Seriously Nintendo fans, enough with all the hate.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

The whole suddenly dying thing is pretty disconcerting and those super moves will wipe you out. Also, Sly felt under-powered when I played him, and I like Sly, SO IT SUX!

him over there:
People are hating on playstation allstars? news to me.

News to me too. Not at all a surprise though. If all the hate on the Internet were a liquid you could fill the entire Universe with it. __

PreviouslyPwned:
See, the thing is, SSB works because Nintendo has all those iconic characters. Playstation doesn't have that luxury.

You obviously didn't see me squeal with delight when I found out Sweet Tooth is in the game, then.

LastGreatBlasphemer:

SNIP for space-saving

It is an interesting proposal you have there, it's one they have already done or had third parties already done, but I suppose your main idea was to keep the character line up but instead make it closer to the 1v1 fighter format that most are used to. I can see that going well, but even as far as absurdity goes, the game would still come out like a Marvel vs Capcom cluster-fuck instead of a SSB-style one.

I think it comes from the idea of just having all these crazy people from different games in one place that made the SSB games excel, which I could see why they tried it that way.

As for all of your 'why' questions, you must already figure someone else is poised to ask 'why not' everytime? Not me, mind you, but I like to point out that sort of thing.

My final point lies in the idea of 'competition', it really doesn't matter if the idea is refined or not, if enough people play it, a range of tournaments and competitions on greater scales will follow.

LastGreatBlasphemer:

We're treated with the most idiotic comments from people who have never played the games, looked down on when we buy a console that changes the way we play games rather than sticking to a formula, and are generally just treated like children.

Puh-lease.

"You've never played the games" is generally whipped out as a variation of "no true scotsman." It's trotted out with the mentality that nobody who's actually played a Nintendo game could EVER criticise it.

You're also grossly misrepresenting why people "look down on" the Wii and its purchasers. I half expected you to proclaim, "innovation!" there.

I'm guessing there's a reason you believe Wii owners are treated like children, but it's not the one you are thinking of.

It's a ripoff, but Nintendo doesn't make Smash Bros games often enough, so a competitor with an all new lineup isn't a bad idea at all.

The kill system sounds convoluted and unbalanced. If they're trying to avoid the Smash Bros ring out mechanic, why not just do a basic life bar? It worked adequately in the Power Stone games for a 4 person fight, so why not do that instead of making all your gameplay revolve around hitting with a handful of special attacks which are sure to be painfully unbalanced?

Here's the thing about Sony's Battle Royal All-Stars etc: It's coming out two generations too late. It comes out claiming it wants to rival Smash Brothers but if Sony really wanted to rival Smash Brothers it would have started trying to do so on the PS2 or, PSX. It really should have started at the PS2, if not at launch than soon after when Sony still had a large roaster of characters that it had exclusive rights to. The current roaster includes a Big Daddy: a character seen on the PS3, Xbox 360 and, PC. Sony All-Stars should be made up of Sony characters, I mean it's in the name after all. The thing is, at this point in our current generation Sony doesn't have enough popular exclusive characters to utilize without taking multiple characters from certain games. As it stands right now, they can still likely get away with using Dart, Cloud and, the knight from Medievil. If this project started back between 2000 and, 2005 they could have included those same characters plus Dante, Leon Kennedy, Lara Croft, Pyramid Head and, likely a lot more.

This could very well be a good game. Hell, it may get me to dust off a controller and maybe even buy a second one (my PS3 is currently being used to watch movies exclusively). I just think it's a little bit too late for Sony to make a game like this...As for Microsoft saying 'we wouldn't want their version'...yes I fucking would! You own Rare dammit, USE THEM.

Austin Manning:
le snip

Alright, for a damn long time I've been a defender of the true meaning of "rip off", and this game is an obvious rip off. Like, really obvious. Like, really obvious. It's almost exactly the same in every way outside of the characters and a few small changes. IA few times when I was watching some gameplay I thought I was watching SSB for a second.

Not to say that makes it a bad game, but if you can't see how blatant a rip off it is, then chances are you're the one that's biased.

