Super Smash Bros (Ultimate?)

[CatGoddess]

So, I've been playing a fair amount of Smash what with the new game out (on other people's Switches, though; I don't own one). I decided to see if there was any intersection between mbti type and playstyle/main, and, sure enough, a guy on the smashboards made a system and chart.

E (close combat) vs. I (projectiles/spacing)
N (reads/timing) vs. S (reaction/repetition)
F (defensive) vs. T (aggressive)
J (specialization) vs. P (adaptability)
I picked the types based on minimal watching of tournament matches, so they may not be 100% accurate. If you think there may be a character who is placed incorrectly, please comment below!
I also divided them into categories by the middle two letters, as is often done in MBTI.
NF (cyan): Patience
NT (yellow): Prediction
SF (green): Defense
ST (red): Aggression
Without further ado, here is the list.

So, for any Smash players here, what do you think? Do your main/type line up according to the chart's predictions? Does anyone want to try figuring out the playstyle types of the new fighters released in Ultimate?

As for myself, I main Marth and am INTJ; I found the system works pretty well for me, as I like his spacing, aggressive playstyle, rewards for good timing over button-mash combos, and defined role as a swordfighter (don't want to be constantly switching between projectiles and melee and whatnot).

I also wholeheartedly second MarioManTAW's categorization of Marth and Lucina as different types; yes, they're "clones" and the only big stat differences in Marth are his higher range and tipper, but I think that creates a big difference in how they're played. Lucina can be more effective at closer ranges and is in less danger from getting rushed down, but Marth has better spacing, rewards strategic hits/timing (because of the tipper), and encourages carefully planned attacks rather than consistent damage (because of his low % KO potential).

Note: these are the predicted types of the players, derived from only the fighter playstyles. They don't necessarily line up with the types of the characters; in fact I know some of them don't (Lucina and Marth are obviously the same in that aspect, just as one example).

Note 2: Sorry, the title might be misleading. I still primarily play SSB4 because I own a WiiU, and the chart is for that version, too. I just threw in the Ultimate part because it's all the rage right now. Also, for the record, I've mained Marth in SSB4, so I'm not playing him just because he's considered "broken" in Ultimate.

 

[Cognisant]

I like playing Link and Zelda, imo Link is OP because he's relatively quick, he's small, has long reach with his sword and can attack from afar using his bow/bombs and all his attacks do a decent amount of damage, if you're in a sudden death round with a Link main you're pretty much screwed.

Zelda has Din's Fire, with her I love to just stand back from the fray lobbing fireballs (how is she an extrovert character?) teleporting away whenever someone comes for me and only rushing in to finish people off or to get an item, also using Din's Fire to blast away an item someone else was going for, she's my trolling character.

Palutena is a less optimized Zelda, Pit is loosely equivalent to Link and it's always a fun fight between the two.

Note 2: Sorry, the title might be misleading. I still primarily play SSB4 because I own a WiiU, and the chart is for that version, too. I just threw in the Ultimate part because it's all the rage right now. Also, for the record, I've mained Marth in SSB4, so I'm not playing him just because he's considered "broken" in Ultimate.

What's the difference between SSB4 and Ultimate?
I prefer the GameCube and original versions, over time they've added so many powerful/explosive items and the levels have so many deathtraps that people more often end up killing themselves or the fight turns into "who has the better item".

Oh look Fox just picked up and used half a dozen pokeballs, oh well GG everyone.

 

[Niclmaki]

What's the difference between SSB4 and Ultimate?
I prefer the GameCube and original versions, over time they've added so many powerful/explosive items and the levels have so many deathtraps that people more often end up killing themselves or the fight turns into "who has the better item".

Oh look Fox just picked up and used half a dozen pokeballs, oh well GG everyone.

Ultimate has a different physics system, and the game is overall faster.

You can call me one of the “boring/serious” players in that I turn all item spawning off and just play on battlefield and final destonation style maps. There is still a huge amount of content via matchups alone that the game is still very fun for me that way.

With that list; Little Mac was my main with Megaman as my secondary in SSB4.

In Ultimate, I’ve mostly given up on Little Mac (feels much weaker than he did in 4) and really only focus on Megaman. I haven’t really settled on a secondary yet. There are so many different characters to try and feel out.

 

[Cognisant]

You can call me one of the “boring/serious” players in that I turn all item spawning off and just play on battlefield and final destonation style maps. There is still a huge amount of content via matchups alone that the game is still very fun for me that way.

I think Nintendo has this thing about making their competitive games more random so people from different age groups and skill levels can play together, like with the obnoxious amount of "rubber banding" in the more recent Mario Kart games. Personally whether I'm winning or losing I just don't enjoy it, when I'm fighting someone and they get taken out by the environment I don't feel like I've won I feel cheated and doubly cheated when the unlucky one is me.

