Super Smash Brothers Melee is a better title than Super Smash Brothers Brawl
I say that Melee is a significantly better game than it's predecessor, Brawl, due in part to the fact that Melee is a faster paced game, and allows the player to have far more control over the way their character acts, thus, making the game more enjoyable as you have to play the game, rather than the game play itself for you.
The reason why I state that the game is a faster pace is because of certain techniques like l-cancelling, performed by pushing your shield button while performing an aerial move before you land. This allows you to cut the amount of time in takes your character to stand up and be ready to strike again by half. The mechanic was, unfortunately, cut from Brawl.
Yet another reason that Melee is a faster pace is due to the fact that the characters fall faster in Melee than in Brawl. This means that combos are easier, and it's harder to knock opponents off the stage, making fights drag on and take longer.
To summarize, I begin this debate by stating that Melee is far superior to Brawl. Over the course of this debate, I plan to cement that.
I thank Con for his acceptance, and am ready to show that Super Smash Bros. Melee is, in fact, a better title than Super Smash Bros. Brawl.
For this debate, Super Smash Bros. Melee can be shortened to SSBM, or simply, Melee. On the flip side of that, Super Smash Bros. Brawl may be shortened to SSBB, or simply, Brawl.
Now, that we have that out of the way, let's begin the debate.
Before we begin to debate this topic, we must first grasp what the word "better" is defined as. For the purpose of this debate, we will define better as "
#1: Brawl contains more quantity than what Melee offers
Super Smash Bros. Brawl has much more content than Melee, from the game modes to the stages, to even the characters. As everybody can agree on, the original Smash Bros. is the absolute worst in the franchise because it lacked so much content. While it is acceptable to consider that as an excuse since Nintendo developed it on a low budget, the point is that Melee is similar to the original when compared to Brawl since it does not offer as much content; therefore, the quality and the quantity is inferior to that of Brawl. In Melee, players could only choose from 26 characters (if Sheik is counted as one), around 30 stages, roughly 20 game modes (manual considers all the Special-Melees to be sub game-modes), and over 200 trophies. In Brawl, there are 40 characters (if Zero Suit Samus, Sheik, and the Pokemon Trainer's three pokemon are counted as separate characters); over 40 new stages and over 10 old stages as well as infinite amount of custom stages; over 500 trophies and 300 songs; and roughly 30 game modes. With more content, you have more to do which increases replayability value which in turn is worth buying the game as opposed to buying a game and regretting afterwards for lacking so much content.
#2: Brawl improves upon (almost) everything that Melee offered
Everything that was in Melee, from the gameplay to the graphics, has been recreated and improved upon to bring a new experience to fans while still staying fresh for newcomers. The graphics are literally the best on the Nintendo Wii and push the console to its absolute limits to show others what Nintendo is capable of. Brawl looks just as good as any good looking HD game on the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360, all the while running at a consistent 60 FPS. The music has also been improved as not only are there hundreds of songs to choose from, but there are multiple tracks for each stage and franchise, and the compositions have been remade and remastered to cover all genres and sound modern. The tracks are so good that they bring shame to all past and future remixes of the remixed songs composed in Brawl (except when Smash 4 came along...). All the game modes have been improved upon as well as new additions such as Boss Battle, Online, Custom Stage Builder, Sub-space Emissary, and so on. Older game modes such as Classic, Stadium, Special Melee (now called Special Brawl), and Event Match have been completely re-designed to stay true to the new content. While Melee did introduce many game modes seen in Brawl, Brawl was the one responsible for mastering and perfecting them to make those even better than before and helped inspire the formula of game modes in Smash 4 such as Smash Run, Online, Fighter Customization, and Stadium.