Zachary Amaranth:

Puh-lease.

"You've never played the games" is generally whipped out as a variation of "no true scotsman." It's trotted out with the mentality that nobody who's actually played a Nintendo game could EVER criticise it.

You're also grossly misrepresenting why people "look down on" the Wii and its purchasers. I half expected you to proclaim, "innovation!" there.

I'm guessing there's a reason you believe Wii owners are treated like children, but it's not the one you are thinking of.

Quite possibly.
"Innovation" is an interesting term. Yeah they built a console around motion gaming. Could that be considered innovation? Possibly, maybe if it hadn't been done before. But the fact that is was so poorly done is probably what really draws the line there. Hell, they had to release a peripheral just to get the Wiimote to do what it was originally intended to do!

As far as misinterpretation as to why people look down on Wii owners, no I don't think I've missed the point. It's the same reason as any. Console wars haven't changed much in the last decade, and people wanting so bad to not be seen as children for playing video games drives them to do things that are flat out immature. If you have to prove you're not a child, you're a child.

BishopofAges:
It is an interesting proposal you have there, it's one they have already done or had third parties already done, but I suppose your main idea was to keep the character line up but instead make it closer to the 1v1 fighter format that most are used to. I can see that going well, but even as far as absurdity goes, the game would still come out like a Marvel vs Capcom cluster-fuck instead of a SSB-style one.

I think it comes from the idea of just having all these crazy people from different games in one place that made the SSB games excel, which I could see why they tried it that way.

As for all of your 'why' questions, you must already figure someone else is poised to ask 'why not' everytime? Not me, mind you, but I like to point out that sort of thing.

My final point lies in the idea of 'competition', it really doesn't matter if the idea is refined or not, if enough people play it, a range of tournaments and competitions on greater scales will follow.

"Why not" being the most important question of all of course, but in this case I think the "why" is far more important.

Why does it have to be like Smash Brothers? Why not?
Because Smash Brothers is a broken formula. Two button fighting died with Bloody Roar. Relying on the popularity of a character to sell a game is still just as bad as rehashing Call of Duty every year (but unfortunately it's what we want, so we can't really discount that part). 2 button fighting style creates a problem, there's no depth to the combo system. There's no depth to the fighting. Many of the characters will be grouped into their respective types, but you won't see obvious differences between them.

Examples:
Donkey Kong and Bowser have similar play styles in that you have to rely on extremely close combat. You have to do a lot of trapping and rely heavily on your stun. Unfortunately the have roughly the same move pattern which makes all of their attacks visible as hell. Any character with any modicum of speed or range control is going to dominate them. They're both extremely slow and generally have to close the gap in the same manner. A technique to handle one, will work just as well for the other.

Zangief and E. Honda are both technically command grapplers. Unfortunately one technique against Zangeif, will not have the same effect against E. Honda. Honda has the ability to close the gap between you means versus a board controller he's removing the board control. He also has strong striking power. Zangief on the other hand has no way to close the gap. He has a fireball dodge step attack that can get him roughly two steps worth of distance, but closing the gap means you're going to be doing a lot of empty jumps. You can't handle them the same way.

Yes it's copying off Super Smash Bros. but no more so then Mortal Combat copied off Street Fighter, games of the same genre take notes off each other in order to improve.

Davroth:
Oh you are absolutely right, we don't know enough about the game yet. I will say this, though, that system for KOs that they explained during the press conference sounds terrible. That part they should have copied from Smash Bros. Here's hoping it's just one of many game modes.

Also, welcome to the console wars. Everything is going according to plan.

Yeah, supers-only KO's don't make a lot of sense.
Also, OP, you're overreacting. The biggest assholes among us are usually the most vocal about their stupid opinions; it's part of what makes them assholes. While I do think they did far too little to differentiate PSASBR (jeez, what an unwieldly acronym) from SSB, that doesn't automatically make it a bad game. I mean, I fail to see how Little Big Planet Karting will be any different than a theoretical ModNation Racers sequel, but I still think it's going to be pretty good.

