, as
simply having good mastery over the basics facilitates the learning of advanced
techniques. Furthermore, Super Smash Bros. has a high skill ceiling, meaning
that one can grow as a player for a very long time. One could argue that no one
has ever truly reached the peak of competitive Smash Bros yet. After all, Melee
keeps evolving even after more than a decade and Project M has just begun to
blossom into a new scene, waiting to be explored further. The key thing to
remember here is that with an infinite amount of possible growth, players have
incentives to continue improving further and further. The challenge level is
not static. Rather, the player has new and exciting challenges every time they
meet new players. They can also challenge themselves to improve. They will
never run out of challenges because they can infinitely learn and improve. Some
will grow faster than others, but it is the possibility of growth alone that
acts as the motivator to keep on playing.
Excellent Roy player and esteemed Project M co-worker
Sethlon has made this comment when we were discussing why he chose to play competitively:
“I've always had a competitive drive. I grew up playing
Tekken with my older brother, and I took smash fairly seriously from the get
go. I hadn't really tried to get into any truly competitive game at that point
in time, so it didn't really matter to me that Smash was "outside of the
norm" as far as competitive fighters go. Once I stumbled on to the combo
video Shined Blind and saw the technical stuff that you could do in the game,
all the different movement and combos and edgeguarding, I immediately knew that
I wanted to explore the game to its depths and be able to do that sort of
stuff.”
His inherent need for a compelling competitive experience
was very clear. He wanted to challenge himself simply because he enjoyed doing
so. The challenge motivates him, and being famous for his impressive Roy skills
demonstrates that winning was never his prime objective. After all, Roy was not
a very viable character in Melee. Nevertheless, he took him farther than many
even thought was possible. While he played to win, winning would lose all of
its significance if it was at the expense of fun.
Justifying the
dual nature of Smash Bros.
The right way to play
and accessible depth:
It's all about the glory.
When I discuss Super Smash Bros. with others who are less
competitively-inclined, I get mixed responses. I have individuals who deeply respect
my mediocre competitive skills, while others approach my gameplay style with
borderline vitriol. As a curious individual, I like to ask the reason for that
vitriol, and the response I hear most often is “You are not playing the game
right”, or “This is not how this game was meant to be played”. I’ve asked these
same people some time later how they felt about Zelda Ocarina of Time speedruns
using glitches, and they responded favourably, some stating that is was silly,
but really fun to do. I asked again about their feelings on competitive smash,
and they responded the same as they did months ago. This shocked me as both
speedruns and competitive smash use exploits to their ends. One could also
argue that one is not supposed to skip important flags in Ocarina of Time, and
thus, they are not playing it the way it was meant to be played. Why did they
consider it right for Zelda, but not for Smash Bros.? I pondered on that idea
for a while and expanded my line of questioning to other fighting games, and I
could never get the same response. Then, as I played The Legend of Zelda:
Skyward Sword and commented on IGN about my dislike of the motion controls
model, I was met with a similar kind of vitriol. Some comments alluded to the
idea that Nintendo knew best how we should enjoy their games and that my
opinion was “wrong” because it didn’t agree with Nintendo’s design sensibilities.
I’ve read comments on articles on Nintendo-centric websites as well as Miiverse
to verify my claims, and realized what was truly going on: There is a rampant “Nintendo
knows best” attitude among less critical Nintendo fans.
Just like how competitive smash has become a part of our
identity, being a Nintendo fan has become a part of some people’s identities.
Just like how we feel that we must defend what we do and enjoy when our
community is under attack, Nintendo’s less critical fans feel attacks to
Nintendo as personal attacks. The idea that Smashers might play the game
differently than what they believe to be the right way (default settings) to play Super Smash
Bros. feels almost like desecrating a masterpiece. This behaviour is toxic to
our community by nature, and one might feel the need to go to them and call
them fanboys, but aggressive defensiveness has never fixed problems.
There is also the issue of competition-hate. There is a
subset of vocal individuals that could be described as casual-elitists. They
are the opposing end of hardcore-elitist players, in a negative way. Their
unbridled hatred for competitive gaming has them making sweeping, often misinformed
statements about competitive communities. In the case of Super Smash Bros.,
they often rally under the chant “No items, Fox only, Final destination”. While
it is true that we have opted for a no items approach, the fact that we play on
a multitude of stages and use a wide selection of viable characters, especially
in Project M where the cast is extremely well-balanced, they managed to get two
out of three affirmations wrong. This behaviour misinforms third parties who
have never really paid attention to the scenes.
