All-stars competition?

[umegames]

One thing that has been nice about the Smash series is its ability to grow and expand in quality with no competition other than its predecesor.

We know that competition is healthy, but is Playstation All-stars the healthy competitor that Nintendo needs or will it just be nothing more than a wanna be?

I find All stars to be respectable and grand in its own right, though I prefer nintendo icons over sonys', i will be purchasing the game. I have some concerns about it, but untill its in our hands, it remains to be seen if they can really stand toe-to-toe with smash.

 

[Big-Cat]

Smash, thanks to SF4's big FG boom, is going to have to compete with the other fighting games, not just platform fighters, even if its status as a fighter is debatable on SRK (protip: never bring it up). This wasn't so much the case with Melee and Brawl even if you had games like Guilty Gear and Tekken thriving.

All-Stars is too early to tell where that game is going. The K.O. method naturally raises up some stinks.

 

[soviet prince]

both games have there moments of fun and should coexist together, why does it have to be a competition? I hope both games are good solid fun games that we can pick up and play anytime. Also since smash will not be out for a while it will be a good diversion :D

 

[Big-Cat]

Competition doesn't mean that they can't coexist. I'm assuming the OP is talking about from an economic standpoint. With the competition being considerably more prominent, namely that developers are trying their hardest to get information out through various websites, Nintendo cannot be as introverted with this game like in the past if they want to sell even more than before, that and Brawl left a bad taste in a lot of people's mouths. This also means plenty of local tests like a lot of the other fighting games have done.

Wait, am I going off tangent?

 

[Johnknight1]

Play-Station All Stars Battle Royale is gonna be trash. I'm calling it now. It's not going to be in league with Smash Bros., or even TMNT Smash or Jump Ultimate Stars. It's gonna be in the bargain bins within the next 3 years, along with that throwaway Cartoon Network fighting game. And for the record, I want PSASBR to be a good game because I want more good games to choose from. That and to dispel anyone from labeling me a fanboy (given how much I love some of Sony's IPs).

As for Smash vs. Street Fighter IV, I don't really see the competition, because the audiences are completely different. That and quite frankly both Smash WiiU and Smash 3DS will outsell SFIV. I mean, literally Smash dominates fighting game genre sales. If it isn't the best-selling fighting game franchise, these 2 games will make it. Melee and Brawl are the 2 best-selling fighting games of all-time, and that's without any re-releases, updated versions, ports, or expansion packs (so far; a WiiU VC Melee isn't a far fetched idea).

 

[Baskerville]

This will be my response to people who say PS All-Stars will top SSB competitively

 

[Johnknight1]

This is my response to anybody who says that PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale can be as good as Smash Bros., let alone Jump Ultimate Stars or TMNT Smash.

 

[Mypantisgone]

Judging by some videos,everyone has the same weight or something.

 

[lordvaati]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3685TEdlOA

at the very least, they sound quite serious about making this(in comparison tothe PTE vids, were they were trying to fake enjoyment on some parts).

besides, Screwattack put it best in one of their Top 10s that having a rival for smash wouldn't be a bad thing.

 

[Wario Bros.]

Even though I have no plans to get a PS3 or a Vita, PASBR does catch my attention from what I've seen in the trailers and stuff. But like KumaOso said, it's too early to see the game's true potential but it looks good so far. The quality of the games does seem far, far more up than what TMNT Smash Up or other wannabes had.

As to comparing it to Smash, there's no doubt they were inspired by Smash and no doubt they're trying to make it have a different experience than Smash. PSASBR is more on HP with stocks, knock back that never increases, no dying from stage edges/abysses and more focus on upgradable special attacks with power meters. The quality and physics seem just right and they know what they're doing. How well it'll do competitively compared to Smash seems too early as well.

But I'm still not getting a PS3 or Vita due to lack of interest in getting those consoles, money, and that I'm happy with the current consoles I have.

Oh, by the way, call me crazy but I actually love Cartoon Network: Punch Time Explosion (XL). Sure, it's not gonna replace any of the Smash games and they could've done better on quality, but the creators seem to understand what made Smash good. The 3DS version was my very first 3DS game and I still play it since it's the closest thing I've ever played to a real Smash Bros. game.