#3: Brawl contains exclusives that are not in Melee and influenced Smash 4
Starting with Melee and now with Brawl, Nintendo's poor decisions can sometimes get the better of them. Like when they decided to cut out many characters from Brawl, or attempted to make the online in Smash 4 still lack basic online communication features. However, as with all bad things, there are also good things. As they have accidentally created many exclusives as a result of these "decisions", it makes each game in the franchise unique and differentiate itself from the other titles. Similar to Melee, Brawl has many characters that were omitted from the roster in Smash 4: Ice Climbers, Pokemon Trainer, Squirtle, Ivysaur, Wolf, Lucas, and Solid-Snake - and all (but Lucas) will be badly missed. Brawl also has many unique game modes such as Subspace Emissary, Boss Battle, Rotational, Spectator, and others which will also be missed but their elements have been incorporated into other game modes in Smash 4 such as Smash Run that proves that such omitted game modes were of excellent quality despite being eliminated. Though this may be more relevant to my second argument, Brawl also has many concepts that were first introduced that were carried over to Smash 4 and made it better if it were not for this game's legacy - final smashes, online, third-party characters, assist trophies, customization, and also interactive/climate/time changing stages.
With my arguments being complete, let us begin the rebuttals in the next round. As promised, I will not refute opponent's arguments from round one so opponent must do the same to me. I will begin to add in more arguments as well as providing sources to refute your arguments and rebuttals in the upcoming rounds. So if opponent criticizes me for lacking certain arguments, I will warn voters in advance that such argument will be included in the rebuttals to further make them effective than without.
To begin, I would like to point out that Con is incorrect in saying that he and I mutually agreed to the rules he states. Con knowingly accepted this debate knowing full well that no rules had been set out regarding format. If had any inquires, nothing was stopping him from messaging me or asking for clarifacations in the comments. However, he did neither of these things, and thus, upon accepting, has forfeited his right to adjust the rules mid-debate. I would, however, like to propse that neither I nor Con may make any new arguments in the final round, to prevent uncontested arguments.
1. Brawl contains more quantity than what Melee offers.
The saying, "It's not quantity that matters, it's quality.", is very applicable here. Reason being is due to the fact that Con gives many truthful facts that there is, indeed, more characters, game modes, and overall things to do. However, once all of these activities run out, and they will, what else will remain? The fighting itself. As I showed from my first source in R2, you will see the poll of Melee and Brawl. If you look, you will see that Melee has 12 more votes, meaning that more people think Melee is the better game. Why? Quality, not quantity. In fact, look at the competitive SSBM community today. It's still very much alive and kicking since the game's release in 2001, which was 14 years ago. Meanwhile, while there WAS a competitive scene for Brawl, it was effectively erased within a year. Why? I'll direct attention back to the entirety of my first point in R2, in which I explain why Melee is overall, more enjoyable than Brawl. Also, even though Smash 64 is NOT a relevant part of this debate, I'd like to add that Smash 64's competitive scene is ALSO still alive and kicking, and that's been since 1999, 16 years. Where Brawl's scene died after one year. And finally, in this area, yes, Con is right. The game is rich with items and trophies and stickers. In fact, you could say that there is far to much content all together, making it extremely tedious to collect every, single, item. ESPICIALLY considering how you can collect more than one of a specific item.
2: Brawl improves upon (almost) everything that Melee offered.
Absolutely not. In fact, according to a game review from GameFAQ, Brawl is WORSE in every respect, including Subspace Emissary, Classic, event mode, and normal battle mode are worse. Classic mode is worse due to the fact that, in Melee, the order of characters you fought was random. A quote from this review, even goes in depth with this. "In Melee, Classic was almost always random with enemy choice. Brawl, despite ten more characters, has a surprising amount of predictability. You'll always fight Zelda characters first. You'll usually fight a giant Yoshi second. And so on and so forth". This review also says the same of all-star mode, saying that, in Melee, All-Star mode was random, and would have you fight anything from 1v1s to 1v3, with the end having you fight 25 of Game and Watch . He states that with Brawl, though, that is it predictable, ends with only a 1v1, and at most has you do a 1v2. Thirdly, this article also talks about Subspace Emissary and Multiplayer seperatly. As it is so long, I will shorten it to the best of my ability. The story, the reviewer claims, is Nintendo attempts at fan service for every character in the game, all at the same time. At the same time, the reviewer says that Sakurai himself posted on his Smash Dojo site and called the Subspace Emissary's story, "incomplete drivel", it was apparently bad enough to the point where Sakurai had to explain parts of the story himself . The reviewer goes on to say that playing the the Subspace Emissary itself is extremely tedious, calling it a door-hunt. On to the multipler aspect. First, to make the game easier on new players, the game has a ridiculous emphasis on defensive play, and hitstun, which is what happens when you are hit by a move an unable to react, is COMPLETELY removed, meaning that you can always counter, and that there are very few combos that are worth doing, and considering the speed of the game, the low falling speed and ability to dodge any attack, combined with the over emphasis on defensive makes the game incredibly slow.