 

[Niclmaki]

@Cognisant yeah, you hit the nail on the head.

If you’ve ever watched Extra Credits on youtube they expand on your ideas there greatly. Specifically their “Balancing for Skill” and “Blue Shell” videos.

Essentially, it’s not too fun for MOST people if the more skilled player wins EVERY time. You might as well be playing chess in that case. And it is not much fun if the game is decided just by a dice throw, you get no pride in it.

Nintendo typically leans heavily towards the dice throw end in their multiplayer games (smash, kart, party). Likely because it is usually a kid vs adult.

The sweet spot is where you can have the winning player feel like they won from skill, but a loss can be blamed on bad luck.

 

[CatGoddess]

The sweet spot is where you can have the winning player feel like they won from skill, but a loss can be blamed on bad luck.

XD. Yeah, the items do make things more random, and I don't think you're odd for turning them off... Actually, the people I hang out with after school all casually play Smash and items are always off (because it's how they do it in competitive games, and it makes things more skill-based obviously).

I do like playing on different maps, though (we set the selector on "random"), because if you play a fair amount you learn how your character might be strong/weak on certain levels and how to maximize/minimize those factors. For instance, Marth is really good at driving people off the screen with his spacing/side b/jab/tipper schtick, so I can try to force the other person between me and the screen edge on stages like Wii Fit, Bridge of Eldin, and Coliseum. On the other hand, levels where you can get stuck under the ground when you fall off aren't as great for him because his up-b is entirely vertical, so you have to be more careful and probably can't edge-guard as effectively.

And then there's the "fun" component, of course; the maps are (generally) well put together, they come from games I like, and the variety is enjoyable. I don't think having different maps detracts that much from the skill component of the game, whereas some items can literally oneshot you.

What's the difference between SSB4 and Ultimate?
I prefer the GameCube and original versions, over time they've added so many powerful/explosive items and the levels have so many deathtraps that people more often end up killing themselves or the fight turns into "who has the better item".

Well, for one thing, they've added a lot of characters to the roster, some of them being old ones whom they didn't put in SSB4 (Ice Climbers, Pichu), and others being entirely new (Piranha Plant, Inkling). They made overall changes to everyone - directional air dodging, smash attacks out of dashes, less landing lag, etc. And some individual fighters got reworks (can't list them off the top of my head). So, overall, Nicklmaki is right; the pace is faster.

I'm young (sorry if that makes you feel old :P) and my childhood was fairly isolated, so I was only playing solo games pretty much up until SSB4 came out. I mained Lucina for a while, but decided to try Marth and realized that I like him 10x more. Marth is more powerful in Ultimate, though, because of the easier aerials due to lower landing lag (he has very good aerials) and faster attacks while dashing (he's already very fast and relies on attacks out of dash).

I've heard it said that he's more like melee Marth now, but I can't speak for the accuracy of that claim since I've never played it.

Zelda has Din's Fire, with her I love to just stand back from the fray lobbing fireballs (how is she an extrovert character?) teleporting away whenever someone comes for me and only rushing in to finish people off or to get an item, also using Din's Fire to blast away an item someone else was going for, she's my trolling character.

I don't know how's she's changed in various versions, but from what I've seen of her online and while playing with other people, she's typically used in closer combat. Din's Fire is frequently used as part of a combo where she... stomps (?) on the opponent while firing them into the ground. And Nayru's love is used for damage at close range.


As for the most skilled player always winning... Isn't that how it's supposed to work? Personally I don't understand playing "just to have fun" because, for me, the fun part is trying to win (otherwise there's no tension/competition). That doesn't mean I get pissy if I lose, but a game where both players are trying their hardest is a "good game" imo. There are definitely people I play with who always beat me, but I put up a good fight, they don't rub their victories in my face, and it's all fine.

I suppose it is different with little kids, though, who might get seriously upset at losing all the time. When I've played with my (very young) sister I've just gone easier on her in 1v1 and mostly put it on team battle vs AI.

 

[Ex-User (14663)]

@Cognisant yeah, you hit the nail on the head.

If you’ve ever watched Extra Credits on youtube they expand on your ideas there greatly. Specifically their “Balancing for Skill” and “Blue Shell” videos.

Essentially, it’s not too fun for MOST people if the more skilled player wins EVERY time. You might as well be playing chess in that case. And it is not much fun if the game is decided just by a dice throw, you get no pride in it.

Nintendo typically leans heavily towards the dice throw end in their multiplayer games (smash, kart, party). Likely because it is usually a kid vs adult.

The sweet spot is where you can have the winning player feel like they won from skill, but a loss can be blamed on bad luck.

