Smash Bros vs. Playstation All Stars

[3Bismyname]

let me just say these-

Sony has a habit of blatantly knocking off Nintendo products. (Mario kart, wii, SMASH)
They tend to love knocking off the other company thinking "hell it worked for them so it will work for us." They then go off making knockoffs.

While this could work for them, they seem to always go off making knockoffs NOT KNOWING why it worked for Nintendo. It worked because everyone recognizes the characters.If you know Mario, you probably know peach, luigi, bowser, and donkey kong (Mario used to be his enemy) if you know DK, you've probably heard of DKC so you know diddy.

The characters in a sense are part of a large family that everyone knows, minus the games nobody cares about now (Ice climbers, rob, etc.) You have to be an old long time sony fanboy to know some of these characters in PSABR, there is where they messed up sales wise.

And whats with having to finish others with specials? Way to screw the competitive scene before it forms. (probably what sakurai will do to screw the competitive scene in ssb4)

there is my opinion, anyone care to rebut?

you've said the same thing before and here is exactly what i had said before

"thats kind of the game industry works. when something works there is bound to be imitaters. it's not like Nintendo never copied another successful series or idea.

Alpha Waves was the first 3-D Platformer. so every other 3-D platformer after couldn't possibly be good, right?
Pac-Land was one of the first 2-D sidescrollers to introduce momentum. does that make Super Mario bros a knockoff?
Street Fighter came before Tekken and Mortal Kombat. does that mean those other two suck?

Ignorantly disregarding a game because it shares similarities is asinine and frankly impossible when it comes to gaming nowadays.

oh and look up Outfxies before you say Smash is so original."

and actually i like the killing mechanic as it does force you to have actual skill in order to win a match.

 

[nessokman]

and actually i like the killing mechanic as it does force you to have actual skill in order to win a match.

how could it take more skill than smash? Get a few hits and BOOM you kill them.smash style is a better way, though I'm glad they didn't steal that. technically in PSAS you could run around like an idiot and as long as you aren't hit by the specials, you CAN'T die. Can't say that for the final destination where you're bound to be hitby combos, juggles and more.smash requires more skillz

 

[3Bismyname]

how could it take more skill than smash? Get a few hits and BOOM you kill them.smash style is a better way, though I'm glad they didn't steal that. technically in PSAS you could run around like an idiot and as long as you aren't hit by the specials, you CAN'T die. Can't say that for the final destination where you're bound to be hitby combos, juggles and more.smash requires more skillz

you clearly know nothing about how to kill in Battle Royale. the only way to execute a Super is by building up your meter to level 1,2, or 3. the only way to build your meter is to lay hits on your oponent meanwhile trying to avoid opponents attacks so they cant build meter. now u cant just use your super and your opponent dies. you have to HIT THEM. which dependant on said character can be difficult of easy. for example Kratos level 1 has a long reach but due to to its slow movement is pretty easy to dodge roll or even jump away from. so it requires timing in order to execute successfully. if you miss u have to rebuild your meter while making sure to evade and keep your opponents meter down. problem with Smash is that anyone can land one good hit and kill you while in Battle Royale it requires timing and precision... unless you decide to build your meter to level 3 then most people are just screwed. bare in mind it is diffucult to build your meter to level 3 with a lot of characters.

realize you also can't win if you don't it anyone with a super either

 

[Kink-Link5]

Also you're going to find it difficult to successfully use supers without getting hit confirms as players become more adept at avoiding them when used randomly- particularly level 2s. All the level 1s and some level 2s are very unsafe on whiff, and not a single level 2 is is full invincible (Most supers don't even have start up invincibility and will lose to jabs)

The meter building is made so getting level 1 is easy (Almost every character has a strong enough combo to build up a level 1 from a single, solid hitconfirm) while level 2 and 3 are exponentially harder to reach. It's much more complex than "Hit them 3 times then super to win," and character/strategy viability varies greatly on ruleset and singles vs doubles.

 

[SmashChu]

This is the part where I just forever regard you as a complete, irreparable moron. I'm not even going to bother with the rest of your post. I'm afraid it will include stupidity of this magnitude.