3. Brawl contains exclusives that are not in Melee and influenced Smash 4.
First of all, I would warn Con against using other games for his arguments, as they do not pertain to the topic at hand, and relying on something that is irrelevant could be seen as sidetracking by the judges. Because of this, I do not feel the need to say anything relating to Smash 4. As I have stated previously, yes, Brawl does have many more options playability wise than Melee. However, as I have ALSO said, once all of these modes are completed, and you have finished everything in the game, what else is there? For this, I refer back to point one, where I said that, once all of the extras were beaten, you would only have the standard fighting mode, and for Brawl, this is extremely lack luster. And on Con's point about things added in to Brawl, like Final Smashes. I would like to add that Online for Brawl, having experienced it myself, is NOTURIOUSLY bad, taking up to five minutes to connect to a fight, and then experiencing extreme lag during the fight. Also, the third party characters that Con mentions are only there because multiple fans of the series asked Nintendo, and they complied. As stated, I have left many of the Smash 4 arguments untouched, as Smash 4 is NOT the topic we are debating, and I would like to, again, remind Con of that.
New Arguments/Building up of Previous Ones.
1. Technical... Techniques.
Let's talk about these. These techniques are things I brought up in Round 2, e.g. wavedashing, l-cancelling, etc. Many people will say that these techniques are accidental glitches of the game. This is, in fact, true. However, though they are accidental, they are in the game, whether people like it or not. Therefore, it is not at all incorrect to include them in my debate, as they are a part of the game, no matter how you look at it. First, while I am building up my arguement, I will say why L-cancelling may be a glitch, but it did not begin in Melee. In fact, it started in Smash 64. If you read my source on l-cancelling from R2, it did, in fact, originate in Smash 64 as Z-Cancelling (Same Technique, Different Button) . Due to the insane success and competitive playing of Smash 64 upon it's release, it's nearly impossible for Nintendo to NOT know about L-Cancelling prior to releasing Melee.
I conclude my turn this round and pass it over to Con and wish him the best of luck.
1 - www.gamefaqs.com/wii/928518-super-smash-bros-brawl/reviews/review-124160
2 - http://www.ssbwiki.com...
http://en.wikipedia.org.... (could not find a better source - you did the same in the last round)
Opponent has stated that Melee is superior to Brawl simply because of the faster speed, heavier gravity, "hardcore" physics, and the "techniques" exclusive to it. Just because a game is different speed, gravity, and physics does not make one game superior over the other unless it is brought to the extreme. Speed may have been slowed down, but the FPS is still there and consistent as there is no lag or frame-rate issues; ironically, animations are much faster as Brawl was made in 2008 so that is expected from a newer game, as well as having much faster aerial attacks and evasion techniques (i.e., rolling, side-stepping, etc.) Heavier gravity is actually a downside as it makes characters heavier and harder to control in the air - while this does not negatively affect most characters, it does for the heavier ones such as Bowser and Ganondorf which were hard to control and almost helpless against light and flying characters. As explained before, these so-called techniques are in-fact unintended glitches that resulted from faulty programming - the main reason why they were taken out in Brawl and the fact that they gave an unfair advantage to certain players. They also wanted to emphasize more on the "weaker" moves, so that such gamers would ironically get better as they are forced to adapt to being handicapped.
