Gamespot-PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale Review

GS:It's easy to be cynical about a game that borrows so heavily from a well-loved franchise. And there's no question that, on the surface at least, PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale bears more than a striking resemblance to Nintendo's Super Smash Bros. But this is a game where appearances can be deceptive. Underneath its collection of classic (and not so classic) characters, four-player battles, and tongue-in-cheek franchise mash-ups lies a fighter that eschews button mashing and over-the-top special moves for a deeper, more technical fighting experience.

[LOGICWINS]

If you liked the beta, I can't imagine how you couldn't be happy with the final product. I played it on the Vita yesterday at Bestbuy and the game isn't for me, which is expected since I never even liked Brawl.

[NastyLeftHook0]

cole is so awesome! my favorite is kratos though.

[LOGICWINS]

Enjoy the game champ!

[MaxXAttaxX]

There are plenty of other 8.5s and 9/10s out there.
___

According to GameSpot:
"The Bad = Complex battle system makes for a steep learning curve"
HOW IS THAT A BAD THING??? What fighting game doesn't have a learning curve given the level of complexity of its mechanics? Some people just want everything to be too easy.

They say it's great fighting game with depth, tons of single player content and it's really fun to play.
But he gives it a 6.5 because it was too hard for him and he didn't like the menus? Really? That's it?

[pixelsword]

@ Nathan:

Dumb people often destroy things they do no understand, no offense to the "much beloved" gamespot.

[NukaCola]

This was from Gamereactor Sweden

"Look up "entertaining plagiarism" in the dictionary and you'll find this."

Almost every single stupid blogger who dares to call him/herself a mother effing reviewer should shoot themselves. Why does everyone feel the need to bash this for similarities to Smash. They are two difference games within a similar genre. And no one seems to even know about Power Stone or the other 10-20 games out there that came out before Smash.

6.5 is low. On a test it's a fail on so many levels. These review read like. "Minus 3-4 points for me liking Smash Bros more. Nice try Sony. Yeah, you'll never get respect from us in the gaming media."

[andibandit]

@Nathan

hmm it's like asking:

Why do the ants come rushing out their hive is kicked?.

[Kennytaur]

Didn't Eurogamer mark it down for uncomfortable controls? Unless you're missing a couple fingers that's reaching for straws. This is a game that'll split opinions between those who can see it as it's own game, and those who can't.

[Ares84HU]

That's the thing, the beta was terrible in my opinion. It was chaos and you could never tell where your character is at any given moment. Because the beta was so terrible, I will never give a chance to this game.

This is THE worst game I played this generation right after Twisted Metal.

Just my opinion.

[MaxXAttaxX]

But that is not the thing...

You only played the Beta?
What, did you keep getting your ass beat or something? The game is fairly easy to pick up.

So even if you didn't like the Beta, I respect your opinion (if it's legit). But in my honest opinion and that of others, this is one of the most fun games this year.

[ChiMasta7]

Yeah I'm kind of "whatever" about this game. I'm a huge fighting game fan (Street Fighter, DOA, Virtua Fighter, KOF) but I never really got into Smash so this game is unlikely to hook me as well.

That said, when you have a fighting game where each character is vastly different from the other and it takes a lot of time to master just one - That's supposed to be a GREAT thing to fighting fans. I don't know why the reviewer docked the score of PSAS for that reason.

This generation is confusing haha.

[StraightPath]

poor mans smash clone wannabe sits at a pathetic 76% metacritic and going soon lower.

[yami930]

Are you talking about Cartoon Network Explosion? Because last time I checked PS All stars cost more, is higher quality and is a very great fighting game as well as party brawler that easily sets it apart from Super Smash bros with a unique character roster, gameplay mechanics, customization and unlockables plus on going support in the form of DLC that only makes for a better game. This game is basically on par with Brawl while managing to be its own game, fun, and its only the first in the series compared to Super Smash Bros third, and its still just going to get better guaranteed with time. I think that is impressive, the team is definitely talented, and both games can co-exist and are both great.

[pixelsword]

And Smash is a poor man's Mugen.

Move on.

[darkziosj]

wow vita is in a combo with the bad games.

