Smash asks players to figure out a solution in a given scenario not through memorization of certain button combinations and character placement, but rather through intuition, where even a newbie can decide what is the best general solution for either defensive or offensive plays. Of course, there is reward for those who memorize general methods that give benefits with little to no risk, hence why the Smash community has formed a general Meta, such as how Fox’s upthrow to up-air is a reliable tool or how Marth can do an easy zero to death on spacies with a setup that involves chaingrabs and constant juggling. I do think however there is a problem with the creation of the Meta: the mindset of competitive players.

I still consider myself being new to this scene despite how often I look at what happens and the many streams that feature tournaments. I have yet to go to a tourney and mainly look at netplay as a source for getting better at Melee and PM due to how it holds competitive playstyles. Interestingly, I have received many different thoughts on my playstyle. Some have stated that I do very odd things that somehow work, or how I approach characters in interesting ways. Yet, the most common and discouraging remark I have heard is that I am too different, not playing correctly. These kind of remarks never made any sense to me, especially when it came to the game of Smash. How is it that my playstyle is deemed incorrect when the game encourages creativity?

While thinking about this, I realized that a lot of the players I fought played in very similar playstyles when compared to each other. There were a few oddities, yes, but each player had a common way of linking attacks. The only thing that was generally different was their placement of these combos. I think that due to this Meta and focus on optimization, the scene passively discourages any attempts of discovery or creativity. As an example, I do moves that are not common or may consider to be as “janky” or “gimmicky.” My main, an aggressive spacing Marth, commonly uses specials as a way to set up situations in my favor or to break flow. One common thing I would do is counter while recovering, where I grab ledge, read the person expecting me to waveland back on stage (thus prompting a jab or other attack), and then counter. It is an easy way of setting back to the neutral from ledge should I desire it. Another thing I would do is use side b as a risk-all gamble if I think I have a hard read or to control minor placement of hitboxes when in control of pressure. I mainly do this as a way to increase the probability of continuing a progression to a setup that I want, be it to keep on platforms from the middle of the stage or to knock back opponents. In both of these examples, a few responded,

“I shouldn’t play with you. Your janky side-b is ruining my skill.”
“Nobody does that.”
“Could you please play like a normal human being?”

I personally think that these responses are just due to people being salty at a style they are not comfortable fighting against, but it bothers me how this excuse frequently pops up. It doesn’t show an acceptance that maybe I have lost due to not adapting, but rather, it shows disregard in the potentiality of players that may perhaps play vastly different from the norm. I like to compare it to how certain characters in Melee were deemed “nonviable” for a while but quickly climbed up the tier list due to players proving their uses. It is only easier though for people to ignore other playstyles when top players have basically written books worth of knowledge for the top characters and what is the best case strategy for them, as well as the playstyles relating to those strategies.

Perhaps one more reason for this common mindset is due to the discrepancies between those who play “for the love of the game” and those who play “for the glory of the competition.” Those that play stylish and bold don’t really care about the end goal, as nice as it is to get it. Rather, they care about being visually amazing and showing the audience, “Look at this crazy shit I’m about to do. It’s risky as hell and dumb, but I am going to do it, and if it works, I am SO going to be far ahead.” For those that want to be considered the best, however, play predictable and logical styles that will increase their probability for success. Usually, the flashy people do not become top five in tournament rankings; however, there is one specific top player that I would like to point out that not only styles, he also wins.

Mang0

Mang0, as everyone in the Smash community knows, is one of the best players in the world and one of the five gods at Smash. He is incredible simply because of how his mindset is like for all kinds of things. If he thinks that people don’t expect something to work or if a character can’t place first in a tourney, he will prove to them that it can happen. He not only does optimal things to secure his placing, he also will be creative for situations that allow him to. An example of this is in his Falco play. Granted, Falco seems to be one of the easier characters to be creative simply because of how much of a glass cannon he can be, but Mang0 does flashy, smart decisions with him, such as how he used his shine as a way to not only slow his descent while recovering, but also prevent a Sheik from swooping in to get an easy gimp, recovering back onto Randall, or how he used a down-smash that sent a Fox upward instead of out and instantly improvised the situation. It amazes me whenever these golden moments happen and put people in a state of awe.

So, what makes it okay for people to not say anything bad about Mang0’s style? It’s because he wins. That is the underlying problem. If you can’t win, people will disregard anything you do that is abnormal. I seem to run into this problem mostly in Melee, probably because of how old the Melee community is. For Project M though, I cannot remember an instance of someone disregarding my playstyle. In fact, I consider Project M as the best Smash game for players that want to do things their way and discover things for themselves, mainly because of the differences in frame data and lag when doing certain moves that would normally be even more risky. I feel like I am able to do what I want in Project M rather than in Melee.

In conclusion, those that disregard “janky playstyles” need to remember that this series is not like other fighters. It is simplistic by nature, and due to this simplicity, the game has depth in remarkable ways that can be approached from many angles. The game allows people to work with what they have learned and what they can do in order to achieve success.  I would like to end with the remark by Mang0 on why he hates Final Destination, and how it serves as a basis for his way of thinking about the game itself.

"It's the weenie level!"

TL;DR: There are playstyles that people disregard due to it not matching Meta or being “incorrect” and people only state this due to salt.