Now he goes on to refute my arguments; now this is where I refute his rebuttals (or hers). You mention the infamous aphorism known as quality over quantity, but an aphorism that I have created over the years is, "It's not the quality nor the quantity - it's both. Why limit to yourself to only one of it when you can have it all?" Brawl not only offers everything what Melee offers, but also has much more than Melee and already improves upon its older game modes. While it can be argued that much of Brawl's new improvements are lackluster and underwhelming, like opponent said before, "It's the quality, not the quantity,"; only a small amount of game modes are actually low quality - Classic, All-Star, Event-Match, and Stadium - the rest are fine or better than before. I also like to point out that the review you used is not a credible source as (a) it is created by a random person on GameFAQS; (b) the staff of GameFAQS nor its partners (GameSpot and GiantBomb) created or approved the review as authentic; and (c) GameFAQS is not reliable as the staff never writes any articles, reviews, or related posts - they simply monitor and update the forums. The poll was also created by random people; while it is acceptable for polls to be answered by random people, it is not appropriate to be conducted by random people. Please find a poll conducted by the IGN staff to make me believe such information.Until a legitimate source is provided, all claims and evidence coming from that site will be forfeited and be penalized for false information.
As with replayability value, there is much to do after unlocking the content: playing with friends in multi-player. Super Smash Bros is known for its multi-player and that's where it thrives the most. While the fighting style is slower, lighter, and more casual, there is still much to do despite those flaws. Everything from the multi-player is brought back plus even more. Special Melee has been transformed to Special Brawl, which allows you to combine and customize all of the old Special Melee's into one single Special Brawl. There are countless combinations to choose from such as stamina mode with giant and invisible characters wearing flowers and slow speed, or tiny metal characters with bunny hoods and light gravity with stock and time limit. Brawl (called Melee in...Melee) and Tourney (called Tournament) are the same, while there is a new mode known as Rotational. It's similar to Tourney except all participants are human players and allows for at least 5 players or more, something that gamers always wanted especially those with many friends and family members. Smash 4 does have 8 player Smash, but that's a completely different debate for another time. Finally, there's the compatibility of many different controllers - Wii Remote, Nunchuk combo, Classic Controller/Pro, and the Nintendo Game-Cube Controller. Players can go back and forth with each different controller, plus the buttons are all customizable, which allows for endless combinations.
Oh, and did I mention that almost all single player game modes have co-op compatibility, as well as Project M for those that want the best of both worlds (the content of Brawl and fighting style of Melee)? Also, provide a source or at least the relevance of gaming tournaments because the audience and voters may or may not assume that it is relevant. You must assume the audience and voters know little of the topic for a successful debate (just a tip to help you in future debates). Opponent accuses me of using other games, yet that it was you are doing; therefore, you are a hypocrite and contradict what you preach. And as explained earlier, controller alternatives, multi-player (with actual human opponents), and co-op single player modes are the key for replayability value for post-content gameplay. As for online, opponent has successfully convinced me that it is bad, and indeed it is because Nintendo Wi-Fi Connection was bad to begin with. The only exception is if you are surrounded by others who play Brawl in your area and not playing regionally or internationally; in other words, only play locally for a good experience. But opponent has nonetheless convinced as it is a fact that it sucks. Since opponent states to avoid Smash 4, I will as well since I will certainly win if other games are involved, and I will not be a hypocrite from now on.
About your glitches, it is true they are glitches yet you admit yourself that L-cancelling was brought from Smash 64, so you contradict your vows yet again. Continuing to contradict yourself will allow others to use it against you (think of this as another one of my wise tips). Because of such an error you made, you are unauthorized by me and yourself (as you yourself promised to leave other games if it is not Melee or Brawl) to do that in the next rounds. As for other rebuttals to your own arguments from round 3, you can refer to it in the first paragraph after my short list of sources. Speaking of sources, here they are (though they are not that much as I know most of this information beforehand from the past):
http://www.gamefaqs.com... (try to find an article - you can't!)
http://www.gamesradar.com... (note how this credible source recognizes them as glitches)
In the words of Fox, "Let's rock and roll."