[princejb134]

6.5 is a little harsh
i would rate it a 8
dont get me wrong the game is fun but during the beta i found to many radek sniper spammers
and kratos chain grab spammers
the special system got a bit boring after a while especially when the majority of the time is when im performing a combo on someone only for someone to come from behind and do his special(yea cheap blow)
but it was fun in a way
super smash brothers still remains the champ in replay ability and fun

[DeforMAKulizer]

I find the cons in the review a bit perplexing.

He says the game is too hard, yet when i played it in the Beta and all other reviews mark it as serious fighter with extremely light and easy controls.

And the comments about the pixelated menus is just silly. Im a big 8-bit fan, but it just feels like he is digging deep to nit-pick at things.

[Conzul]

Most IGN low scores for Sony games involve nitpicking against little things. But this is Gamespot, I wouldn't expect this from them.

[Kennytaur]

Gamespot is for the most part no better than IGN.

[e-p-ayeaH]

lol gamespot are the worst

[Anon1974]

Personally, I have no interest in this game at all. Fighting games aren't my thing but this review left me puzzled. He claims the game looks "gorgeous" and is a blast to play, but due to complexity you should focus on one character and learn it's moves because there's a lot to it.

Well, that all sounds like it's shaping up for a fantastic review, then he complains that he didn't like the way the menus look. Ok. So, a gorgeous fighting game that's fun to play with a lot of depth get's a 6.5 because you don't like the art choice with the menus? And the characters don't all just have basic punch, kick buttons?

Does it not seem a bit like the score doesn't match the actual review? Who cares if you don't like the menu art style, is the game fun? Oh..it is? But it takes time to master the characters? What's the problem here? Is the game unbalanced? are the controls broken? Does the online not work? Is it not fun to play? Those are issues that would usually warrant a subtracting a couple of points from overall score, but you don't like the art direction in the menus and each character isn't the same? Wtf? Who is this guy?

An opinion is an opinion, and I'm not going to gripe at a review score. If they think the game deserves a 6.5 score, so be it, but your review should back up your score.

If you think the game just deserves an average score, back it up. In my opinion, they don't do that in this review. But hey, given the positive reviews we're seeing elsewhere, by what looks like effectively lowballing this review does anyone doubt that Gamespot is seeing a huge spike in traffic today? Clearly being the odd man out when it comes to the great review scores this game is receiving from other sources makes this review stand out.

If you disagree, read the review and comment. You can't honestly think that that review backs up the score they handed out at the end.

[TronEOL]

It's amazing how a comment like this gets disagreed with even though it's the one comment that makes the most sense and anyone with any type of basic form of understanding should see what you're saying.

Being a fanboy or a hater really puts a HUGE mental block on basic brain functions. But of course, for calling anyone a hater for being a ridiculously negative without any true rhyme or reason makes me a rabid Sony fanboy. I think most normal Playstation fans probably think like this by now.

[Blastoise]

Well said Darkride66. It's a poor review, and not just because of the score. Nothing he says really validates his score (like you say). After watching the review, the only downsides are complexity(?) and ugly menu's. So...6.5 it is?

[Aghashie]

Bubble up for u bro. That is exactly what I was about to write.

[talisker]

They can probably write whatever they want. What they get paid for are review scores as people nowadays can't read long passages so they will just look at the number at the end. That's why so many sold reviews have a huge discrepancy between the content and the score.

If you think I'm paranoid, just recall the picture with Geoff Keighley and Mountain Dew.

[izumo_lee]

I thought reviews were supposed to be unbias opinions about a game but when a review opens with... "It's easy to be cynical about a game that borrows so heavily from a well-loved franchise" it is clear what the intentions are from there on out.

Ok we get it, it is very similar to SSB in concept. From the very get go Superbot made it clear that the game was very inspirational in PSAS development. We do not need the reviewer to hammer that thought over & over & over again.

Is it that hard to judge the game on its own merits rather than have every idea of the game compared to SSB? If SSB did not exist how is the game? See...simple.

I played the beta, excited to play the full game when i get it after work. It is a love letter to fans of the Playstation just like SSB was for Nintendo. I appreciate the hard work Superbot has done to live up to expectations of this game & with the hope of success many more to come.

[dark-hollow]

"If SSB did not exist how is the game?"

If SSB didn't exist, pasbr wouldn't too.

[despair]

you're missing the point, he's saying the reviewers need to review the game based on its own merits, not on how it compares to another game, even if its inspired from it. Thats like constantly comparing Uncharted to Tomb Raider in your review, it has no place there.