I'm a philosophy major where logic and argumentation are one of the most fundamental things taught (and a physics major too where Occam's Razor is used extensively). Let me tell you, if you were to take even the most basic logic class (even PHI 101 mentioned it), you would know that you're using the term for Occam's Razor incorrectly and you would know how truly disgusted academics are at helpless pseudo-intellectual morons like you that misuse the term to justify fallacious reasoning.

Occam's Razor DOES NOT state that the simplest answer is the best.

What Occam's Razor truly says is to not include unnecessary agents in the explanation of something that can be sufficiently explained without it. The razor applies against things such as mind-body dualism, magic, karma, gods, ghosts, etc. For example, if consciousness and emotions can be sufficiently explained through neuroscience and the physicality in the brain, then there is no need to add unnecessary concepts like spirits or the devil's influence or magic monsters or whatever people come up with.

Occam's Razor would never support oversimplification fallacy, otherwise it would even be taken seriously by anyone and you would have never heard of it.

Please, just stay away from the internet, get an education before speaking, and learn your place.

OK, let's see what Wikipedia says

Occam's razor (also written as Ockham's razor, Latin lex parsimoniae) is the law of parsimony, economy, or succinctness. It is a principle stating that among competing hypotheses, the one that makes the fewest assumptions should be selected.

In plain English, it means the simplest answer is the best (the one with fewer variables).

I'm going to go with Wikipedia on this one and not the guy who sat though Philosophy 101.

Here is another source.​

I know I wasn't going to say anymore, but I had to make an exception here. Carry on.

 

[Robert of Normandy]

In plain English, it means the simplest answer is the best (the one with fewer variables)..

This is from TvTropes:

The Razor is commonly misinterpreted as saying, "The simplest theory is the best." This is not correct in Real Life unless it is the simpler of two theories which make predictions with identical degrees of accuracy.All other aspects of the theory have to be equal before simplicity is taken into account.

Source

 

[El Duderino]

In plain English, it means the simplest answer is the best (the one with fewer variables).

It is a principle stating that among competing hypotheses, the one that makes the fewest assumptions should be selected.

You do realize your argument is littered with assumptions in an attempt to remove variables? What this definition suggests is the exact opposite, go with the most thorough and practical explanation, and not one based on lots of hypotheticals and/or notions. It is not whatsoever an excuse to ignore relevant contributing parts of an explanation to reach a different conclusion.

What you are doing is called over-simplification and it has little to do with Ockham's razor.

 

[Kink-Link5]

I wish I could be cool and make a fake argument based an incorrect interpretation of a loose term described by wikipedia like SmashChu.

I'm not cool enough for that though.

 

[El Duderino]

This is from TvTropes:
Source

Had a good laugh reading these:

Another very common mistake is to summon up the Razor in a debate over a point that is entirely moot in order to add weight to a particular argument. This usage is entirely fallacious as the Razor does nothing more than recommend the hypothesis that makes the fewest new assumptions. It is not a magical tool that points to the right answer.

And always remember that Occam's Razor is a guideline, not a rule. Be careful of facts that are subjective in nature or may not be fully established.

 

[Wobbly Headed Bob]

OK, let's see what Wikipedia says


In plain English, it means the simplest answer is the best (the one with fewer variables).

I'm going to go with Wikipedia on this one and not the guy who sat though Philosophy 101.

Here is another source.​

I know I wasn't going to say anymore, but I had to make an exception here. Carry on.

ROFL

You're disregarding someone with actual authority in the subject in favor of a wikipedia article you misinterpreted. This is stupid to such extreme degrees that it almost looks intentional.

 

[Tweezer Salad]

PSAS is decent, obviously not as good as smash, but just something to keep you somewhat entertained enough untill SSB4.

However there are some things in there that could work well in Smash.
I for one actually like the character intros in PSAS. I never thought longer traditional intro animations would work in smash, but seeing it in PSAS changed my mind and I could easily see them in smash. I love the little things that add more personality to characters so I really would like that. And you could always have the ability to turn them off.

The unlockable taunts, costumes, and animations in PSAS was cool and smash could use something like that.

 

[3Bismyname]

PSAS is decent, obviously not as good as smash, but just something to keep you somewhat entertained enough untill SSB4.