First off, my opponent has not turned down or accepted my offer to not introduce new arguments in the final round, therefore, unless he says otherwise, if we use the saying of "Silence Implies Consent" this means that, by his lack of a response, we can conclude that my opponent agrees with the rule I have offered to him.
Contention 1 - My opponents overall rebuttal
My opponent is correct in saying that speed, gravity, psychics, and techniques do not make a game better simply by existing. However, it does make the game better if those in one game are not present in another and are used frequently. Example being that L-cancelling is used in Melee freqently, making the game faster paced, whereas in Brawl, it is completely removed, making it unusable, and, by proxy, slowing the game down tremendously. In fact, I would say in response to my opponent, that the speed difference between Brawl and Melee is very extreme. An example from personal experience is that, in Melee, one is likely to die from a strong attack from anywhere between 89 - 130 percent, whereas, in Brawl, one is likely to die from a strong attack from anywhere between 140-190 percent. This is because of a combonation of falling speed, far to easy aerial movement, and very good recovery moves. My opponenet also goes on to say that there is no lag or frame rate issues. This is true, but it is also true for Melee. However, both games can, and will, run slow, if pushed to the extreme. (Example: Brawl, going into training mode, then spawning and detonating as many smart bombs as possible.) He goes on to talk down about falling speed and how it can negatively affect characters. However! I would like to point out that, if you take a look at any existing tier list for Melee tournaments, you will see that one of the heaviest characters in the game is, in fact, number two, right below Fox. And that character, is Falco. And to COn, I say this. You are wrong in saying that heavy characters are beat by lighter characters. Heavy characters are not launched as easily as lighter characters. Finally for this point, my opponent seems to rely far to heavily on proving that the techniques that I mention are glitches. This is true. However, they are, for better and not worse, part of the game. You cannot disprove that unless you convince Nintendo to re-release Melee without them. Also, Con states that Brawl emphasizes weaker moves, again, incorrect. Let me shed some light on why. In Brawl, L-Cancelling was removed, and instead, replaced with Auto Cancelling. This is the same thing, except now it depends more on where you start the move, since auto cancelling only takes effect if you land near the finaly frames of a aerial move. Simply put, the way you be good at brawl is to discover what moves auto cancel and only use them.
Contention 2 - Brawl's game modes and multiplayer are poor at best.
I can agree that quality mixed with quantity is a very good thing. However, this is something, that I assert, Brawl does NOT have. I have stated, using a legitimate source that Con seems content to waste 3 lines bashing, that Brawl, does in fact, not improve. In fact, he claims my source is not good, yet he totally avoids the part where I talk about how Sakurai himself has stated that the Subspace Emissary is "drivel". Second, it seems that Con has accepted my source as legitmate, because, all though he asserts it is not legitmate, he AGREES with me, saying that "a small amount of game modes are actually low quality - Classic, All-Star, Event Match, and Stadium. The rest are fine or better than before." However, what Con does not say is that the only thing that remains out of the list of what he gave is multiplayer and the Subspace Emissary, one of which, the Subspace Emissary, I already proved to be horrible. So before you, the judges, agree with him that my source is not good enough, pleas enote that he agreed with things I said that I cited FROM the source. He also bashed the poll that I used in which 12 more people voted Melee over Brawl, saying that it was conducted by "random people" however, I would like Con to please name me a poll that was NOT answered by "random people". Finally, Con does not decide whether or not I am penalized. Con is not a judge, and therefore, has no right to decide if a source is valid or invalid.
Con goes on to praise Special Brawl. And why shouldn't he? Special Brawl is very good, espicially if you consider that it's actually the exact same as Melee, options and all. Tournament, as my opponent states, is also the same. It can also be asserted that rotation was not needed at all, espicially considering how it's not difficult at all to hand a controller to somebody else.