[izumo_lee]

I'm not sure if you are agreeing or disagreeing with that quote so i'm not sure how to respond.

However i will say that look i get that SSB is a great game & deserves all the recognition it gets but to say that without it that PSAS will not happen as well is cutting it short.

I know that Nintendo fans believe that SSB was the first game in this whole cross-over fighting game thingy & they have the right to do so, but to simply ignore all the other games that 'inspired' SSB is disrespectful. Sure SSB made the genre popular but it is clearly not the first EVER game to have that concept.

So i believe PSAS was going to happen even if SSB did not exist, it will probably been a different looking game though like a more traditional fighter.

@ despair

Thank you that is exactly what i meant with that quote.

[zebramocha]

Check out thrill kill on YouTube.

[P_Bomb]

@dark-hollow
SSB didn't invent brawlers though. I just find it funny how fighters like Mortal Kombat VS DC Universe, Marvel VS Capcom, SNK VS Capcom, StreetFighter VS Tekken etc can all co-exist and crossover concepts, characters and style...but SSB makes people territorial. The AP system and IPs in All Stars are different enough. Even the Metal Gear characters are different.

[ZombieNinjaPanda]

@Despair

Yeah, no. You review things based on their own merit and compared to other similar things. Especially if a game is so heavily "taking inspiration" from another one.

[rezzah]

Everyone is biased, the real issue is actually wanting to be objective (even to games you love).

[Ducky]

"Is it that hard to judge the game on its own merits rather than have every idea of the game compared to SSB? If SSB did not exist how is the game? See...simple."

That's not how reviews work. One of the things a review should do is tell you how well the game stacks against the competition, or at the very least, use the competition as context for the new game's achievements.

Game X might have decent visuals and fun gameplay, but if there is another similar game Y that does everything better, then game X doesn't deserve much praise now does it? The review has to show why new game X is indeed worth considering, and that can not be done without making comparisons.

[sjaakiejj]

I agree, other games in the genre have to be looked at and compared to.

But a point that can be made here is that it's really easy to let fanaticism get in the way of an objective review, which in the case of Gamespot does seem to have happened.

If you start off the review by saying that you love Super Smash you're basically admitting that the rest of the review is anything but objective.

[Ducky]

^ Why does that statement make the review stop being objective?

If the reviewer loved Smash, then he would surely like a game that takes inspiration from it, no?
It arguably puts him in a better position to judge the game because he's already a fan of the genre.

Anyways, when does the reviewer even state that? His opening sentence isn't a negative jab at BattleRoyale. He just says that it is easy to be cynical and assume it is a cheap knock-off, but then continues by saying that this is not the case... and spends the rest of the review talking about BattleRoyale without referencing SSB. Izumo's comment is entirely directed at an imaginary review, which he made up in his own head after reading the first sentence.

[izumo_lee]

Look i got caught up in the moment but even though he rarely mentions SSB the whole review makes it look like he expected PSAS to play like it, but when it does not he is at a lost.

Superbot made PSAS to play like a traditional fighter where the player needs to understand the pros/cons of each character. That whole 'complex battle system makes for steep learning curve' negative that he writes is what fighting games are about. When you play a game like Blazblue or KOF or Soul Caliber mastering the moveset of a character is key to winning on a consistent level.

Also are we now so fixated on menu designs? Why do reviewers care so much on how the menu looks? I remember Mega Man 3 having a black screen with the title but that did not stop it from being an awesome game. So i do not get this facination & desire to have complex menu screens.

Very few fighting games have an actual decent storyline. Other than Blazblue (which some say is too complex) a simple story is good enough, most fighting games stories are some big baddy setting up a tournament & fighters come to beat each other up. We already know the back story of most of the characters in PSAS so i do not see the need for a narative.

A review is ones opinion, but that first line was very clear on his intentions. He came in to PSAS expecting it to play like SSB so when it was totally different he was unsure of what to make of it. SSB is a game that is very easy to pick up & play but since PSAS is a traditional fighting game disguised as a SSB 'clone' it takes more time & effort which this guy is not willing to do.

*if you look at the reviewers contributions to Gamespot reviews he has reviewed a total of 5 fighting games (Mortal Kombat, DOA 3DS, SF4 3DS, DBZ Kinect, PSAS) so i am skeptical about his knowledge of fighting games.

[Ducky]

^ Those points, I can agree with.
Fighting being complex is a positive in my book, and the menu complaints are indeed silly.

