Why I'm Disinterested In PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale

I can see by not including percentage health and ring outs it might take away the survival aspect but as long as they show score listed, there should be some sort of play of ganging up on whoever's winning I imagine. I didn't personally mind having Sonic in Brawl, but he's still the sega mascot in my eyes and one could argue he doesn't fit with the nintendo roster. I haven't played All-Stars at all tho, so what do I know.

This seems really typical to me. I hate to say it but this may be the reason why this game may not do to well among alot of gamers. The simple fact is that alot of people are either going in with a bad view of the game or can't stop comparing it to Smash Bros. and when they do this they almost all come out dissatisfied. However then you have the people who are able to go into the game after high anticipation and a fresh mind towards it, it seems to me that almost all the people like that seem to be really pleased with All-Stars.
I'm not trying to say this is how it is with you but have you considered that one of the main facts you can't play this game is that you want and play it like it should be exactly like Smash Bros. and that you immediately thought this game would fail, this is the main reason why I can't see it doing so well as it has been pleagued with constantly being compared Smash Bros I mean don't you think it's unfair to negitively say the game is a "rip off" but go on to say it needs to be more like the game it supposedly "ripped off".

I like the fact that the game is a mash up of third party characters. It feels like a celebration of third party developers more than a Sony brawler, Sony just happens to be the one getting all these developers on board to do it. Which I think is awesome.

Most of your arguments as to why the characters don't work together can be said of Nintendo's brawler. There is no unity amongst the characters in that game other than the fact that Nintendo owns their license. Samus and Link are two very different characters from two very different worlds that control very differently, but they brawl well together.

After re-reading the article this is what I heard, "MUAHAHA I have played a game you all want to play! This game you are all looking forward to sucks and you can't argue that it doesn't because you haven't played it! MUAHAHAHA".

GR trolling since 1996.

Your first comment is perfectly fair. Your second comment is pretty dickish. What do you expect game critics to do, *not* play the games before they write about them?

It was meant as a joke.

OK, if you say so. In that case, your joke was not funny at all.

It made me chuckle.

I was born in 1996

Most of the characters in PSAS are all First Party as Sony owns the rights to most of them.

That's true. They do own the license to most of the characters but they are still third party characters.

Not if they're published by a first Party developer.

Developers that Sony does not own are third party. For example Insomniac, Media Molecule, Naughty Dog, Eat Sleep Play.

According to the wikipedia page Sony owns all four of those studos.

That's not correct at all. Insomniac's last game was a Facebook game.

Yes but Sony owned francises are allowed to develope mobile games as long as they aren't making other consoles, for example Santa Monica is owned by Sony yet they a=made a God of War mobile game.

I knew a long time ago that Sony would release a title like this, mainly because for their exclusive list of games. What I think about as that this would be the second game in the "Brawler" genre. If I was worried about games ripping off other game then I wouldn't be a game, because essentially all games derive from each other. People weren't pissed when King of Fighters came out when Street Fighter was a raging success. Nor every game in the shooting genre.

Think about it. Super Smash is the first game to mash up different characters from other titles within their own company of characters. Yes, most of these characters are extremely memorable but some of them have a decade+ in between Sony's character list. Few companies can do this because of exclusive rights and Sony should do this because they can. I find it childish for people to complain when the very games they play now are derivatives of past games.

PSAS:BR and SSB are two different games and should be treated as such.

I don't like fighting games, don't like Smash Bros, and definitely won't like All-Stars. With that being said:

I have two problems with this article. First, it's complaining that All-Stars is *too different* from Smash Bros. The line, "Everything they've changed to differentiate it from Super Smash Bros. has inherently made the game a less compelling experience," is the tell. This is very jarring, since most of the criticism it's been getting is that it's *too similar* to Smash Bros. As difficult as it may be, we should judge the game on its own merits, and not compare it to a completely different series.

And second, the criticism that Sony's different IPs don't fit well together could also be said about Smash Bros. As Imnickson points out above, the only common factor with Nintendo's IPs is that they all belong to Nintendo. What does Metroid have to do with Kirby? Not a whole lot. It seems pretty unfair to arbitrarily decide that this works in Smash Bros. but not in All-Stars.

I will wait until I play the game, but I don't expect it to be bad.

The choice to focus on supers is an exciting one because it creates a different play philosophy from SSB. In the latter (in a 4P match), you are motivated to stay out of combat for as long as possible and only make moves to "snipe" opponents when their damage is high. In this game, you are motivated to be in combat dealing as much damage as possible, which I think is actually a welcome change and will go far towards differentiating the two games.

The 'tension', as Alex puts it, comes from being required to engage with opponents who can potentially kill you in one hit at any moment. You need to be aware of who can do what, including yourself, and where everyone is relative to one another.

When I watch this gameplay video youtube.com/watch?v=u32u2DaEoDs#t=05m40s and see Nathan Drake find the PERFECT situation to launch his level 2 and get a triple kill out of it? Tell me everyone at a party wouldn't be laughing, yelling, and cursing when that happened.

It just looks like a bad fangame.

Are you guys familiar with MUGEN? You ever played one of the games where it's just a bunch of loosely related characters? It's pretty bad.

Daniel Fortesque is in it. That warrants a purchase.
Not day one, but I'll definitely get it. Cross-buy helps too.