Since my opponent seems to use his fourth paragraph to bash my research and how I argue, save for the first line and a half and somewhere in the middle, I will simply attack the two points he made. Number one being that he mentions Project M, and then almost immidately after tells me to assume the judges know little of the topic. But he doesn't elaborate to what Project M. Project M is simply a complete overhaul of Brawl to make it like Melee, just with better graphics. It is not made for casual play. In fact, it's made ENTIRELY for competitive play, and it is MADE to emulate Melee, hence the M in Project M. Con might tell the judges that you can have the content of Brawl in Project M, however, the only people who have Project M have it for mutiplayer, as accessing any single player modes will crash the game. AND, any stages in Project M that came from Brawl, with the exception of Smashville, are changed or completely removed in favor of stages from Smash 64 of Melee. Maybe Con should get a copy of Project M before he begins to use it where it has no place. And, because he brought up Project M, my arguments against project M being solely made for competitive is enough of an argument. However, I will elaborate in the coming round if Con asks. Also, when I used Smash 64, I was using it to support an argument. My opponent used Smash 4 to create one. There is a difference.
My opponent states that I made a rule and promised to not mention other games. However, I promised nothing, and I asked him politely, and, as I said previously, I used Smash 64 to support the argument I made, and to help my rebuttal against his argument, whereas he used Smash 4 to create an entirely new argument.
Back to Con
Just because Brawl had characters that many fans did not ask for does not make it inferior. I find it amusing how opponent later contradicts themselves when I state the same thing by stating that Sonic and Snake were only included from fan service. Since you make such an ironic contradiction, then I will also use it against you. It does not matter if the characters are not liked by fans, as long as they were not clones and were actually of good use. This claim is true as the characters that were not in Brawl are all clone characters (with the exception of Mewtwo), which is a waste to the roster as they are similar to other characters in appearance and move-set, thus being deemed clone characters. Brawl also had many clone characters, but only to a certain extent, and their cloned moves were not as similar compared to the moves used by said characters in Melee. Also, both Dr. Mario  and Mewtwo  make a return to Smash 4, though I will end it here as that has little to do with this debate as mentioned earlier by opponent. Finally, tripping is agreed to make the gameplay randomized and unfair at times, but it is just that - random. Tripping does not happen all them time and therefore has little interference; when it does, players can simply recover from it in a matter of seconds and resume the fight.
I would like to personally thank my opponent for dropping certain arguments for successfully being refuted and admitting that I have done so - unlike other opponents I debated with in the past. Opponent now refutes my other arguments, so let me begin. The examples used are terrible as damage and knock-outs have nothing to do with the speed, but instead applies it to the gravity and physics when they were clearly used to prove how speed was an issue. Opponent also fails to provide any source in this round as many arguments used are based on opinion rather than fact; please provide a source for certifying the damage difference in Melee and Brawl to make me believe your claims. Opponent then goes on to say how lag and frame rate is consistent in Melee but fails to provide a source for their examples nor is the example logical enough to be not credited with a source. Either find a credible source or use better reasoning to make the example more believable and legitimate.
Again, where is the sources for the tournament references - for all I know, you are making this up simply because I never went to a Melee tournament before. True, Fox and Falco do fall faster than average characters, but that has nothing to do with their weight if you can even know how weight is in a video game - it's their speed and agility . I understand that heavy characters are harder to launch, but due to their weight, they are easy to attack and dodge when in the air, as well as easier to die when not on land. I find it funny how opponent mentions how these glitches are for the better and in order to disprove his claim, I must request Nintendo to re-release a new copy of Melee. Then if I were to do that, while I'm at it, please...just please tell Sega to re-release every 3D Sonic game since Sonic Adventure 2 and before Sonic Colors to make them glitch-free and with high gameplay quality, okay? Besides, Mashiro Sakurai even stated himself  that he removed it from Brawl because he felt L-cancelling and other techniques to make the skill gap between hardcore and casual gamers way too large. So that proves that Nintendo recognizes them as glitches as they removed it from Brawl and even Smash 4.