Overall, it seems the reviewer couldn't understand the concept of a cartoonish-looking game also being competitive.

Only thing I disagree with you is about the review's first line stating his intentions. I think you're reading too much into it. He was just stating a general perspective that a large group of people have on the game (which is that BattleRoyale is a SmashBro clone) and he started with that line to address the issue at the beginning. Many other reviews (IGN's for example) start out similarly as well.

[Ares90]

Classic Gamespot...

[Lovable]

Sorry but if they're going to copy something, they gotta make sure to do it right and surpass the original. Unfortunately, that wasn't the case.

[dubt72]

True. Sonic Racing and Mario Kart are a good example. There is no choice by the reviewers but to compare it to the inspiration, at least in the first iteration. Then any sequels can be compared to the original.

[P_Bomb]

[QUOTE]And, let's face it, because Sony doesn't have quite enough loveable characters to make up a full fighting roster, there are third-party inclusions too, like Big Daddy, Dante, and Raiden. [/QUOTE]

There are plenty more Sony exclusive characters out there though...they simply aren't in it for whatever reason at this time. I think for a first attempt the roster is pretty strong, and some 3rd party characters like Raiden just make sense.

Million selling exclusives like Resistance, Yakuza, Valkyria Chronicles, Syphon Filter, Heavy Rain, Warhawk, Journey, Ico, Okami, Shadow of the Collosus, Demon's Souls aren't represented yet, but the characters most assuredly are still out there. As such, the roster complaints are getting kinda old. We already have free DLC confirmed from two more exclusives, and I wouldn't be surprised to see a sequel. The first Super Smash Bros game (which many seem to be viewing with protective nostalgia) only had 12 characters. You gotta start somewhere.

[brew]

Yeah , 20-22 characters is a good amount to start with. That's a lot of moves , supers , and other various nuances in the gameplay to sift through. It's a lot to take in.

[the worst]

Gamespot are burned out reviewers

[Norrison]

I like how this site works.
A xbox 360 or Wii U exclusive gets good reviews:
"Microsoft/Nintendo paid them, Journey/UC metacritic is better, it got 2/10 reviews and so on"
A xbox 360 or Wii U exclusive gets a bad/troll review:
"Their paycheck didn't arrive on time" or
"It's his opinion, he's entitled to it"
A Ps3 exclusive gets good reviews:
"Totally deserved, GOTY"
A PS3 exclusive gets bad/troll reviews:
"The reviewer is a Xbox 360 fanboy, retarded reviewer, troll review, etc."

Seriously people, it's a review get over it, it's not even a bad score.

[Count]

^you're surprised? This website has been like this for years.

[BlackTar187]

I love that people act like its only one side. Just cause you weren't here when Xbox fanboys ran the site doesn't mean it didn't happen. Try kotaku forums if you are so interested in MS getting the fair shake in the forums.

Otherwise just stop with the nonsense don't feed it and maybe it will starve and we can all be GAMERS and play games together and have fun and not care about the weekly SDF or XDF member count.

[Outside_ofthe_Box]

*SIGH*

***"A xbox 360 or Wii U exclusive gets good reviews:
"Microsoft/Nintendo paid them, Journey/UC metacritic is better, it got 2/10 reviews and so on""***

http://n4g.com/news/845209/...

http://n4g.com/news/1112208...

http://n4g.com/news/1112193...

http://n4g.com/news/859568/...

http://n4g.com/news/1100117...

I like how people like you on this site work.

[Norrison]

@Outside_ofthe_Box
That proves? My point?
If you look at the comments praising the game or the review they have tons of disagrees.
Look at the comments I found

"Guys looks like MS only really decent exclusive barley breaks the 9's. Maybe next year guys maybe next year"

"Wait what, all of a sudden IGN reviews are now credible? Funny old bunch here on n4g sometimes. Will bookmark this article then laugh as the same people dismiss IGN scores come Black Ops 2 review."

"IGN always give halo and COD high scores no matter what. Though this one does look good i must say"

"Nothing against the game but this looks almost exactly like Dirt 3. The presentation is nearly identical."

"I think it's a shame really because you have Forza missing essential racing features like Gravity gauge, Break Gauge, Throttle gauge fuel and tyre wear gauge and even lack of a Turbo gauge. Say what you will but this is what racing sim fans want. That's just my opinion, it doesn't deserve its score for a lack of fundamental features."

