PlayStation All-Stars Vs. Super Smash Bros.
Who wins in the brawl of platform fighters?
Read Full Article
Who wins in the brawl of platform fighters?
Read Full Article
PlayStation All-Stars Vs. Super Smash Bros.
- Thread starter Mike Kayatta
- Start date
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.
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.
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.Revnak said:
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).
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).
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.Mike Kayatta said:
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.
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!
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!
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.
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 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.
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.The Tall Nerd said:
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)
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.