However there are some things in there that could work well in Smash.
I for one actually like the character intros in PSAS. I never thought longer traditional intro animations would work in smash, but seeing it in PSAS changed my mind and I could easily see them in smash. I love the little things that add more personality to characters so I really would like that. And you could always have the ability to turn them off.

The unlockable taunts, costumes, and animations in PSAS was cool and smash could use something like that.

agreed, but in smash make all those things a little more difficult to unlcok

 

[asia_catdog_blue]

I do like the 3-Attack Button imput PSALBR had. I was wondering if SSB should have something like that for a bigger movepool.

...should it?

 

[umegames]

allstars is good, it just doesn't captivate me like melee and brawl did/do.
It actually feels like playing the n64 version of smash, good game, works well, just missing something...

that said, i do welcome 3 level supers for smash, though not in the form of needing them to win. perhaps having level 1,2 and 3 smash balls appear instead. hmm....

 

[Guybrush20X6]

I do like the 3-Attack Button imput PSALBR had. I was wondering if SSB should have something like that for a bigger movepool.

...should it?

Technically Smash's move pool is almost as large as PS AllStars due to Smash attacks adding another four options and SB characters having 4 throws instead of 3. Also SB chars can have 3 taunts at once instead of having to chose but that's another entirely.

 

[Johnknight1]

Smash Bros is better than PSAS given the fact that it has Smash 64, Melee, tons of modders, a set ringleader, and actually sequels that are forthcoming.

 

[volbound1700]

Is PSAS dead or will they try to make a second one? They needed bigger names and a more distinct feel to compete with Smash Brothers.

 

[El Duderino]

Sony parted ways with Superbot a while back with Sony Santa Monica taking over the DLC. All signs suggest there will not be a sequel. I wonder if, outside of Nintendo, we'll ever see a major publisher attempt a similar scale mascot platform fighter again.

Sony is having a large sale related to PSABR soon though.

 

[BridgesWithTurtles]

I love PSASBR, despite its many technical flaws, and while it's certainly no Smash, I actually like the super system. It's just incredibly unbalanced and unfortunately, has a tendency to dictate character efficiency while leaving their movesets in the dark. So, I think it shines as a party game, and can be almost as fun as Smash, but it just can't hold my interest through depth like Smash's gameplay can.

I would absolutely love a Sega Smash Bros.

 

[volbound1700]

I am a big SEGA fan but I am just not sure if SEGA has enough without bringing in third parties to make its own Smash game. I like the idea of a PC one because it could have a different feel.


However, Marvel vs. Capcom and the Marvel related fighting games are likely to be the best and biggest competition to Smash.

 

[SmashChu]

Looking at sales, it sold about 600,000 between two systems (though I believe some of the Vita sales are tie ins).

Superbot made a competitive minded game. And competitive Smash players enjoyed it. But it flopped and, as a result, Sony cut ties with the company who created it. Meanwhile, Brawl sells over 10 million worldwide, a game competitive Smash players loath. The writing is on the wall: competitive gaming doesn't work.

If Sony wanted Smash Brothers sales, they should have tried to understand what made the series successful in the first place.

 

[Robert of Normandy]

Looking at sales, it sold about 600,000 between two systems (though I believe some of the Vita sales are tie ins).

Superbot made a competitive minded game. And competitive Smash players enjoyed it. But it flopped and, as a result, Sony cut ties with the company who created it. Meanwhile, Brawl sells over 10 million worldwide, a game competitive Smash players loath. The writing is on the wall: competitive gaming doesn't work.

Or it could just be that Sony fans don't have as much interest in a party fighter as Nintendo fans do.

 

[FlareHabanero]

The reason why Playstation All-Star Battle Royal failed is because it had a ****ing ******** battle system, it was advertised very poorly, and the characters in it a no where as interesting (though I do enjoy using Sly Cooper).

Seriously, not everything is judged by what is and isn't competitive.

 

[bobadz]

I got PSABR at launch and played it for about a week, I've never played it again afterwords. I still play both Melee and Brawl. It takes so long for a match to end. That's not the case with all three smash. I

 

[3Bismyname]

meh i still like Battle Royale. i know there's flaws and ppl hate the killing mechanic blah blah blah. but in the end i have more fun with it than i do with all my other fighters. Smash included actually.