[OmniSlashPT]

Remember when Uncharted was labeled as a Tomb Raider clone? Yeah, this is exactly the same situation.

[ginsunuva]

All the aspects he points out as negatives are what I see as the positives in this game.
It's like the first time in recent memory I almost 100% didnt agree with a reviewer's opinion. It's almost like bashing MGS for long cutscenes when that is something I love.
Opinions are opinions, not facts, guys. Reviewers are not the word of god.

[modesign]

at least this game got better marks than zombieU

[NintyJazz]

From what I hear ZombiU is actually a pretty cool game worth checking out depending on whether you like slower paced games

[Grandmaster-B]

Jesus, this generation is full of shit.

It takes time to master the characters is a con???
Are you kidding me gamespot, maybe you should just stick with the COD "no-brain" formula.

Games becoming easier and easier and you coming up with such shit. No wonder the industry is suffering...KZ3, U3, Socom, Warhawk are all sold out to the casul market.

Bad future for the next generation.

[BlackTar187]

It takes time to master the characters is a con???
Are you kidding me gamespot, maybe you should just stick with the COD "no-brain" formula.

This is so true. Its awfully sad

[MiyagiSPG]

All COD's fault! Its like reviewers have completely forgotten how gaming was in the past gen's! You know, actual skill+fun!

[memots]

yup

I mentioned this before but it reminds me of a friend i have he didn't want to play Kz3 because he didn't know how to play. But he played every single cod on the market. Even after i told him its pretty much the same control he still wasn't interested.

Then i put Cod 4 on and all he was doing is quick scoping people.

[Veneno]

Gamespot are seriously incompetent. The game has 2 tutorials for each character going through Every single move and combo possibility. And each tutorial literally takes 3-5 minutes to complete.

And also 2 more training camps for absolute beginners and then intermediate to advanced.

What more do they need? For the game to play itself?

[DivineAssault]

Gamespot can kiss my a$$.. its getting pretty good scores across the grid but they give it a 6.5? lol screw them, this game is a great cross buy value & fun multiplayer title

[Kos-Mos]

I said it when we first got the teaser for this game, it would receive mediocre critics. Why could I see that? When I saw the interview with the developer I knew that it was a rookie.
I`m sorry to say, and yes I own a PS3. That`s the console I`ve played most on this generation. Don`t blame me, blame Sony for giving this game to the wrong developers. They are not Nintendo!

[Neo-Axl]

Played the beta, was addicted to the beta.
I will be buying this game, & I will enjoy it regardless of what the reviews say! Simply because of the hours me & my friends put into the beta alone.

[NBT91]

For PlayStation fans, it is a blast seeing the franchise characters together. For most others, it's a semi adequate fighter.
They reviewed it for what it is, a fighter. The main appeal here is not the fact it is a fighter, but that all the Sony mascots are together in a game.

Based on that, I think I will like it a lot personally but I totally see how, from a fighting game fanatic or one who had not grown up with PS characters would not enjoy it as much.

[shempo]

so a fighting game play different depend on characters is bad now gamespot ? seriously? lol

each single characters have their own style of gameplay which u need to master...check the ign 2hours exclusive gameplay to see what i mean.

this time i agree with ign review gamespot should choose someone else for this mark is a lame reviewer

[NBT91]

But read the rest of the review, the point they were making was... The game has an in depth combat where each character is different, making for a true fighter, but that does not really match the OTT fun, colourful silliness that the rest of the game seems to present.
It looks like a fun, accessible fighter but plays like a serious one, which for some would be great, others will find it a little odd and frankly, difficult.

Not sure if I agree with them yet as I dont get the game until Friday, but I see the point they were making at least.

[FunkMacNasty]

And out comes the Sony defense force... over ONE review.
just food for thought: what if the game is really as bad as the reviewer says? What excuse will you all come up with then?

[Hicken]

Only it isn't. Those of us who've played it know it isn't, and the majority of the other reviewers out there agree that it isn't.

The complaints, by and large, are weak. So who's the one making excuses?

[Ben_Grimm]

It still doen't explain most of the comments here that proclaim Gamespot as garbage or MS paid just because they have an app on Live.
What's the excuse for that Hicken?

[StrawberryDiesel420]

You haven't played it, the game deserves nothing less than an 8. PS All Stars accomplished what it set out to achieve and runs great while looking amazing on top of that.

