PlayStation All-Stars Vs. Super Smash Bros.

PlayStation All-Stars Vs. Super Smash Bros.

Who wins in the brawl of platform fighters?

Read Full Article

I have to say, that is a measly amount of levels, I love having a lot of levels to play in...

The roster is small, but if the characters are much more varied (and not clones like a lot of characters in Melee and Brawl were) than that is awesome! Especially since Sony hasn't the amount of recognizable characters that Nintendo has...

I know why Crash and Spyro didn't make the roster...but it would have made so many people happy if they did...

You should probably proofread these articles a bit more carefully. I passively noticed about 6 typos as I was browsing the post.

Not sure how I feel about the game yet. I guess I'll have to play it and find out.

axlryder:
You should probably proofread these articles a bit more carefully. I passively noticed about 6 typos as I was browsing the post.

Fixed them all. Stupid Word not accepting my changes ...

I haven't played Public Service Announcement (PSA, lol) and as such I'm probably a biased SSB fan, but it's important to remember that SSB is a game that was created as a quick release title for the N64 as a cash grab that wasn't supposed to take off the way it did (much like portal) and as a result, it's evolutions are based on the decisions made during that period. I bring this up as a small counterpoint to the Mario stomp example.

Clones have a similar "rushed" problem. Ganondorf in Melee was thrown in at the last minute due to public demand from fans and Roy was included in an attempt to boost Fire Emblem Sales for Roy's game: Fire Emblem Blazing Sword, which was released in march 2002 (approx 4 months AFTER the release of Melee in nov 2001 both release dates are JP)

However none of these change the current gameplay differences between SSB and PSA. Ultimately, I'll have to make the judgement for myself and I always like the idea of world cross-over brawlers.

I'm pretty certain there aren't fifteen clones in brawl, and the size of the move sets overall is probably about identical when you factor everything in unless they have completely different aerial attacks for all inputs. I don't have a ps3 though so I guess my opinions here are pretty unimportant.

Revnak:
I'm pretty certain there aren't fifteen clones in brawl, and the size of the move sets overall is probably about identical when you factor everything in unless they have completely different aerial attacks for all inputs. I don't have a ps3 though so I guess my opinions here are pretty unimportant.

No, there aren't, but that's why I specifically said variety. Luigi isn't a clone of Mario, but much of his move set matches up. Same goes for Dr. Mario. Then you have Young Link/Link, Diddy Kong/Donkey Kong, Fox/Falco, Ganondorf/Captain Falcon, Pichu/Pikachu, etc. etc.

And I am, indeed, factoring in aerial attacks. All moves change in the air for PSA as well, even further blowing away SSB's per character action set. It's, at minimum, a 3:1 ratio of unique moves between SSB and PSA.

Is it really fair to compare this with two games that are 4 and 11 years old respectively? I understand that they are the closest games genre-wise, but given the potential that this game could have had given the difference in technology and time to develop it, it's seems underwhelming. It's obviously built to compete with the SSB series, so why doesn't it blow it completely out of the water?

The game has an overall air of "shrug" for me. At least half the appeal of a game like this is playing as a much loved character, out of character (as it were). If anything, this highlights how indifferent Sony has been about developing it's characters. Whether that's because Playstation was built on the backs of third party developers or whatever, it doesn't lend itself well to the type game, even regardless of the play quality.

I've not played All-Stars, but SSBB felt huge to me. It wasn't as tight a game as Melee, but it definitely felt like the biggest fighter game I'd played. The limited character roster and quantity of levels is a disapointment. That all of the characters work differently is great, but why so few? The fewer character = the fewer variation in battles, end of. Sure, in SSBB the skill sets are repeated, but the characters still have different sizes and weight to them, meaning that as opponents, they need to be tackled differently.

I don't think this was ever going to be a huge success, in part due to cynicism like mine, but externally it looks like they fell far short of the mark (and when selling an expensive product, that appearance counts in a big way).