 

[Swamp Sensei]

PSASBR could have been something to rival smash bros. It's fun but after a while the character balance (and bias, its clear the developers loved Kratos more than anyone else) is so apparent and the mechanics are so.... polarizing that I'm not sure if I can play it for long periods of time anymore.

 

[Capybara Gaming]

Considering Kratos was the character everyone else was based on, and the first announced...

 

[El Duderino]

If Sony wanted Smash Brothers sales, they should have tried to understand what made the series successful in the first place.

Actually, Superbot's idea of what makes Smash such a success and highly regarded series is not too far from the truth :



Popular Game Mascots?
Simplified Control Scheme?
Platforms and freedom of movement?
Dynamic Environments?
Atypical, party game friendly killing mechanic?
Some degree of largely optional depth for dedicated players to explore?


Problem is, they didn't come from, consult, or regularly address the Smash community, opting to hire from and speak to the rest of the FGC instead. Collectively they lacked the understanding of what about Smash's combat, game systems, and even presentation tied all these elements successfully together.

 

[Kink-Link5]

Being able to press down and Back then press a button to do a DownSq/DownTr/DownCi in that direction is a really, really, really good control mechanic. I'd take it over crawling any day easily.

Same goes with how landing lag is handled. You're limited to certain actions when landing, and get more over about a 10 frame period. First you can only do attacks, then you get movement options, and finally you get the ability to super. This kind of dynamic lag is a smart and well-handled mechanic, much more so than Brawl's "dynamic" hitstun.

And Kratos is far and away the Ike of the game. He's all scary and **** until you realize he's something like -15 on block. He's safe on whiff and spammy, and he's a very clear example of a noob gate character. He teaches you to punish out of block like Daniel teaches you that air escape downward is a generally good idea.

 

[El Duderino]

Despite how things turned out, Superbot deserves recognition for coming up with some new ideas, having the tenacity to try some bold changes, and most of all, attempting to help this genre not live and die by a single franchise.

 

[TewnLeenk]

I own PSASBR.... and it's not very good. Got bored within the week. Having no unlockables really hurts the replayability. The character balance is atrocious. Play one match online and I guarantee you'll encounter more than one person playing as Kratos at a time, who will then chain-sword-whatever it is spam you to death. The level of quality and polish is no where near Smash Bros levels.

Basically, Playstation All Stars has nothing on Smash Bros and was pretty much dead on arrival.

Hey, Sony :

 

[Vaati]

My Wii was broken for some years, so I decided to buy PSASBR. Worst decision ever. The day after I repaired my Wii and restarted playing Brawl. PSASBR is really ****ty. The only argument they have for rip-offing SSBB is the different knock-out system... AND IT SUCKS! It's really the worst KO system ever, it just pissed me off. But ok, let's make the hypothesis that it's not a rip-off... it will never be like a SSB game. It lacks depth. The music is crap, gameplay is **** and so is the character roster. There are so few characters that the creators would deserve a punch in the face.

Sorry for my anger but I just can't believe I wasted my money on it. Oh, sorry for my crappy english too.

 

[El Duderino]

Having no unlockables really hurts the replayability.

There are so few characters that the creators would deserve a punch in the face.

 

[3Bismyname]

20 characters to start and 24 with dlc is not bad. esp for a first game. admittedly i wish they had better replay value outside of online matches but overall i still enjoy myself. Kratos isn't op by any means. he's just the easiest character to master and that's why u see a lot of him. that said they tend to be the most predictable opponents to imo. and hey at least with this game i can actually play online with my friends.

 

[Kink-Link5]

20 characters to start and 24 with dlc is not bad. esp for a first game. admittedly i wish they had better replay value outside of online matches but overall i still enjoy myself. Kratos isn't op by any means. he's just the easiest character to master and that's why u see a lot of him. that said they tend to be the most predictable opponents to imo. and hey at least with this game i can actually play online with my friends.

Raiden would like a word with you.

Kratos is easy to cheese with, not to master. Raiden in comparison can get a punish from a fair distance away and build up to level 1 and a half off that easy punish. Kratos is Ike, Raiden is Sheik.

And lol at the unblockable comment. Even if there weren't grabs in the game or guardbreak attacks, Smash has the same "problem."

 

[3Bismyname]

Raiden would like a word with you.

Kratos is easy to cheese with, not to master. Raiden in comparison can get a punish from a fair distance away and build up to level 1 and a half off that easy punish. Kratos is Ike, Raiden is Sheik.

And lol at the unblockable comment. Even if there weren't grabs in the game or guardbreak attacks, Smash has the same "problem."

yeah ive never gotten into Raiden but ur probably right. those two have a lot of people playing them for reasons tho. easy to use.

 

[Kink-Link5]

Is your psn the same as your smashboards name? I'd like to do some 1v1 or team matches with you. PM me about it.

 

[LiteralGrill]

Well I figured I'd try to weigh in. Most people here probably don't know me, but I was running at it's heyday the largest PSAS site for competitive players that managed to actually hold decent tournaments 4 times a week with an average of 30-50 people each night. I've got one of the largest knowledge bases for the game from having the privileged to talk to the best players and by studying the game intently.

And then I watched as each week we got smaller and smaller and smaller until the entire scene fizzled out. A LOT of why PSAS wasn't a huge success in the long run was the community by a LONG shot. Some people said maybe Sony fans weren't really ready for a brawler and I'd say they were right. A lot of that community asking for changes to characters 24/7 was also horrible.

In all honesty after watching PSAS crumble I like that smash didn't have DLC and changes. With that capability open you will end up with fans trying to ask for ridiculous things and end up watering down the game or changing it insanely as the last major patch for PSAS did making people have to actually 100% relearn their characters and team combos they may have made. Smash 4 if it will have patches and such needs to wait LONG periods of time before implementing them instead of having a patch 2 weeks into the game and then falling short from there.

Also, Smash 4 would need to NOT favor certain characters. Some characters did honestly need some work but never really got them or instead got buffed! They actually buffed top tiers and nerfed bottom tiers many times. How bad is that!?!?

The game has some design flaws deep down too that plaque it, but I don't think that's what the original thread really was about. But those few things I mentioned before are things Nintendo should avoid using PSAS as an example so they are worth mentioning.

Now, for what PSAS did well the first thing is HAZARDS OFF. That option is AMAZING and could make SO many more stages legal in smash to play on. It's almost a must add because even certain weird and fun stages for casual play are a pain just do to silly hazards. (Though Smash had better do better then PSAS if they implement this as PSAS when hazards are off still many hazards remain on stages.)

Alternate Costumes: More then enough people have mentioned this, so it's an obvious choice.

Leveling System: If you can somehow do it right it can be interesting. In PSAS you'd go against 999 players, and you should expect them to be top notch as that is the highest rating. I can mutilated more then enough of them to say that the level system in the game is pointless, and many community people will say "I'm a level 999 so I'm an expert on this character" when they were just tossing around horrible players. It leads to people who think they have great skills putting in complaints and some people believing them based on that level and others who know better which just causes huge fights.

Mic Capabilities: Nintendo, put in a system to automute people who are muted by players all the time, and maybe make it actually easy to mute players unlike in PSAS where it can be a pain.

Rage Quitting: If you have a ranked mode, make it so people can't just click a button to quit! Or if they do leave in a huff they actually get a significant penalty and they don't stop an entire online match over it.

Online: A lot of people have wondered if PSAS online is worse then smash. I've played brawl online and I know it has some serious issues, but at least I can manage to connect to people when I want to most days. PSAS online can crash my entire console every other minute sometimes even when I have decent internet. It's terrible, and with there being almost NO decent local scene for PSAS outside of Toronto, the online scene was what was holding it together. Now the forums are deader then ever for the game and filled with trolls that moderators never deal with. A HUGE shame...

I may have more but these are my starting points. Having waded through so much of PSAS since its beginning I've seen it at its best and worse and can flat out say that Smash should take a small look at PSAS but disregard almost all of it for the junky game it is.

 

[IceColdSmashBrother]

Super Smash Bros had the amount of characters and balance to keep itself considerably over All-Stars. Smash Bros probably just had a much better, simpler idea of what it wanted to do with the franchise than Sony did.

 

[BluePikmin11]

Maybe PSABR was a test of the series. Like how Sakurai said the first Smash bros was only a test. PSABR sequel could possibly way better than the original.