I noticed that when I tried mariokart. It's like playing goddamn roulette.

Reminded of poker – you can only play the game statistically, and the difference between the skilled and unskilled can remain invisible for many games.

 

[Hadoblado]

Mariocart is skill based, but has more variance. Being good is about being able to hold onto your advantage most of the time. Obviously there's not much you can do about blue shells, but you're also less likely to be the target of all the other OP stuff that the last few places receive.

For instance, the person in first place is very rarely going to be hit with a bullet, because in order for that to happen the pack needs to be tightly clustered. In first place, other than blue shells, you're mostly contending with weak items picked up by the front of the pack, most of which can be countered by dragging a shell or banana behind you.

 

[CatGoddess]

I guess the people (high school kids) I play Mario Kart with must really, really suck, then; I virtually always win with that group.

They probably invest their time into Smash instead because it's the game for Real Men (tm). I don't play Mario Kart much these days, but I logged a fair number of hours into it (playing against bots) when I was in elementary school. And, yes, I suppose this is a bit unfair, but if you want to consistently win it's not enough to play a good/better game (avoid running into most things); you have to play a perfect game (don't run into anything).

I can see why that would turn some people off; again, I don't really play the game so much nowadays because it's kind of... uninteractive after you really learn the maps. I really do think itemless Smash is fun, though. The CPUs are actually pretty challenging at the higher levels (8 and 9) so, even without a friend, you can engage in some pretty intense and fun fights.

I honestly expected more responses considering Smash Ultimate's enormous popularity right now, but I guess the demographic is somewhat younger than that of this forum.

 

[Hadoblado]

Smash is a fun game, I haven't played since brawl. I preferred no items, or at least, no items that turn the game all the way around. I used to main Mr. Game and Watch, but for casual brawls there was something about tilting people with DeDeDe's RNG that appealed.

TBH trying to meld smash and MBTI felt a little forced and I don't see the value in it.

 

[Cognisant]

 

[CatGoddess]

The chart the guy published is certainly not an authority on the matter, but I found it interesting that my main and I lined up with its predictions. So I wanted to see if that held more broadly, because it would be interesting if the differences in temperament that often result in different playstyles were quantifiable.

For instance, just looking at the ESTJ column, you have to be pretty aggressive (and perhaps confident/assertive as well) to play any of those fighters well. Does that necessarily indicate an mbti "T" classification? No, but perhaps it is related to some aspect of personality that you can put into words.

I'm not really endorsing the whole mbti typing of different playstyles; I'm mostly just interested in how a person's approach to Smash might (or might not) be reflective of how they approach life. Why? I don't know. I guess I meet a lot of different players, and I've noticed that the ones who pick certain fighters tend to have commonalities (most Fox/Falco players are playing to win; Rosalina & Luma and Olimar players tend to be pretty smart, probably because you have to be willing to multitask with the split characters; etc).

So I suppose I wasn't communicating very clearly; I'm not terribly concerned with the mbti typings. I just wanted to spur discussion.

@Cognisant Unfortunately, the reference was wasted on me.

EDIT: Besides, the more interesting part (imo) is the dichotomy of aggressive vs. defensive, spacing vs. close combat, etc., and figuring out which characters indicate which preferences (assuming the player is trying to win. Obviously if you're trying to troll or represent your favorite videogame fandom that's not going to apply)

 

[Niclmaki]

For me, Megaman and Little Mac were initially just newcomers I wanted to play. Before them I mostly just played Kirby.

I really liked the “steal powers from your enemies” gimmick. Megaman and Kirby both have that. I also like the perseverance you need for both (MM + LM) of their games. It is even shown in the trailers for them (they both get murdered in their trailers, but bounce back).

I also see the same thing with Fox/Falco players. Big “play to win” personalities.

I would add Cpt.Falcon to a list for people with big egos. My guess is, they just love the styling he can pull off and taunts lol. Ganondorf players seem pretty similar. Just more smug. I only know 2. But I also enjoy busting him out for some fun every now and then, and I’ll admit, I am quite smug lol.

 

[Ex-User (14663)]

When i play mariokart i always choose Toad because he seems have the lowest center of gravity and good aerodynamic properties due to the small body

 

[CatGoddess]

@Serac What version...? I think in Mario Kart 7 and 8, at least, character stats are the same across categories (i.e. all the small drivers are the same). But I prefer the small peeps because they seem more agile and can weave between barriers. Within that category, I play dry bones because he makes great rattly sounds.

...

Seriously. I don't know why, but the sounds are weirdly satisfying.

I think I might be odd in that I severely onetrick in pretty much everything I do - only Marth and Marth only in Smash, dry bones on standard bike in Mario Kart... even in MOBAs like League of Legends I basically just play one champion/role.