Mike Kayatta:

Revnak:
I'm pretty certain there aren't fifteen clones in brawl, and the size of the move sets overall is probably about identical when you factor everything in unless they have completely different aerial attacks for all inputs. I don't have a ps3 though so I guess my opinions here are pretty unimportant.

No, there aren't, but that's why I specifically said variety. Luigi isn't a clone of Mario, but much of his move set matches up. Same goes for Dr. Mario. Then you have Young Link/Link, Diddy Kong/Donkey Kong, Fox/Falco, Ganondorf/Captain Falcon, Pichu/Pikachu, etc. etc.

And I am, indeed, factoring in aerial attacks. All moves change in the air for PSA as well, even further blowing away SSB's per character action set. It's, at minimum, a 3:1 ratio of unique moves between SSB and PSA.

More like maybe 3:2 since both effectively have 3 inputs per direction on the ground, though that is neat that there is a full range of aerial moves for each input. How about grabs? I haven't seen those mentioned.
And there are no similarities between the Kongs at all. They don't share a single move. Mario and Luigi share less than half a move set. Between the Star Fox characters you get around two move sets. That brings us down 1.5. Gannondorf and the Captain are the same with speed and a couple effects being the only difference, so we can count them as one. Same goes with link/toon link. 3.5. Another clone is Lucas. 4.5. That leaves Brawl at over 30 characters. I'm not going to defend the Melee roster as it had way more clones, but it really isn't fair to say that PSA has more character variety than Brawl as it is. Not trying to be rude or anything though, as I have kinda implied I haven't played PSA, so I feel I'm in a poor place to judge. I just think you may be underestimating the character variety in Brawl is all.

Why are there so many comparisons to melee, and Brawl, and very few if any to the vanilla (SSB for the N64) this does feel like the article perceives the start of the franchise on the GameCube. as I think that the comparison between the actual first game in each series would be more poinient then comparing the first game this new series to the 2nd, and 3rd of the other.

I really feel like this should've been a Triple Threat with Digimon Rumble Arena 2 being the third combatant.

Because, y'know, that game is awesome. :)

Yes, it's a Smash Bros clone, but that also means it's a clone of one of the most enjoyable games ever made.

If you're going to steal, steal from the best.

So, who's waiting for Xbox's Mega-Smackdown? You'd get Master Chief, Marcus Fenix, and Blinx the Cat!

Thank you for making this an informative article instead of a "which one is better??" article.

i am still gonna go with smash brothers as my preferred one
its roster i like
besides the furry quartet, and raiden i don't care much else or if anyone else on that ps roster.
i can get with most of the Nintendo roster

also some of the choices to put in that game/ developers letting them put peeps in the game, made me down right angry. while i am used to activision being activision and crash not getting into this game, i thought spyro was owned by insomniac. and i understand square kinda doesent like having the character associate with anybody accept nintendo and disney, so cloud strife or maybe even zidane ( though that one would be a long shot considering the former, is a cultural phenomena, and the a tribute to a dead friend of one of the lead developers)

also,the no name chick, who was the star in that one-of god of war clone got into this game, but laura croft the effing tomb raider didn't get into this game.

-sighs-

im done

wait one last thing
why does this person keep mentioning melee, brawl had a superior roster online play and some semblance of an actual story mode. so you cant do the same combo's , Nintendo is making a 4th one and is gonna fix it, hell you can even hack brawl to add more characters or to play like melee if you wish.
but nostalgia is always "its never as good as it was " sort of situation huh

-sighs-

and now i am done

One caveat I have, is that you don't really mention that Cole and Evil Cole are about as different from each other as Fox and Wolf in Brawl.

Some would call Wolf a clone, but some don't because he shares some moves (pretty sure their up B's are the same), has some similar moves that do different things from what Fox does (Fox's blaster has no knockback, only deals damage and has rapidfire, while Wolf's has a little knockback, can do an extra hit if the enemy is close, and is single shot) and some moves are completely different (Fox's standing A is two hits followed by a neverending flurry of kicks that's just supposed to increase damage while wolf has a more powerful 3 hit combo with his claws)

Same thing with the Coles, their square (face button on a PS3 controller) attacks are the same and level 1 super are the same, their triangle attacks are similar but do different things and their circle attacks and level 2 and 3 supers are completely unrelated.