[Silly gameAr]

Guess people don't like fun games anymore. They have to have billion dollar hype behind them to get the good scores I guess. Sad world.

[shempo]

tell me about about it.....

All i saw the last month on gamespot was shitload of halo4-ac3 adds,news every ten minutes ffs.

[Meep]

I don't see the problem. The review gave the game a 6.5 which is "fair". One of his thoughts are that the game is complex. Some might see this as a turn off or turn on. It was a turn off for the reviewer but I can imagine if you do manage to put the effort into learning the combo system then you will enjoy it. I played it at NY comic-con and I liked the battle system.

One thing I definitely agree on is the topic on health bars. I didn't like the way the AP system works. I played maybe 6 or 7 matches but from what I can recall, it was a fighting frenzy the whole game. The way the opponents interact with each other in the game was about the same throughout the matches. I guess that's why They put emphasis on the arenas, so the game isn't to stagnant. I the game had health bars or another mechanic, I believe it would have been better. Like the reviewer said, their is nothing more satisfying then watching/making a clutch moment in a games. With the AP system I can imagine their arn't many clutch moments.

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

I don't play fighting games that much but this video is just AWESOME. Pumps the heart.

[TristanV1]

LOL what a CRAPPY review by a crappy reviewer

[byeGollum]

If you enjoyed the BETA like me, I know you'll be buying the full game. Don't waste your time trying to convince others that you don't agree with another person's opinion :) . . . see ya online!

[Nes_Daze]

This game is getting bad reviews because people can't stand that the PS3 now has a game that plays a bit like SSB. fanboys...

[miDnIghtEr20C_SfF]

A 76 on metacritic. Ouch. http://www.metacritic.com/g...

[The_Klank]

How the Hell is that an ouch, I really don't understand gamers anymore... If your interested in the game you can probably add a mark to that and it'll be an 8.6 if your not remove a mark it'll be 6.6, either way a 7.6 Is a GOOD score.

[aceitman]

ign gave it an 80 it cant be that bad . ign is a tough reviewer website.

[Silly gameAr]

Yeah man. It's time for Sony to send out some swag bag of their own I guess. Though I don't see how 77 is bad,but whatevs.

[ALLWRONG]

Because it couldn't be the fact that game is mediocre right? Blame everyone! MS, Xbots, bias, Nintendo, swag, media, god, aliens, soundwaves, toothpaste, anything accept the actual game.

[sypher]

eh i always go off the reviewer himself. If you look into it you can see he mainly reviews casual titles. Your dance games etc which he gives high scores to. So not really the same mindset as I would have. So his opinion on the game means nothing for my own.

People need to stop relying on sites for reviews and find the actual journalists themselves. Find someone who likes the same games you do, then you are more likely to get an opinion which more aligns with how you would perceive the game. Relying on the actual site as a brand and judging a review because its IGN or GameSpot is just an oxymoron. Because all sites contain good journalists and terrible ones. It's up to you to find the good ones.

[MoonConquistador]

Well said sypher, +bubs

[NYC_Gamer]

I believe people who enjoyed the beta should buy this game

[NateCole]

A 6.5 from gamespot is a 7.5 for other reviewers.

It's a good score.

[ALLWRONG]

But other reviewers are also giving it 6 and 7. Even a Playstation mag gave it a 6 http://www.metacritic.com/g... for the disagrees

[Soldierone]

"Me can't smash buttons and win! me give low score because of that! Wah!" lol

Played the beta, enjoyed it, will be buying the second Crash Bandicoot or Snake are put in. Anyone find out who the final boss is yet?

[Om3ga370]

Seriously, I do not understand why there is so much hate towards this game. Just give it the chance that every new game deserves.
"It copies SSB."
It does, but it uses those elements in a different way. Almost every element is different, and the ones that remain are changed to work with the game, so these elements are welcome. I have always wanted a Sony beat-em up, since SSB, and now when one is made, people act like it's a trashy rip-off. Why fix something that isn't broken? Look at all of the fighting games that every console has to offer. SSB was fun, and competitive at the same time. Why is that bad to have in a fighting game?
"It was a poorly made game."
I doubt it. This game set the stage with what could be done in the future. Super Smash Bros 1 is definitely not as great as it's counterparts (although some may say otherwise,) and Playstation Allstars Battle Royale is only the first one! They are testing the waters for a possible sequel, and if people hate on this game for being a simple clone, then why would Superbot bother with making another?