So, the fighting/party game genre is being done by someone else than Nintendo. Yay.

This kind of reminds of a time when every open-word action game was called a GTA rip-off. And as is the case with that situation, I think the main problem is that there just aren't a lot of party brawler games. I mean, except for Smash Bros., Rag Doll Kung Fu and TMNT: Smash-Up, I can't think of any other game in the genre.

Well, except for Powerstone (which, ironically, came out the same year as Smash Bros.), but I don't think it really counts, as you can actually move around in three dimensions, altering the gameplay experience.

I agree that it is a rip-off but that is NOT a bad thing. Games rip each other off all the time and people still buy them regardless of the bitching they do before the game is released. Not all the characters have been released (nor should they, it keeps things a mystery) and we still do not know a whole lot about it. I do like how they are using the Vita along with the PS3.

Matthew94:
Have you been in the "Will the WiiU be outdated thread?"

It's pure Nintendo hate in there, you aren't some "persecuted minority".

I never said I was. I think it's wrong that hundreds of people are attacking a game that hasn't been released yet.

I also think it's wrong for people to simply bash Nintendo, though after taking a peep at WiiU outdated forum I must say I didn't see any of that. What I saw was mostly just conjecture about how releasing a console without showing any specs, not to mention one that only seems to be at par with the competition in terms of power, may have been a strategic mistep. No one (that I saw mind you) was saying that the WiiU would be complete shiite on a crusty roll or that it was just a badly made knock off of Microsoft and Sony's systems.

While I do think that it is a blatant rip-off of SSB, I don't really care. These things tend to iron themselves out. If it was a really shitty rip-off of a SSB clone, then it'll go over very poorly, sell poorly, and they'll probably get their asses sued off. If it turned out to be a great, well-crafted innovative game that builds upon SSB and surpasses it in quality and mechanics, then it will sell a lot, and frankly, I don't see a problem with that. Why wouldn't you wan't an excellent game on the market. Then they'll probably get sued anyways. But seriously, if it turns out to be a legitimately great game, then it's not just a cheesy clone anymore, it's become a great game in its own right. And really, SSB has been sitting on a goldmine of replay value. People played melee excitedly during the 7 year gap in between then and brawl, and brawl, in my personal experience, after playing it on a regular basis for the past 4 years, doesn't seem to show any signs of becoming boring. Why no one has taken advantage of this earlier, well, my captcha "beats me", says it all.
Edit: Also I felt compelled to argue in this manner after seeing the gift from the gods that is the WiiU pro controller. I can't in my right mind argue that PS:BR is wrong and horrible, and then defend the pro controller. They are both, in essence, the same thing; A mechanism used to draw major attention and sales.

I don't own a single Nintendo console, and I have a strong distaste for anything Smash Bros related (as opposed to some of my friends). I also own a PS3, and am a fan of many Sony series, including Sly Cooper, Ratchet & Clank, and Infamous. That being said, I don't like All Stars Battle because it looks really stupid. The intro to this being announced at E3 was an awkward connection to a commercial that aired a year or so ago. Not a good sign.

Also, you know how it's kinda weird and garrish when you see Mario and Gannon next to each other in Smash Bros? You can probably double that for this game, since the more cartoony mascots (Sly, Ratchet {speculation}, and Jak {more speculation}) are going to be across the slew of "dark, gritty" mascots that will be in there, like Sweet Tooth, Kratos, Nathan Drake (not so much gritty, but more realistic), and that guy from Killzone that I had no idea had a name, because Sony has gotten on the dark and gritty bandwagon. The main reason is that these characters were never meant to be next to each other, and as such were made with completely different art styles that don't compliment each other.

Also, remember the last game that had a Sony mascot crossover? image

Didn't go so well, from what I understand.

Sorry if I seem snarky, but I'm just really disappointed by Sony trying to do this. Shouldn't they have done this when the last edition of Smash Bros came out?