There is also the assumption that competitive smashers are
of the elitist kind that will look down on new or non-competitive players. The
truth is that while there are a few out there who may qualify as elitists, most
of us come from a party smashing origin. We understand why people are playing
it that way because we have done so before. In general, we are also very
welcoming of new players. When a new face comes in, we offer support and tips
whenever they ask for it. For instances, when Topher played as Pichu at Melee
singles at various events, he was approached by good players and told that he
was very good with this unviable character. They even told him
what they were able to anticipate in his gameplay so that he can use that
information to better himself. I have done this as well, telling a new player
at Polybash that he had great instincts, and then I explained to him that I was
using a technique called crouch cancelling and that he could punish my attempt
by grabbing me instead. He was thankful for the tip and even though he had
lost, he lost with a smile. He told me he’d kick my butt next time and I told
him to bring it on. We enjoy sharing our passion with as many people as
possible.
Casual elitism is misinformed and basically engages in the
very behaviour that it condemns. It accuses competitive gamers of attempting
to force a gameplay style, while attempting to force their own
gameplay style on the competitive gamers. One could say that this is very hypocritical, but I
think that misinformation has a lot more to do with this. I firmly believe that
people’s minds can change, and that they can grow to better understand and respect
differences in taste.
Farfromsubtle, a fairly popular Let’s play channel has shown
that this is a possibility. Fraser Agar, the host of Video Games Awesome has
made many erroneous statements about the nature of competitive Super Smash
Bros., but after reading his comments section, and actually choosing to get informed on
the topic through watching the well-made Smash Bros documentary and listening
to what the scene had to say, he made a response video where he demonstrated
that he grew to understand our community and respect it. He did not become a
competitive smasher, but he understands how important this is for us, and has
shown an openness that I believe deserves to be mentioned and respected.
Persecution of the smashers
His statements were not meant to be mean-spirited; those were the words of someone who was not following the scene closely and had heard it being described by individuals who did not know what they were talking about. The fact that he was willing to go through a nine parts documentary shows that there are people who will listen and actually try to understand when given the chance to do so.
Deep but approachable:
The most important feature of Super Smash Bros. is how it is
a deep but approachable game. Many game designers fail to grasp the importance
of that duality. They at times either make games that require high levels of involvement
and mastery to play, or they make games that require no involvement and mastery
to learn. Games get branded as hardcore or casual, black and white.
However,
when I try to explain the concept of approachable games that also have a lot of
depth, my mind keeps going back to Super Smash Bros. Melee. This game’s basic
mechanics are easy to learn. One can enjoy the game without learning about the
intricacies of advanced techniques. However, if one is so inclined, he or she
can choose to learn advanced gameplay mechanics but does not need to do that
to play it. One could say that this game is truly a game for “everyone”.
Players get to choose how they want to experience the game. They get to choose
if they want a social couch play experience, or if they want a competitive high
octane challenge. Sometimes, players will play a mixture of both, using
advanced techniques but adding in the random elements. At other times, people
will play both, experiencing all facets of Super Smash Bros.
As a member of the Project M development team, I coined the
sentence: “There is no right way to play a game, only a way that is right for
you” during an interview for Nintendo Force magazine. I’ve seen other members
of our team use it, so I believe that we generally agree on that. Gamers have
different needs, are looking for different levels of engagement, have different
tastes, etc... If one really means to create a game that as many people as
possible can enjoy, they must reject black and white interpretations of game
design and see video games for what they truly are: interactive experiences. A
player’s perception and subjective experience contributes to the general
experience of a game. If you simply watch let’s play videos, you will quickly realize that
players put emphasis and pay attention to different elements of the game than
you would. In fact, playing through one game several times has often allowed me
pay attention to other things, allowing me to notice details and easter eggs
that I had missed in a previous play session. For example, the Youtube channel Game theory has made
a very compelling argument about the theme of The Legend of Zelda: Majora’s
Mask, which forever changed my interpretation of the game’s narrative. It gave
me a new perspective, and it made experiencing the game again a very fresh
experience.
The article in question. I own a print copy!