 

[Johnknight1]

Judging by some videos,everyone has the same weight or something.

Everyone looks to have the same weight, attacks, there is no ebb and flow, and the game looks unbalanced. Also, defense looks non-existent (including spacing), and I got a feeling there will be loads of broken combos. Oh, and so far the only mode shown is something similar to time mode but where you only get kills by super attacks.

That is what we call a "bland party game" without any depth. This is why I am calling this game the next Shrek/Cartoon Network garbage party platform fighting game.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3685TEdlOA

at the very least, they sound quite serious about making this(in comparison tothe PTE vids, were they were trying to fake enjoyment on some parts).

Doesn't mean it looks good. Judging by what I've seen, what august said about playing it, and how it looks, I wouldn't be surprised in Smash WiiU and 3DS were better games at this point. It looks pretty obvious that their staff (albeit talented) haven't worked on a fighting game, or possibly even a platform-esk multiplayer game.

 

[Zzuxon]

All-Stars is just another ******** attempt by Sony to rip off nintendo. It's not a threat.

 

[soviet prince]

Play-Station All Stars Battle Royale is gonna be trash. I'm calling it now. It's not going to be in league with Smash Bros., or even TMNT Smash or Jump Ultimate Stars. It's gonna be in the bargain bins within the next 3 years, along with that throwaway Cartoon Network fighting game. And for the record, I want PSASBR to be a good game because I want more good games to choose from. That and to dispel anyone from labeling me a fanboy (given how much I love some of Sony's IPs).

As for Smash vs. Street Fighter IV, I don't really see the competition, because the audiences are completely different. That and quite frankly both Smash WiiU and Smash 3DS will outsell SFIV. I mean, literally Smash dominates fighting game genre sales. If it isn't the best-selling fighting game franchise, these 2 games will make it. Melee and Brawl are the 2 best-selling fighting games of all-time, and that's without any re-releases, updated versions, ports, or expansion packs (so far; a WiiU VC Melee isn't a far fetched idea).

So why do you say it will not be as good/fin as smash other then that it's not smash

All-Stars is just another ******** attempt by Sony to rip off nintendo. It's not a threat.

I guess call of duty and the million other first party shooter games are all a ******** rip off of doom and street fighter is another copy of Heavyweight champ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavyweight_Champ_(1976_arcade_game)

in the game world similar engines will be used and sony picked the one that they think is the most fun and that is the smash engine. Also if I am not mistaken smash was not the first to even use this system.

 

[Retroend]

though i think all stars looks cool, its not really a big competitor. smash has been around for a long time. all stars is new. i think that at least sakurai and his team could learn some examples from this series though. it looks interesting at the very least.

 

[Tollhouse]

That is what we call a "bland party game" without any depth. This is why I am calling this game the next Shrek/Cartoon Network garbage party platform fighting game.

^^^ This. However even though it'll probably not compete with smash I am interested in seeing the roster and seeing how big it will be.

 

[DakotaBonez]

It seems like all the stages have walls that get in the way of knocking people off the edge like Shadow Moses Island
Except Shadow Moses Island has a low enough roof for that.

 

[Tollhouse]

It seems like all the stages have walls that get in the way of knocking people off the edge like Shadow Moses Island
Except Shadow Moses Island has a low enough roof for that.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the object isn't to knock the opponent off the stage, right? All the combatants have health bars I thought.

 

[soviet prince]

no heath bars, character are koed by super moves, you build up super moves by gaining ap which can be aquired by beating up on your opponets. It's anti camping at the best

 

[Tollhouse]

no heath bars, character are koed by super moves, you build up super moves by gaining ap which can be aquired by beating up on your opponets. It's anti camping at the best

Oh ok. But it's not like they have a damage meter and receive more knockback they more they are hit, I hope.