EDIT: Huh. Image isn't working so well. I meant to have the box art of Playstation Heroes there. I'll try to fix it in a bit, sorry.

Phlakes:

Austin Manning:
le snip

Alright, for a damn long time I've been a defender of the true meaning of "rip off", and this game is an obvious rip off. Like, really obvious. Like, really obvious. It's almost exactly the same in every way outside of the characters and a few small changes. IA few times when I was watching some gameplay I thought I was watching SSB for a second.

Not to say that makes it a bad game, but if you can't see how blatant a rip off it is, then chances are you're the one that's biased.

Out of curiosity can I hear your definition of "rip off"? Also, saying: "something is exactly the same except" is a fairly weak argument. I mean, that's like saying a car is exactly the same as a bike except that it has two more wheels, an engine, and cargo space.

Austin Manning:

Phlakes:

Austin Manning:
le snip

Alright, for a damn long time I've been a defender of the true meaning of "rip off", and this game is an obvious rip off. Like, really obvious. Like, really obvious. It's almost exactly the same in every way outside of the characters and a few small changes. IA few times when I was watching some gameplay I thought I was watching SSB for a second.

Not to say that makes it a bad game, but if you can't see how blatant a rip off it is, then chances are you're the one that's biased.

Also, saying: "something is exactly the same except" is a fairly weak argument. I mean, that's like saying a car is exactly the same as a bike except that it has two more wheels, and engine, and cargo space.

Well, yeah, that's completely true. I agree with that 100%. But-

Phlakes:
It's almost exactly the same

words are important.

Out of curiosity can I hear your definition of "rip off"?

Well, going along with the car metaphor, making a hybrid sedan after someone else has made a hybrid sedan is perfectly fine, and taking inspiration from theirs (like the raised backs you see on the Prius) is also fine. But if you copy the body work, the dashboard, and use most of the same parts inside the car, then you're crossing the line.

So, making a fighting game after someone else made a fighting game is fine, but making a four-player, vertical-heavy fighting game based on licensed characters and stages, with the same controls ("each character has a variety of moves accessed via a directional input in conjunction with an attack button", from Game Informer), style, and even HUD, well, that's a rip off. It's completely obvious that someone at Sony told this developer "we want Smash Brothers but with Playstation" and they stuck to that hard.

well this works both ways.

tons of people rag on Nintendo for not doing more mature games or not focusing enough on "hardcore gamers"
then there was a guy from Sony who called Nintendo's Wiimote a "lollipop" only for Sony to come out with the Playstation Move controller that looks even more like a lollipop.

In short I think the bitching fanboys are taking shots back at Sony for all the shots they feel they have taken from other haters over the years.

So ya. Person A complains about one thing, and Person B fires back by complaining about another.
then you just get flame wars.

both sides are childish, neither side is greater then the other.

I'm saying this and I support Nintendo more then other groups. :P

Phlakes:

Austin Manning:

Phlakes:

Alright, for a damn long time I've been a defender of the true meaning of "rip off", and this game is an obvious rip off. Like, really obvious. Like, really obvious. It's almost exactly the same in every way outside of the characters and a few small changes. IA few times when I was watching some gameplay I thought I was watching SSB for a second.

Not to say that makes it a bad game, but if you can't see how blatant a rip off it is, then chances are you're the one that's biased.

Also, saying: "something is exactly the same except" is a fairly weak argument. I mean, that's like saying a car is exactly the same as a bike except that it has two more wheels, and engine, and cargo space.

Well, yeah, that's completely true. I agree with that 100%. But-

Phlakes:
It's almost exactly the same

words are important.

Out of curiosity can I hear your definition of "rip off"?

Well, going along with the car metaphor, making a hybrid sedan after someone else has made a hybrid sedan is perfectly fine, and taking inspiration from theirs (like the raised backs you see on the Prius) is also fine. But if you copy the body work, the dashboard, and use most of the same parts inside the car, then you're crossing the line.