Tying accessible depth
to player control:
In terms of gameplay, games like Fire Emblem Awakening have
understood the concept of accessible depth. It gave players different
difficulty settings to choose from, but it also even allowed players to choose
whether perma-death should be left on or be disabled. It lowered the bar of
entry into the Fire Emblem series, but removed none of the features that those
looking for a more difficult challenge desired. That is good game design that
takes into account different player needs.
Knights in the Nightmare however is a game that failed to
understand this concept. It is a DS RPG with an extremely steep learning curve.
Those who have had the patience to sit through an hour of tutorials and study the
very complicated game mechanics have found it very fun and engaging. However,
most gamers simply do not wish to spend hours learning how to play a game, and
spend additional hours revisiting that said tutorial in order because so much information
was thrown at their face and they had forgotten earlier mechanics. In that
case, the game was deep, but not very accessible.
On the other end of the spectrum, Wii Music is fairly easy
to play. It’s a waggle game that has no inherent goal. Anyone can jump in and
play. However, it is devoid of depth as there is really not much to it. You
waggle to make noise and there is no goal in sight; not even a high score to
beat. One might want to argue "but Minecraft has no goals!", which is true. However, it allowed the player to create their own goals, which ties into the idea of player influence, which we will explore further down the article. Both extremes of the spectrum limit the reach your game can have. They
are locked into very specific categories of players; those that want a strictly
deep experience and those that want a strictly accessible game.
Whenever a game combines both of these elements, they can
grasp at a variety of fanbases, and even capture those in between. The player
gets to decide what type of gameplay appeals to them most and thus everybody
gets what they want.
Competitive Smashing is part of that interactive nature of
video games. Players have taken a game that they loved, and they created a new
way to play it. This happened with Street Fighter, where players
discovered combos in a game that was not designed around them. The difference
here is that Capcom embraced that feature whereas Nintendo tried to stifle its
competitive scene. Instead of protecting that perfect balanced between party and competitive
play, they decided to excise a portion of their fan base, which is rather
unfortunate.
Rather than letting players choose how to play their game,
they decided to try and dictate how players ought to play their games, control
the experience. They did so at the expense of everyone. The infamous random
tripping mechanic in Super Smash Bros. Brawl was a mechanic that had the sole
purpose of discouraging dash-dancing. Players assume that this was the intent
as every previously-established advanced technique was carefully removed from
the game or reduced in effectiveness. Static air dodging was added to prevent
wavedashing, L-canceling had been completely removed, Directional influence was
changed to make escaping combos much easier, and the general feel of the game
was much slower and clunkier. There was a deliberate attempt at removing all
traces of competitive gameplay. It was a difficult pill to swallow within the
competitively Smash community, and it has made them feel unloved by the very company that
they supported.
The fact is that competitive players have never demanded a
fully competitive game. They have however demanded a competitive-friendly game.
They wish for the option to play a high speed, technical game, whilst keeping
the party game elements alive and well-tended to. Competitive gamers enjoy the
fact that this game is accessible. After all, this is part of the reason why
the scene has grown to what it is today.
Conclusion:
I would like to end this by stressing that no matter how we
play Smash, we are all smashers. While we may all enjoy this game differently,
the important point is not how we enjoy the game, but that we are in fact
enjoying it. Smash fans would have much more to gain by supporting each other
as opposed to antagonizing each other. Working together for a game that is more
fun for everyone feels like a more optimal option than striving to hurt the
other party’s enjoyment of the game. I believe in a Smash Bros. for everyone. I
have played Project M with Melee players, Smash 64 players, Brawl players,
exclusively Project M players, non-smash players, etc... I have played it in
both competitive and party environments, and have been amused through it all.
Project M has taught me a lot about game design, but also
about keeping an open mind. It taught me that one does not need to sacrifice
depth for accessibility or the other around. The balance is difficult to
achieve, but it has already been done. Player choice is essential for a game’s
reach to cross several fan bases at once, and that even translates into
character design. Some players prefer fast fallers, while others prefer floaty
characters. Some players like speed, while others prefer power-oriented
characters. Some like to rush aggressively, while some are more defensive.
Player choice should be prevalent in all spheres of gameplay design. While I am
not advocating for a sandbox smash game, I strongly believe that players ought
to be able to play the game in the way they feel is best for them.
Now since we have mentioned Fire Emblem Awakening, let us end of a lighter note:
.