I'm just saying, because comparing PSABR to Melee makes it sound like the two Coles are another Captain Falcon/ Gannondorf pair.

Also, you forgot (unless we're only talking about the games at launch) that PSABR has DLC characters (and possibly stages) in the works, which Brawl and Melee obviously didn't.

Finally, you also forgot an important part for hardcore gamers: design philosophy. Melee became hyper-competitive, because of a glitch. It was never intended, yet it was what made the game legendary. Yet, in Brawl, they tried to remove wavedashing and combos and even inserted random tripping into the game in order to undo all that Melee had (though it hasn't stopped people from playing it competitively).

PSABR was designed by people who were in the competitive fighting game scene at one point (Omar Kendall, Clockw0rk, Seth Killian) and tried their hardest to make PSABR competitive. My point is, both games moved in different directions in how competitive they wanted to be.

I gotta say, I had reservations about the game before release and some have definitely been put to rest. They did amazingly enough scrounge up a good number of characters, though Big Daddy is kind of cheating and it sucks that it's not the Dante that was actually from the games that were actually Playstation exclusive.

The combat itself is surprisingly solid too, I was amazed at how Kratos actually played like Kratos, though obviously the shooter characters are a little more, meh. That said I hate the kill mechanic. No matter how well you do in a fight, as long as you can land one super you're good.

The Tall Nerd:

hell you can even hack brawl to add more characters or to play like melee if you wish.

I don't think most people generally take into account things that aren't even technically a part of the game (or supposed to be a part of the game) when comparing it to different games. Also, there's a REASON why people hacked the game so you can play more like Melee. Melee doesn't have that fucking stupid trip mechanic. Melee has better combo potential due to hitstun. Melee seems less floaty. The final smashes aren't very well balanced. There's no directional airdodging or good dashedances. Recovery times on rolls and stuff was increased in Brawl and throws were nerfed. Brawl seems to encourage camping. The damage balance seems out of whack in Brawl due to the ability to live longer, causing the battles to feel more drawn out. Some people actually prefer the graphics of Melee etc. etc.

Obviously much of it comes down to opinion, but no, it's not just because we're a bunch of old fogies talkin' 'bout "the good ol' days". What's more, saying "they'll fix it in the sequel" is about the worst defensive point I've ever heard when watching someone try to defend a game that removed an arguably key mechanic.

The game looks like it has potential for a lot of really fun play, but what makes me iffy is that it's Sony's first attempt at a game like this.

It's like they saw the SSB success and figured they could grab some quick bucks by borrowing from the same format. And while it might be a more advanced game by considering mechanics, i still don't get the feeling they quite understand why SSB is the success it is and thus failed to replicate the same feeling.

I'll probably still buy this game to try it out, and i can only hope that i'm wrong and that the 4-way multiplayer matches will be as fun and enjoyable in PSA as they were in the SSB games.

(Kinda bummed to hear about the half-hearted single player mode though)

I think I might pass on this. I really wanted to play some Sir Dan, but the way points are scored turns me off completely.

I just hope this makes people interested in Daniel Fortesque and we ger MediEvil 3.

axlryder:

The Tall Nerd:

hell you can even hack brawl to add more characters or to play like melee if you wish.

I don't think most people generally take into account things that aren't even technically a part of the game (or supposed to be a part of the game) when comparing it to different games. Also, there's a REASON why people hacked the game so you can play more like Melee. Melee doesn't have that fucking stupid trip mechanic. Melee has better combo potential due to hitstun. Melee seems less floaty. The final smashes aren't very well balanced. There's no directional airdodging or good dashedances. Recovery times on rolls and stuff was increased in Brawl and throws were nerfed. Brawl seems to encourage camping. The damage balance seems out of whack in Brawl due to the ability to live longer, causing the battles to feel more drawn out. Some people actually prefer the graphics of Melee etc. etc.