So, making a fighting game after someone else made a fighting game is fine, but making a four-player, vertical-heavy fighting game based on licensed characters and stages, with the same controls ("each character has a variety of moves accessed via a directional input in conjunction with an attack button", from Game Informer), style, and even HUD, well, that's a rip off. It's completely obvious that someone at Sony told this developer "we want Smash Brothers but with Playstation" and they stuck to that hard.

The car metaphor while good actually applies better for creative works than actually cars ironically enough. Designing and finding the best way to make a car is a science. If everybody is trying to find the most aerodynamic design they'll all look incredibly similar because eventually they'll all reach the same conclusion on how to solve the problem. With a creative work if you scope what makes the other guy's thing good and create a re-skinned carbon copy (Not really what's going on with PS allstars but meh) then that would be far more of a ripoff then simply realizing that the competitor made the most objectively provable aerodynamic car or whatever.

I agree. I've always been a Smash Bros. fan, but Battle Royale still looks awesome. While I can see why some people would view it as a rip-off, I don't see why that automatically makes it a negative thing. Look at it this way: We will finally have a game where Sly Cooper vs. Big Daddy vs. Sweet Tooth vs. Kratos is possible. Rip-off or not, I have yet to think of a way for that not to be awesome, at least in theory.

The strangest thing to me, is that once you make it so each attack only builds power they lose their use. In Smash every attack has a lot of properties, and therefore has specific uses in certain situations... I can't see that happening here.

him over there:

The car metaphor while good actually applies better for creative works than actually cars ironically enough. Designing and finding the best way to make a car is a science. If everybody is trying to find the most aerodynamic design they'll all look incredibly similar because eventually they'll all reach the same conclusion on how to solve the problem. With a creative work if you scope what makes the other guy's thing good and create a re-skinned carbon copy (Not really what's going on with PS allstars but meh) then that would be far more of a ripoff then simply realizing that the competitor made the most objectively provable aerodynamic car or whatever.

They could've at least changed the HUD, I'm not sure moving away from RGBY would hurt the game that much.

Its probably not going to be a poorly made Smash Bros. clone, its most likely going to be a very well made Smash Bros. clone! I mean that in a good way too.

LastGreatBlasphemer:
SNIP again to save space

I understand where you're coming from and what it is that you're saying, but what I am trying to point out is that there are people out there who want to play a fighting game without memorizing a million and two moves, combos, counters, counter-combo, defense-break, etc.

VERY TRUE that they could have gone a different direction with this game, but this is the one they chose, will the controls be different? I, for one, don't know.

Sure there are some fighters that get dominated and out-right not used in SSB tournements, but that is the SAME for any fighter game and if you've convinced yourself otherwise, I'm sorry. If 'two button' fighting really died out with Bloody Roar, then why is SSB popular?

It seems you've missed the point of my final statement, it really doesn't matter what formula fits into your personal ideals for a fighting game or those of a competitive schema, it matters if people find it fun to play and play constantly against others. (hell there are still PONG tournaments for crap sakes.)

I'm really not trying to argue here, but it seems that stating the obvious is getting harder and harder, especially over the net.

I would agree with you if they hadn't made the game look exactly like smash brothers, font and all. We have a million shooters that are virtually the same, sure, but at least those look slightly different. In this case it almost seems like they added a (terrible) game mode and made some new character skins for SSB:B

I also think there is a photo somewhere of the video trailer for the game on youtube, from the Playstation youtube channel, where the tags are "SSB:B, Super smash brothers brawl, super smash brothers"

Eh, I expected it to be a half-decent smash bros. knock off.

Was even a little excited at the prospect of shooting sly cooper with a RYNO gun, or throwing daxter at clank, etc.

I wouldn't mind playing smash bros: sony edition, as the SSB formula is excellently genius, although...;

The all stars score system though is just... just terrible.

One of the least popular additions to brawl (which I happen to like, but that's neither here nor there), and they just make a game centered around it. There's no penalty for taking hits. It's... asinine, is what it is.

No matter how much you like super moves, a fighting game about super moves sounds just senseless. Additionally, since the only function of super moves is to kill instantly, most of them are going to feel and function exactly the same.