 

[Frostwraith]

how funny, it looks like we are running out of creative minds... oh well, guess it could be applied to anything.

but the name "PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale" says rip-off out loud... anyone remember the Japanese name of the original Super Smash Bros.? Nintendo All-Star Dairantou Smash Brothers... yeah pretty much this. it is a lowly move to come up with something like this.

even in the trailer $ony released on YouTube they had "ssb" "super smash bros" as tags, so there.

honestly I don't mind competition but this PSABR screams ripoff, much like PS Move. nothing new here, it's just 21st century Sony, where they get the money by ripping off ideas from the competition instead of trying something new.

the way I see how it plays is even more bland! there are no lifebars or any damage indicator! it's just about building up a super move, which is always a OHKO. it's even less deeper than Smash where you have to know what moves should you use for building up damage or to finish the foe off. it's just that stupid.

 

[Tollhouse]

The name isn't creative at all. It sounds like they named the game after the description, really. How would people address in a casual manner? "Hey dude, wanna play some Playstation all stars?" Hey, dude wanna play play Battle Royale?" It doesn't roll off the tongue well unlike something simple like melee and brawl does.

 

[lordvaati]

the original name fr the game was Title Fight(which sounded WAY better, btw), but I believe they had to change it because it was copyrighted by a band.

 

[Johnknight1]

So why do you say it will not be as good/fin as smash other then that it's not smash

Look, I've seen gameplay of it, and there is no focus on balancing, the way you kill opponents and win is based around a gimmick or 2, there is no ring out, there seems to be loads of stage interference, there is no flow in the offense, the game makes Brawl look as fast as an F-Zero racer, and there seems to be no good defensive mechanics at all.

Oh, and the characters all look like they move at the same speed, the stages are all huge and thus camping and running away will be easy (which this method can break that "rewarding offense" that you mentioned, and reward camping, stalling, and running away even more). On top of that, this game has no off the stage area or edges (at least none shown), and thus no off the stage/edge gameplay, therefore it lacks a area that makes smash bros. more unique and deep, and that means that this potentially easily abused super move system will be the only game mode (via time and stock modes).

Also, with the huge stage size, you can camp to charge that up; that is why fighting games like Street Fighter, MvC, and BlazBlue have small stages and much faster gameplay.

Oh, and judging by what a person or 2 I know who have played it and know how deep smash is, this game won't have competitive depth at all if it comes out this year as planned. Also, the controls from what I hear are lose, a lot of moves are broken, and a lot of combos are broken. PSABR sounds about as "balanced" as Smash WiiU and 3DS are now!

I guess call of duty and the million other first party shooter games are all a ******** rip off of doom and street fighter is another copy of Heavyweight champ

The difference is that even though those games have borrowed elements, they are their own games/series, and they have redeeming qualities, depth, and originality. I want PlayStation All-Stars to be a great game, because the world could always use more great games, but I know it's going to be garbage, and a shadow of the shadow of smash!

Also if I am not mistaken smash was not the first to even use this system.

That was Outfoxies, which much of the HAL Laboratories smash had made when at Namco Bandai. Although the gameplay and engine were totally different from Smash 64.

 

[soviet prince]

how funny, it looks like we are running out of creative minds... oh well, guess it could be applied to anything.

but the name "PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale" says rip-off out loud... anyone remember the Japanese name of the original Super Smash Bros.? Nintendo All-Star Dairantou Smash Brothers... yeah pretty much this. it is a lowly move to come up with something like this.

even in the trailer $ony released on YouTube they had "ssb" "super smash bros" as tags, so there.

honestly I don't mind competition but this PSABR screams ripoff, much like PS Move. nothing new here, it's just 21st century Sony, where they get the money by ripping off ideas from the competition instead of trying something new.

the way I see how it plays is even more bland! there are no lifebars or any damage indicator! it's just about building up a super move, which is always a OHKO. it's even less deeper than Smash where you have to know what moves should you use for building up damage or to finish the foe off. it's just that stupid.

do I have to point out again how all games take inspiration from others, again by that logic all first person shooter are a copy of doom. Also you contridict yourself in your post when you point out the differences this game has. I applaud them for trying something new it's an interesting take on how they approach life in the game.

Look, I've seen gameplay of it, and there is no focus on balancing, the way you kill opponents and win is based around a gimmick or 2so does smash bros, knocking characters off stage is not a gimmick?, there is no ring outno that's the point smash are diffrent games and have diffrent objectives, there seems to be loads of stage interferenceand smash bros stages don't? Plus there been 4 stages revealed and it is already confirmed that u can turn stage interference off which smash don't even have itself., there is no flow in the offense, the game makes Brawl look as fast as an F-Zero racer, and there seems to be no good defensive mechanics at all.how is the no flow seems pretty good to me?



Oh, and the characters all look like they move at the same speed, the stages are all huge and thus camping and running away will be easy (which this method can break that "rewarding offense" that you mentioned, and reward camping, stalling, and running away even more)so how are you going to build up super meter and get KO'S by running and camping?. On top of that, this game has no off the stage area or edges (at least none shown)again that's the point off this game it don't revolve around knocking ppl off stage, and thus no off the stage/edge gameplaysandover village has off stage gameply btw, therefore it lacks a area that makes smash bros. more unique and deep, and that means that this potentially easily abused super move system will be the only game mode (via time and stock modes).

Also, with the huge stage size, you can camp to charge that up; that is why fighting games like Street Fighter, MvC, and BlazBlue have small stages and much faster gameplay.again camping will hurt you more then help

Oh, and judging by what a person or 2 I know who have played it and know how deep smash is, this game won't have competitive depth at all if it comes out this year as planned. Also, the controls from what I hear are lose, a lot of moves are broken, and a lot of combos are broken. PSABR sounds about as "balanced" as Smash WiiU and 3DS are now! yeah because we seen videos of smash wiiu right?

The difference is that even though those games have borrowed elements, they are their own games/series, and they have redeeming qualities, depth, and originalityso does this game. I want PlayStation All-Stars to be a great game, because the world could always use more great games, but I know it's going to be garbage, and a shadow of the shadow of smash! again you don't know that, you have not played it

That was Outfoxies, which much of the HAL Laboratories smash had made when at Namco Bandai. Although the gameplay and engine were totally different from Smash 64.

answers in bold

 

[Sacredtwin11]

@Soviet Prince
You don't need to build up super meters and get KO's while camping because if you're camping, you most likely are in the lead, and are camping to keep the lead and make sure the opponent doesn't kill you.

 

[lordvaati]

Look, I've seen gameplay of it, and there is no focus on balancing, the way you kill opponents and win is based around a gimmick or 2, there is no ring out, there seems to be loads of stage interference, there is no flow in the offense, the game makes Brawl look as fast as an F-Zero racer, and there seems to be no good defensive mechanics at all.

Oh, and the characters all look like they move at the same speed, the stages are all huge and thus camping and running away will be easy (which this method can break that "rewarding offense" that you mentioned, and reward camping, stalling, and running away even more). On top of that, this game has no off the stage area or edges (at least none shown), and thus no off the stage/edge gameplay, therefore it lacks a area that makes smash bros. more unique and deep, and that means that this potentially easily abused super move system will be the only game mode (via time and stock modes).

Also, with the huge stage size, you can camp to charge that up; that is why fighting games like Street Fighter, MvC, and BlazBlue have small stages and much faster gameplay.

Oh, and judging by what a person or 2 I know who have played it and know how deep smash is, this game won't have competitive depth at all if it comes out this year as planned. Also, the controls from what I hear are lose, a lot of moves are broken, and a lot of combos are broken. PSABR sounds about as "balanced" as Smash WiiU and 3DS are now!

here's some minor tidbits from Maj involving the game:

1) There’s no hitstun increase like Smash, because it wouldn’t really add anything to our game engine or resolve any problems that we might face. There’s no hitstun deterioration like Marvel, because although it’s a convenient system, none of us really like the idea of basic reactions changing halfway through a combo. We feel it’s better to keep attack behavior consistent as much as possible, so that players can move combo pieces around freely.

2) Currently throws are untechable, but this is a perfect example of something that could easily change over the next few weeks as we buckle down on playtesting for balance. Judging by the current state of the game, i personally happen to think that we can get away with oldschool untechable throws. But it’s not a terribly difficult feature to add, so we’ll see how it goes.

3) There’s no air control during hitstun, but i’m sure you’ve seen characters automatically flipping out of air reactions to regain mobility. Ed Ma has been experimenting with adding SFA3-style directional control to our automatic tech flips. You still wouldn’t be able to escape early out of true hitstun, but you’d have some control over how you recover in the air. We’re actually trying to be very careful about how our characters recoup from scary situations like air reactions, knockdowns, and things like that. You should always have a few defensive options under pressure.

4) Most characters can cancel moves into other moves, but it’s not as fomulaic as SF4′s normal -> special -> super. Canceling between attacks is much more of a character-specific feature in Battle Royale, but it’s still pretty intuitive once you actually get your hands on a character. I think you guys will have a lot of fun exploring our roster.

5) At the moment, quite a few characters can combo into their super moves in various unique ways. Everyone seems to have a different way of approaching it. Generally speaking, lvl2 supers are the easiest to combo into, but that ends up being kind of an expensive way to guarantee a single KO. There’s definitely a cost vs benefit decision to consider here, and those choices shift frequently over the course of a match.

6) All super attacks are unblockable, but as you’ve seen by now, there are many other ways to avoid them. We wanted to give people that exciting moment of figuring out a way to dodge Drake’s crumbling wall or Fat Princess’ giant chicken. I’m sure you’ll agree that having everyone stand around blocking supers would’ve led to incredibly boring gameplay. (We tried it a long time ago, and sure enough, it made us all sleepy.)

7?) Beating Sly on paper and beating Sly in a real match are two different things. He’s quite difficult to pin down! Mobility is never an issue for him and he can definitely hold his own in a fight. But really, what makes me happy is that we’ve got creative designers like Ray Ray Shen who come up with interesting gameplay proposals for unorthodox characters like Sly – and that Omar and Paul are willing to roll the dice on stuff like this.

At the very least, the Battle Royale community will have some extremely interesting discussions about Sly Cooper a year from now. And i think the fighting game community as a whole will benefit from those discussions.

just from this I can tell they are adding more in depth details, bebunking your argument on no flowing offense and no defensive options, and to a lesser extent character speed.. as for the large arenas, those were intentional, because some characters(Raedic) must have space control. Balancewise, Parappa's Boombox attack was nefed from the original presentation to E3(it shoots orbs farther away now), and the interview I posted they did say they are still balancing the cast out, so that ststement about there being no balance is flawed.

oh,and as for stage hazards: Omar confirmed you can turn them off.

 

[soviet prince]

@Soviet Prince
You don't need to build up super meters and get KO's while camping because if you're camping, you most likely are in the lead, and are camping to keep the lead and make sure the opponent doesn't kill you.

you will not know who is winning do to no score being displayed while your siting back hiding your opponents could be killing other players and getting points.

 

[shinhed-echi]

Comparing it to All-Stars:

Personally, I think PSASBR is not going to even dent Smash Bros 4's success. First of all, the Sony characters aren't half as memorable as Nintendo's, and Ninty has plenty to choose from.

Second, I totally hate the system where you can only defeat opponents through their equivalent of Final Smash. It totally sucks, IMO. Makes the rest of the battle kind of redundant (Granted I haven't played it, but it sounds boring as heck).




As for comparing it to other fighters, I don't think Smash is direct competition with the likes of Street Fighter, simply because it's not the same kind of experience. Maybe I'm wrong, since I'm speaking from a personal stance, but comparing Smash to traditional 2D-Fighters (aka, SFII clones), is like comparing Rail shooters to FPSs. The experience is different, they won't compete. (my cents)

 

[lordvaati]

S*** Just got Real.

 

[Johnknight1]

@ Vatti
Grabs being untechable seems broken, the lack of hitstun doesn't fit a game that doesn't have just regular KO's IMO.

Worst of all defense and spacing other than running away still seems worthless and non-existent. As much as people focus on Melee's offense, it's defense is pretty good overall. The same goes for games like Street Fighter II Soul Calibur III, Tekken, and Marvel vs. Capcom 2. Without defense, all you are doing is button mashing to muscle memory.