Obviously much of it comes down to opinion, but no, it's not just because we're a bunch of old fogies talkin' 'bout "the good ol' days". What's more, saying "they'll fix it in the sequel" is about the worst defensive point I've ever heard when watching someone try to defend a game that removed an arguably key mechanic.

i hear you
but there are two audiences for smash brothers
there are regular fans on the game and then there are what they forums call "tourneyfags" ( i am not trying to offend but thats the term they use)the latter is the minority of the fanbase. while i understand your complaints to call brawl a crap game is idiotic especially when the latter of the two fanbases are the minority, and they people even complaining about the melee thing. shouldn't they all be happy that Nintendo is even considering their input and deciding to do something about their complaints in ssb4 instead of going par for the course. i am in this "tournyfags" category, i know i am the minority for me to even expect a company like Nintendo who prides themselves on doing the same sh** kinda different(there are so many, of their idea's that they are implanting now, that they have had since nintendo started making games, the Wii and WiiU are 2 of those things) to cater to a minority is insane, if they did that before, i would have a 4th mother by now. i didn't expect brawl to be this combo heavy place, just a fun brawler.

i am just glad Nintendo decided to try and be more competitive and do something different, in ssb4, i would have played it regardless, sonic is gonna punch Mario in the face. i think the " everything is awesome and no one is happy " line should be used here, this isn't street fighter x tekken or capcom fighting jam, there are no huge scandals or systematic failures, you can't do the same combo's , meh.

also anyone this being able to hack with no repercussions as a plus. i have shadow the hedgehog and zidane in my brawl, i am quite happy. and while i again i kinda agree with you in a combo aspect, everything else grabs damage intake, i think its fine.

anyways that my shtick, take or leave it

Gatx:
That said I hate the kill mechanic. No matter how well you do in a fight, as long as you can land one super you're good.

Well, a more casual player is able to jump right in and feel fairly effective until the supers start coming out, but there's a lot of provisions for strategy in the AP system if you know what you're doing.

Level 1 supers are relatively easily dodged or interrupted - you really can't use most of them against someone who's directly on you. They all make a similar sound/flash that players who know what they are doing will see coming, and can react to. Level 2 supers can be hit out of their slower animation with any other super (preferably a 1). Doing a throw or certain special moves will deplete an opponent's AP bar (and drop AP orbs on the ground for you to pick up). If you get up to pro esports level, then managing your opponent's AP bar is very doable, and level 3s should only really happen if they're outplaying you by quite a bit - a good player will deplete your AP, or will get multiple kills on you while you're sitting on all your AP building to level 3 (some 3s are worth it if you can wipe out 3 other players multiple times).

It may not be everyone's thing, and I'm not the greatest at it, but I liked the no hp system quite a bit. There's definitely more to it then unloading a bunch of hits and unleashing a screen wiping super though. :)

The Tall Nerd:

while i understand your complaints to call brawl a crap game is idiotic

No one here said it was crap. We're saying Melee has better gameplay and that there are good reasons for people preferring Melee. Do try not to misrepresent an opponent's argument, it's very bad form.

The Tall Nerd:

especially when the latter of the two fanbases are the minority

Who represents the majority or minority has nothing to do with one's subjective assessment of the quality of the game. Just because a game might successfully pander to its intended demographic doesn't mean that I can't think it's a worse game for it when considering the changes that were made.

The Tall Nerd:

shouldn't they all be happy that Nintendo is even considering their input and deciding to do something about their complaints in ssb4 instead of going par for the course.

Again, that's a pointless thing to bring up. We're talking about comparing two games that exist. Not what Hal and Nintendo plan on doing for the sequel. If anything, their stated intentions for the future is a better defense for the previous title, not its successor.

The Tall Nerd:

i am in this "tournyfags" category, i know i am the minority for me to even expect a company like Nintendo who prides themselves on doing the same sh** kinda different(there are so many, of their idea's that they are implanting now, that they have had since nintendo started making games, the Wii and WiiU are 2 of those things) to cater to a minority is insane, if they did that before, i would have a 4th mother by now. i didn't expect brawl to be this combo heavy place, just a fun brawler.

i am just glad Nintendo decided to try and be more competitive and do something different, in ssb4, i would have played it regardless, sonic is gonna punch Mario in the face.

That's nice

The Tall Nerd:

i think the " everything is awesome and no one is happy " line should be used here, this isn't street fighter x tekken or capcom fighting jam, there are no huge scandals or systematic failures, you can't do the same combo's , meh.

again, you're saying "so they just took out a potentially KEY fighting mechanic, meh". You're trying to downplay an important factor. If they took the combo system out of any other fighting game there would be total outrage. What's more, there's more to it than JUST the combos. I think that should have been made apparent by the laundry list of things in my previous comment. People preferring a game that they view as "better", and thus placing that game as the standard to compare others against hardly fits the "everything is awesome and no one is happy" scenario you're proposing.

The Tall Nerd:

also anyone this being able to hack with no repercussions as a plus. i have shadow the hedgehog and zidane in my brawl, i am quite happy.

That's entirely missing the point. You can hack just about any game. That's not how you compare two games though. That's like saying "which is better, Super Mario World or Yoshi's Island?" and then someone saying there are waaaay more hacks for SMW so obviously that's the superior game. It's a silly point to bring up considering the game isn't even designed to do that.

The Tall Nerd:

and while i again i kinda agree with you in a combo aspect, everything else grabs damage intake, i think its fine.

A lot of people don't, and considering your assessment is not the template we use to test the validity of our opinions, those criticisms still stand as valid.

The Tall Nerd:

anyways that my shtick, take or leave it

I'll leave it, thank you.

axlryder:

The Tall Nerd:

hell you can even hack brawl to add more characters or to play like melee if you wish.

I don't think most people generally take into account things that aren't even technically a part of the game (or supposed to be a part of the game) when comparing it to different games. Also, there's a REASON why people hacked the game so you can play more like Melee. Melee doesn't have that fucking stupid trip mechanic. Melee has better combo potential due to hitstun. Melee seems less floaty. The final smashes aren't very well balanced. There's no directional airdodging or good dashedances. Recovery times on rolls and stuff was increased in Brawl and throws were nerfed. Brawl seems to encourage camping. The damage balance seems out of whack in Brawl due to the ability to live longer, causing the battles to feel more drawn out. Some people actually prefer the graphics of Melee etc. etc.

Obviously much of it comes down to opinion, but no, it's not just because we're a bunch of old fogies talkin' 'bout "the good ol' days". What's more, saying "they'll fix it in the sequel" is about the worst defensive point I've ever heard when watching someone try to defend a game that removed an arguably key mechanic.

It almost seems like some of the solutions to problems from Melee to Brawl caused more of them. Ex: Camping encouraged in Brawl and damage out of whack and lifespan too long because Final Smashes are removed. No air dodge was based in the ultra floaty jumps.

The question I always ask SSB players who remove Final Smashes (and usually no items at all, almost always on Final Destination): Why not just play Melee? The Final Smashes and a slightly altered roster were the whole reason to play Brawl.

OT: This looks interesting, but games like this are more fun for multiplayer, and I have a hard time finding enough people for a good multiplayer match of anything these days.

axlryder:

The Tall Nerd:

while i understand your complaints to call brawl a crap game is idiotic

No one here said it was crap. We're saying Melee has better gameplay and that there are good reasons for people preferring Melee. Do try not to misrepresent an opponent's argument, it's very bad form.

The Tall Nerd:

especially when the latter of the two fanbases are the minority

Who represents the majority or minority has nothing to do with one's subjective assessment of the quality of the game. Just because a game might successfully pander to its intended demographic doesn't mean that I can't think it's a worse game for it when considering the changes that were made.

The Tall Nerd:

shouldn't they all be happy that Nintendo is even considering their input and deciding to do something about their complaints in ssb4 instead of going par for the course.

Again, that's a pointless thing to bring up. We're talking about comparing two games that exist. Not what Hal and Nintendo plan on doing for the sequel. If anything, their stated intentions for the future is a better defense for the previous title, not its successor.

The Tall Nerd:

i am in this "tournyfags" category, i know i am the minority for me to even expect a company like Nintendo who prides themselves on doing the same sh** kinda different(there are so many, of their idea's that they are implanting now, that they have had since nintendo started making games, the Wii and WiiU are 2 of those things) to cater to a minority is insane, if they did that before, i would have a 4th mother by now. i didn't expect brawl to be this combo heavy place, just a fun brawler.

i am just glad Nintendo decided to try and be more competitive and do something different, in ssb4, i would have played it regardless, sonic is gonna punch Mario in the face.

That's nice

The Tall Nerd:

i think the " everything is awesome and no one is happy " line should be used here, this isn't street fighter x tekken or capcom fighting jam, there are no huge scandals or systematic failures, you can't do the same combo's , meh.

again, you're saying "so they just took out a potentially KEY fighting mechanic, meh". You're trying to downplay an important factor. If they took the combo system out of any other fighting game there would be total outrage. What's more, there's more to it than JUST the combos. I think that should have been made apparent by the laundry list of things in my previous comment. People preferring a game that they view as "better", and thus placing that game as the standard to compare others against hardly fits the "everything is awesome and no one is happy" scenario you're proposing.

The Tall Nerd:

also anyone this being able to hack with no repercussions as a plus. i have shadow the hedgehog and zidane in my brawl, i am quite happy.

That's entirely missing the point. You can hack just about any game. That's not how you compare two games though. That's like saying "which is better, Super Mario World or Yoshi's Island?" and then someone saying there are waaaay more hacks for SMW so obviously that's the superior game. It's a silly point to bring up considering the game isn't even designed to do that.

The Tall Nerd:

and while i again i kinda agree with you in a combo aspect, everything else grabs damage intake, i think its fine.

A lot of people don't, and considering your assessment is not the template we use to test the validity of our opinions, those criticisms still stand as valid.

The Tall Nerd:

anyways that my shtick, take or leave it

I'll leave it, thank you.

i will respond to he some things

first there are quite a few who are quick to label the game crap. next i said you cant do the same combo's there are plenty of them you can do, you just dont like the system brawl has set up. reasonable some people like 3rd strie better than super street fighter 4.

the rest of it i will leave it alone
i think we are going to dissagreem plus i dont feeling typing a full argument.
i disagree with you ,can we be the friends now

The Tall Nerd:

i will respond to he some things

Augh, don't do that. Either respond to all or none. Cherry picking points is a very obnoxious debate tactic and just makes it look like you have a poor overall argument.

The Tall Nerd:

first there are quite a few who are quick to label the game crap.

Yes, some people. I'm not some people. Don't bring up the position of some people when talking to a specific person.

The Tall Nerd:

next i said you cant do the same combo's there are plenty of them you can do, you just dont like the system brawl has set up. reasonable some people like 3rd strie better than super street fighter 4.

I'm obviously aware of how this all works. They did, however, remove the combo system that was available in Melee. It's nearly impossible to chain more than a 3 or so attacks in Brawl. It's a flimsy excuse for combo potential. Brawl is objectively limited/nerfed in this regard. That's just the way they designed it. SF4 and 3rd Strike aren't good comparisons since they both have deep combo systems. Yes, it does come down to preference, but no, it's not like they're on different yet even footing.

The Tall Nerd:

the rest of it i will leave it alone

shocking

The Tall Nerd:

i think we are going to dissagreem plus i dont feeling typing a full argument.
i disagree with you ,can we be the friends now

Only if you provide the liquor.

axlryder:

Only if you provide the liquor.

i have plenty

TizzytheTormentor:

I know why Crash and Spyro didn't make the roster...but it would have made so many people happy if they did...