The appeal of smash bros.'s more open, roam-friendly stages was that the characters could toss each other around. All stars just seems to be a zoomed-out camera... and no health bars.

Nintendo came up with a game where they take various Nintendo characters in a 4 player brawler. It turns out to be a success so they make two sequels to it.

Sony makes a 4 player brawler where they make a character roster with various characters appearing on different Sony systems where you need to use super attacks in order to score points.

Clearly this is not even close to being a rip-off of Super Smash Bros. It's so incredibly different I can't even begin to describe it...

D Moness:

OlasDAlmighty:
Whenever Nintendo does something original it's either laughed at or called a gimmick,

Yeah when nintendo comes with something it is silly stupid and gets laughed at then another company comes with it (like sony) then suddenly it is gods gift to men for many people.

That is something that ticks me off.

I'll hammer on this drum.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Go fuck yourselves Sony because this is a rip-off and it is clear as day.

Is that bad? Not really, but doesn't change the fact that it is a rip off.

What I wish they DID copy more from super smash bros was the good character roster. Sly racoon seems to be the only notable one in there that i'm personaly familiar with. Where are the other like him?

Original super smash bros had this roster of all the major iconic nintendo characters(mostly, if only they could retroactively include banjo-kazooie :P) and a few extra's you may or may not have known about.

This one has... maybe 2? of the more iconic playsation characters (though admittedly i'm not so in one the newest generation) and the rest are all just randoms.

I understand why, since stuff like spyro, crash, rachet and clank, jak and daxter, etc they apparently don't own anymore, but it's still disappointing.
Actually, the cynic in me just now is wondering weather they might have some of these other characters but they're keeping them back so they can sell them as DLC.

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. If Sony pulls it off, more people can enjoy the Super Smash Bros-style gameplay that so many people love; how could that be a bad thing?

MysticToast:

PreviouslyPwned:
See, the thing is, SSB works because Nintendo has all those iconic characters. Playstation doesn't have that luxury.

You obviously didn't see me squeal with delight when I found out Sweet Tooth is in the game, then.

Who the hell is sweet tooth??

Samus Aran but a man:
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. If Sony pulls it off, more people can enjoy the Super Smash Bros-style gameplay that so many people love; how could that be a bad thing?

A solid system of thought, friend.

Don't like it? Alright. Maybe some people will. Don't buy it and let them have their fun. *shrug*

Yes, it is most certaintly heavily...shall we say, "inspired" by SSB. However, I fail to see a problem here. It WILL have some things that are not present in SSB which in turn will inspire Nintendo to add new features to their game. We get a mascot brawler with Sony characters and some more evolution in the genre. Everybody wins. It will not comprimise Nintendos creativity or take away from their sales (probably).

Honestly, people should be glad that Sony and Microsot copy Nintendo. It gives the whole industry more variety and we, the consumer, will only profit from the increased competition (not saying that only Nintendo innovates). Nintendo still gets bragging rights for bringing motion controls and the mascot-fighter into the console world so whats the big problem? "Loyal" fans who think this diminishes their chosen videogame company? Please.

In my opinion, I think it's a great thing Sony's doing. Brawl was pretty incredible not just because it was fun but also because it was a celebration of nintendo's rich history. I seriously hope Microsoft give it a go at some point so I can see Master Chief go up against Marcus!

The user interface and the level designs seem identical to Smash Bros., but the mechanics themselves seem more similar to Final Fantasy Dissidia. In Dissidia, you build up "bravery" by attacking your opponent and causing them to lose their own. You cause damage to your opponent's HP by using HP attacks, which do damage proportionate to your bravery. Sony All-Stars seems to have a similar mechanice, but dumbed down. I think someone else mentioned Dissidia in this thread, so I'm glad I'm not the only one that noticed.

At the end of the day, they could rip off Smash Bros. entirely and I wouldn't care. Especially since Big Daddy being in the game means that other, non-Sony Exclusive characters, might be in it. Its a long way out though, who knows what they'll change between now and then.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked