Here it is; the great wall that divides the Smash community. Which point do you fall on this debate? SSF2 is in a bit of an interesting situation in that it works very hard to appeal to both sides equally, which means we wind up with quite a bit of variety in our playerbase.

I should probably preemptively clarify that skill level has nothing to do with this scale. An international tournament winner can still be a 1 and a six-year-old can still be a 4, for example, so please don't be under the impression that a certain ranking will make you seem better or worse.
Remember: 1 is not beginner. 4 is not expert. If the summaries in the poll options aren't enough, here's summaries of the numbers for both sides;

• 1 - FLEXIBLE: Plays at the given setting in general, but can and often does deviate when playing with others.
• 2 - DECIDED: Has formed a general opinion on both playstyles. Still very capable of deviation, but has an outwardly clear preference or focus, even if slight.
• 3 - ROOTED: Is deeply ingrained in the given setting and does not feel comfortable leaving it, often to the point of feeling that the other side is missing out on a fun experience. It's fine if you're like this, that's just what you enjoy.
• 4 - EXCLUSIVE: Honestly believes that a given playstyle is inherently superior to another for any given reason; that there's a "right" and "wrong" way to play the game; this includes a belief that a focus in development towards one playstyle is damaging to the other (like, for example, if you believe that time spent programming items and hazards would be better spent on balancing, or time spent on adjusting technical details would be better spent on adding more content, for example). While a volatile path, still an acceptable one if general respect is given to other players.

---

On a personal scale, I consider myself somewhat competitive. High-level play interests me, I find intricate strategy enjoyable (if difficult to personally achieve), and am uncomfortable with a large amount of chaotic elements. However, I am a strong supporter of audiovisual variety between matches and usually, in private matches, set items to Low instead of Off.

I'm more of a neutral type when it comes to game play. I always strive to improve my understanding of my metagame but also keep it casual. But I always think quick but careful when it comes to strategic planning while coming up with optimal solutions while facing a critical situation...

Do you think you should change some of these descriptions? Most of these sound so negative, like it's written to make you feel guilty of your choice. Anything more than Competitive 2 or Casual 1 makes the person sound like a one-sided douche.

Just because someone "primarily play with unregulated settings," doesn't mean they "find the metagame and the study of it to be uninteresting," as a whole. You can "prefer playing under neutral settings and/or have a strong focus on technical depth over surface details," but still enjoy playing "unregulated settings," at other times.

So describe some things from "I do not enjoy playing without neutral settings... ," and change to, "I prefer/find more enjoyment playing under neutral settings for the strong focus on technical depth."

totally agree with zalo

When does one Disagree with Zalo and still be considered sane?

Iiiii was worried about that. But wasn't entirely sure how to go about it.

...I'm more awake now. I'll get to fixing It a bit.

Thing is, though, 3 is meant for the one-sided. Competitive 3 is for "Why are you so upset that everyone only chooses Fox, he's just a bunch of hitboxes anyway", and Casual 3 is for "this isn't what Smash is about, so much of the game is going to waste"... if not so confrontationally.

What you described is 2. Maybe even 1.

I consider myself a casual player but i can gladly enjoy a competitive setting with friends.
I'll go with casual 1

I just enjoy smash in every format!! neutral 0

I'm definitely a Competitive 3, as I just don't enjoy Smash with items and stuff. Whatevs to everyone else playing casual stuff, but I wish that what are really totally different games (casual and competitive) don't cross-pollute each other.

Actually kinda surprised that C2 was most popular. I expected most people to be C3. Hell, I suck at this game but I love the competitive depth it has in terms of information and mechanical skill.
I'ma bronze 1 C3 and I'm proud.
gg

I consider myself a Competitive 2 leaning towards Competitive 1. Most of my matches (more than 90%) are in neutral settings with competitive rules but I love to take a breather and just play FFA while trolling all the same.

f*** casuals ruining the game smh

Gosick , you know that you used to be a casual player too so quit fussing bra....

I picked competitive 2.
While i'm not that good at smash,i always pay attention to the metagame of all the games and enjoy more watching people play without shenanigans. As for SF2,i'm starting to learn more about the meta game from it and try to see it's competitive scene more,in order to have a concrete opinion on it.