I know it would've made me happy...
Activision loves money, isn't there any wheel greasing Sony can do to make this happen in the future?

Eclipse Dragon:

TizzytheTormentor:

I know why Crash and Spyro didn't make the roster...but it would have made so many people happy if they did...

I know it would've made me happy...
Activision loves money, isn't there any wheel greasing Sony can do to make this happen in the future?

Sadly, there is little chance of them getting into it...

In comparisons I've heard, I'm confused as to why the standardized moveset model is implied to be a negative?

In SSB, the idea that every character followed a common template meant that the game was easy to learn, and that one could switch between characters more fluidly. Complicated and individualized movesets are actually a major turn-off for me in fighting games, and the simplicity of the Smash Bros scheme is part of what makes it so fun. The players, regardless of their character choice use a common set of rules to respond to a variety of scenarios. Advantages can shift based on the combinations of characters and levels (which is why it helps to have a lot of both), but the tools we have are more or less unchanged.

The way I hear it, the implication that it is better for each character to become more individualized seems like a plea for the game to be more like a traditional fighter that demands character-intensive practice and not context-applied experience.

Punch You:
Finally, you also forgot an important part for hardcore gamers: design philosophy. Melee became hyper-competitive, because of a glitch. It was never intended, yet it was what made the game legendary. Yet, in Brawl, they tried to remove wavedashing and combos and even inserted random tripping into the game in order to undo all that Melee had (though it hasn't stopped people from playing it competitively).

PSABR was designed by people who were in the competitive fighting game scene at one point (Omar Kendall, Clockw0rk, Seth Killian) and tried their hardest to make PSABR competitive. My point is, both games moved in different directions in how competitive they wanted to be.

Might actually consider picking this up now.

After so many years, it's fair to say that I am a liiiiiiiitle biased for SSB, but I did find some of your arguments genuinely puzzling. Lacking a standard attack sounds pretty damn stupid to me, as some of my favorite characters relied heavily on standard melee (Pit and Link). The stages also seemed very dull from what I have seen and some of them were just flat playing-grounds with some weird shit happening in the background.

You did argue about that last point as well, but I perceived your opinion as positive, while I'd say active stages add a layer of fun to what is essentially a party-game. Good article overall, though. Just some differences in opinion ;)

Okysho:
I haven't played Public Service Announcement (PSA, lol) and as such I'm probably a biased SSB fan, but it's important to remember that SSB is a game that was created as a quick release title for the N64 as a cash grab that wasn't supposed to take off the way it did (much like portal) and as a result, it's evolutions are based on the decisions made during that period. I bring this up as a small counterpoint to the Mario stomp example.

Clones have a similar "rushed" problem. Ganondorf in Melee was thrown in at the last minute due to public demand from fans and Roy was included in an attempt to boost Fire Emblem Sales for Roy's game: Fire Emblem Blazing Sword, which was released in march 2002 (approx 4 months AFTER the release of Melee in nov 2001 both release dates are JP)

However none of these change the current gameplay differences between SSB and PSA. Ultimately, I'll have to make the judgement for myself and I always like the idea of world cross-over brawlers.

Actually, Roy's game was Sword of Seals (Fuuin no Tsurugi). Blazing Sword (Rekka no Ken) was FE7 with Eliwood (Roy's father), Lyn and Hector and it was the first Fire Emblem to be released outside of Japan (Released on 25th April 2003 in Japan, 3rd November 2003 for North America and 16th July 2004 for Europe).

You can probably guess why I know that if you ever played it.

Regarding the topic, I've been a Nintendo fan for 25 years. I'm obviously biased and my opinion is predictable enough that there's no real point trying to say anything of consequence, other than kids who grew up with a "Nintendo education" tend to actually be better people in real life. I could probably write a whole article or mini-thesis on how and why, and I'm not looking to cause an argument, it's just a passive observation throughout my life.

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here