Also, this game still looks rushed (especially with a 2012 release date on 2 consoles), boring, and the addition of Seth Killian seems a little too late. If Seth Killian joined the development of this game earlier or from the get-go I would have more faith in this game ending up good. But as it stands, 4 or so months isn't enough to "fix" this game IMO.

 

[lordvaati]

well that's the thing, Johnny. we don't know all the features of the game just yet. we know tidbits, and we've only seen one part of it(the actual game has been in work since late 2010, and the development was revealed back in October, so 1-2 years is not that bad). let me put it this way: When Smash Bros Melee was shown,it showed footage of timed, 4-player matches with items-the same thing this game is doing. now would anyone seeing that have assumed how huge of a competitive scene that game would spawn?

I mean we haven't even seen stock or 1v1 play yet(though we might at EVO), so we can't just go, " this is gonna be lame" without even seeing the whole thing out. am I saying this is gonna trump Smash? hell no. am I saying this can compete with Smash? yes. it can at least be like the PSP to the DS, as they can give some competition. besides, I think Smash has had a monopoly on this genre for long enough,and unless Capcom revives Power stone, this is the best chance we got of another game in this genre.

 

[Johnknight1]

The difference is Melee looked more smooth, had more depth, a better camera angle, a more experienced company with more experience in fighting games (including Outfoxies and Smash 64), and probably more experience in gaming in general. The game had also been in development for a longer time. It is also worth mentioning that Melee and Brawl looked more exciting, played better, and looked complete in the demo; PSABR looks like it is far from complete!

And yes, I can say I think it's going to be lame, because I think it is based on video evidence and the mediocre reception it got from people who play smash bros.

 

[lordvaati]

....in comparison to the positive reputation from people who play traditional fighters. go figure.

 

[Johnknight1]

I never heard much positive reception from people who play the game competitively and frequently, only from people who don't play fighting games much or aren't very good.

The only people I heard say anything good was major media outlets IGN, GameSpot, etc., who largely don't know squat about competitive fighting games. They just focus on what the minute and broad details of the game, instead of the balance. Even some of those sources said the game was very unpolished. The game just doesn't look polished.

Still, if you are going to fool yourself into thinking this game will be in league with smash bros, you go right ahead. If you do that, you're setting yourself up for disappointment.

*waits for some random poster to call me a Nintendo fanboy even though I own multiple Sony consoles and I want PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale to be good*

 

[lordvaati]

Shoryuken who I was referring to, actually(the thread on the game has been getting notably positive feed back from people like Ultradavid, Gootecks, etc.)

and I'm not fooling myself into anything. there are tons of signs hat this game has a potential to be good, and that they are going full-out on it. my final verdict of the game though will come when I see how their system translates to singles/stock play.

 

[Johnknight1]

Well I wouldn't exactly call that as knowledgeable source on that type of platformer fighting game, especially considering how they always hate on smash bros. for being "kiddie" with characters like Kirby and Pikachu (which is a hell of a lot better than lifeless losers like Ryu, Chun Li, etc). That and they are looking to find a game to use to keep the next smash out of EVO. They tried to jump on that Cartoon Network fighting game competitively, but boy, did that fail!

Regardless, if the game is good, I'll be surprised. But so far, all my indicators point towards "failure," at least in terms of competitive gameplay.

 

[ItsSilverLPs]

In my Opinion, PS All-Stars seems to be just a wannabe.

 

[soviet prince]

In my Opinion, PS All-Stars seems to be just a wannabe.

explain please? if it's because it like smash then I geuss all first person shooters are wannabees from doom

 

[Johnknight1]

Honestly, if the game is good, but is ridiculously similar to smash bros, I don't think anybody (but Nintendo) should care. I would buy that over a crappy "original game" any day.

I have the same feelings towards dozens of FPS. Sure, all of them have influence from other FPS, but that doesn't make them any less enjoyable. That is, unless you're a fanboy of one series, and are a anti-fanboy (lol, new word!) of the new "copy cat" series. Plus I hope PlayStation All-Stars is good. The more good games, the better the game choices!

 

[Kink-Link5]

I don't see why Nintendo should care about any similarities the game has with Super Smash Bros. Care to explain?