And, not all techniques were removed as teching is still present in Brawl  - please provide another source to prove that auto cancelling is a legitmate technique and not something you made up. Opponent states that Brawl does not have both high quality and quantity, yet he continues to refer to the GameFAQS and IGN sources that are not legitimate. Here's a tip, go to Meta-Critic and search Brawl up - they might have a legitimate negative review done by a professional gaming critic for you to link to your arguments. Opponent has failed to provide any source with Sakurai mentioning the mediocrity of Subspace Emissary; there is no source that you provided with Sakurai mentioning that, nor have I found any page or link on the Smash Dojo! site stating that Sakurai said that. Opponent continues to make random claims yet has no source to back it up; opponent has at least provided sources in previous rounds, even if they were fake and not trusted. I have also never agreed with the source that those certain game modes are crap - if you do not know what a coincidence is, then you have problems; I never even looked at the source after discovering how fake it is.
My claim that those game modes were inferior were merely my own theory about the flaws of Brawl. Also, you never provided any source claiming that Subspace Emissary is horrible besides that non-credible review. I may have agreed with certain things that those sources claimed, but I have never referred to those sources when making such claims. Opponent has terrible logic if he believes that no two people are allowed to have the exact same opinion, beliefs, and views on the same thing. I may not be a judge, but I can use constructive criticism to reveal your flaws. And about the poll, I accept that they can be answered by random people, but in order for it to be legitimate, it must be conducted by credible people, such as the staff of IGN that are universally considered to be credible. All other arguments that I do not refute has been successfully refuted or will be refuted in the final round, and I again thank opponent for dropping certain arguments I made and admitting that some of what I claimed is legitimate and cannot be argued. Here are sources for all of my arguments and rebuttals - though some are not trusted or not legitimate, at least sources are provided rather than no sources at all:
 http://dragonball.wikia.com... (kind of pointless to have this - but the more the merrier)
 Oh my, the link is a video!
 http://www.ssbwiki.com... (note how Fox has fast acceleration speed and not heavy weight)
 http://www.ssbwiki.com... (it may be non-credible but better than having none in round 4)
Before I begin, I would like to point out to Con that I did not make my own rules. In fact, I offered one to Con and hoped that we could mutually agree, as the rule is fair for both parties, as it means that Round 5 is ONLY rebuttals, and not a creation of new arguments. However, Con has turned down my offer, but I will do my best to prevent from making new arguments, just in case Con happened to misunderstand me. Also, advice from Con, if you wish to not run out of space, try not to use multiple hyphens to separate your arguments. It's more character effective to name your arguments. Also, I liked Con's quote about Dragonball Z.
Now, since this is my post for Round 5, I would like to conclude with thanking Con for taking this Debate, though I wish he could have seemed less cocky at times, but that may have been just me. Since this is the last Round, I would like to ask any potential judges to please vote Pro for all of the reasons and evidence that I have supplied. Thank you for reading this, and have a nice day.
Since this is the final round, I am going to simply get straight to the point and not put any unnecessary things. First, it's time to refute opponent's rebuttals on his round 2 arguments. I never specifically said both Snake and Sonic were added because of fan service. And as any Smash Bros. fan knows, Snake was originally going to be added in as a character in Melee, but was not because Nintendo was already too late in development. To make it up for Konami who "literally begged for Snake to join" , they added him automatically as a third-party character in Brawl. Sonic, on the other hand, was the one that was added because of a poll conducted by Nintendo  to determine their fans' most preferred third-party character to be added, which resulted in...Sonic. While many characters such as Meta Knight and Ike were not asked to be joined, just like L-cancelling and wavedashing, they are a part of the game and it is Nintendo's decision whether or not a character should be added or omitted - not the fans (even if it pisses people off).
Nintendo, just like with other game companies is never going to completely satisfy everyone. Heck, take a look at Smash 4; nobody asked for Palutena or Wii Fit Trainer  yet they were added - people only wanted Mega-Man, Little Mac, Mii Fighters, Shulk, and Pac-Man. Clones may be enjoyed but Nintendo still thinks an abundant of clones are bad, and they do their best to avoid putting in alot to the roster, such as taking out clones that were in Melee from Brawl, and taking out many Brawl clones in Smash 4. As said awhile ago, whether or not you disliked Dr. Mario is up to the discretion of Nintendo - they added him as a returning fighter in Smash 4 even if people did not want him back. I admit that I found it stupid as well, but the reality is that only the developers can decide what gets changed to the roster. I also understand that tripping can cost a person a match, but that rarely happens as we all know, and tripping at the most has only made me lose 1 point in timed multi-player matches in Brawl.
As I ran out of space in the previous rounds, I will make it up by refuting opponent's arguments of Project M and hint that opponent has avoided many of my arguments, such as Sakurai's apparent claim of Subspace Emissary being a confusing plot and how Subspace Emissary and multi-player is completely inferior to Melee's multi-player and Adventure Mode. I recommend to not avoid arguments simply because you have nothing better to say - either admit that your opponent has won in convincing you, or simply refute them in later rounds like what I am doing right now. I have to admit you are a worthy opponent and I hope to debate with you in the future as you are one of the few to not be trolls *looks at troll debates*. I know what Project M is and how it works, which is all explained in here  if you say otherwise.
You may have used Smash 64 as a sub-argument, but so have I with Smash 4. I may have used it a bit too much, but I haven't used it as a seperate argument. Opponent may deny this, but according to my original argument, I used it as a sub-argument as I stated that Brawl has exclusives that Melee lacks and that influenced Smash 4. That argument was meant to argue how Brawl had exclusives that Melee never offered, and to make it more effective, I state how Brawl's exclusives are able to influence Smash 4 while Melee's exclusives fail to do that as L-cancelling and all those techniques are still not present  despite being claimed to be more like Melee than Brawl. Also, you still continue to drop many of my arguments simply because you refuse to refute them. Here is another wise tip, purposely ignoring certain arguments is a big no-no in actual debates and opponents can use that against you, like what I am doing right now.
Now let us get on with the final rebuttals. It's exactly as told, you cannot find a source that refers to that, and where is the source you promised me where Sakurai proves that Subspace Emissary's plot is confusing? I never said that you made up Melee tournaments - I simply stated that you provide sources that Project M is used for sources as well as Fox and Falco being favored in tournaments. I recommend you need to take certain things metaphorically and contextually as that is part of my writing style - I should honestly not be telling you this. The source I used to disprove your claim of Falco and Fox's weight refers to both Melee and Brawl...if you can even read properly. I was referring to falling speed - not the running nor combat speed . Again, you should have properly read the source carefully as well as understand the contextual value of my arguments before assuming false information. Opponent has finally also agreed to use more reliable sources as this actually will help you in future debates on this site and in reality when you get into an unlucky debate with a uncooperative person in court for all the wrong reasons. And opponent admits how Melee is only slightly better than Brawl and not completely yet you contradict yourself as you said it was completely superior.
So it appears that your claims are just opinionated as both the critics and fans claim otherwise. Funny how you spent all this time trying to argue how Melee is completely superior to Brawl, but than your last few rebuttals help my arguments as you state that it is only slightly better than Brawl, which is what I said earlier in this debate; thus, proving that you agree with your opponent - something that you should not be doing in a debate. As this debate is now officially over, let me conclude this debate by thanking my opponent for having this debate with me. I admit that I have not faced such an excellent and worthy opponent in such a long time, as you can tell from my past debates that the majority of debates I had in this recent time is composed of unskilled debaters and trolls.
You state that you wish that I was less cocky, but I was not cocky at all during this debate - you assume such false speculations simply because you cannot see my facial expressions and body language; if you could, you would have said otherwise. I ask all judges to vote for me if you think I qualify as the winner, or choose my opponent - I do not care as this seems to be an even debate as my sportsmanship was my main flaw and opponent's questionable sources was his, so please choose wisely. Remember to vote properly, as if you vote with the wrong reasons and I gather enough evidence, I will consider it vote bombing and have the administrators of this site to remove such invalid votes. Only legitimate, honest, and unbiased (in terms of debater, not the game) voters should participate in the vote to prevent abuse and spam. As with previous rounds, here are my sources:
 +  http://en.wikipedia.org... (it is in the "Inclusion of Characters" sub-section)
 http://www.ssbwiki.com... (please read about his falling speed carefully before refuting)
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||2||0|