[Omnislash]

Some of the reasons that people are dissmissing this game so early is because they play the game like super smash brothers... its so stupid... Its not super smash brothers.

[KevPC]

the guy who reviews it nerfs the score down mostly cause the fighting mechanics...which for me its simple...but i guess he would know having only reviewed like 2 fighting games. Also he said it had "horrible, pixelated menu screens" well you review the vita version and what does the menu screen have to do with playing the game.. that's a funny thing to nitpick on..

I feel like some reviewers gave it an even lower score cause is the same genre of game as smash bros... who cares if it plays completely different and has different characters...right?

I played the beta and loved it. i played with my cousin and brother 2 vs 2 online. it was so much fun. There was only 6 characters to choose from and 2 maps...so i figured if i am enjoying it this much with so little...imagine with the full game...If u play this game by urself i guess i can see how it might not be as fun...but when ur playing with friends its a blast.

[portugamer]

'Dad, I heard there is a cool game coming out for the ps3, like the one my cousin has, on the Wii. It looks really nice, I wish I could have it for Christmas'

Meanwhile, at Microsoft HQ
'Batte royal for the ps3 could sell really well this Christmas, even a Xbox customer could be tempted, and would pick a ps3, with that game and a few more hits'
'Ok, its better if we call hour friends,at xxx,yyy,zzz.com ' so they give it a shitty score, so people don't get it.'
'Ok, I already called P. at gamespot, he is ok with the deal, for the same cash, as usual'

- gamespot reviews the game,which gets a shitty score and review. P. checks his bank account, the cash is there.

- the kid reads the review from gamespot, which is one, if not the most influent gaming website in USA, and gets disappointed. He will not get the ps3 and the game anymore.

- Sony loses a potential customer, because a biased/dishonest journalist uses his personal tastes as a negative fact, and turns every little issue(thanks to his tastes) into a lethal issue, and slashes the score because of 0.5% of negative things, without taking into account the remaining 99.5% of positive things.

- 95% of all the other websites will review the game , according to the review from their 'master' gamespot, without even playing the game, for the most part, thus contributing on spreading the negativity all over the world.

- as usual, an exclusive ps3 game, no matter how good it is, gets killed by the big USA websites, with shitty reviews.like I always say, no ps3 exclusive game should get good reviews in USA. The less people spend money and buy foreign stuff/consoles/games, the more the local brands(Microsoft) will sell. Even if a multi platform game, the Xbox has 128*128 pixel compressed textures, while the ps3 has 1024*1024 pixel uncompressed textures, an ign or gamespot reviewer will still give a better review to the Xbox version, saying, for example, that the Xbox controller is heavier and better, or the lcd generated less heat when playing on Xbox, or the dog barked more while playing on the ps3.

I hate ign, like I hate gamespot. These Xbox fanboys journalists are the ones responsible of many many ps3 games not selling as they should/deserve, thanks to their biased and paid reviews, where ps3 games get slashed, 3 points less here for the graphics, because bla bla bla the textures bla bla bla, but he will never talk about the 3d, which is available and works great, 3 points less for the sound, because the sound is on 7.1 uncompressed hi quality files, and the reviewer only had a stereo speakers from his tv, 3 points less for the gameplay, because the guy can jump, run, crouch, walk, turn left and right, and it already exists on other games. And many many s-hit like that. A single bad texture in the 20 hours campaign, and the graphics will get a 7/10, because of that texture, which can make you blind.

[arbitor365]

im glad I stopped taking gamespot reviews seriously a long time ago. otherwise I would have missed out on tons of great games

[Blackcanary]

All i care is i played the beta and i loved it gonna get it for my ps3 and my vita so i do not care what the review states.

[stage88]

Oh, some review site gave it a 6.5. No skin of my nose.
I'll still be buying it after work today. Game on!

[silverdragon41]

I bought this game yesterday and I don’t regret it at all. I spent the day yesterday playing with my three friends and we had a great time. Each characters special is pretty unique and adds a lot of fun to the game. The stages also add a lot of fun to the game. I was first skeptical about building up supers to kill people but when you play the game it actually works out great. I also like the different game types and according to what game mode you are playing changes the way you decided to use your specials. My favorite aspect I like about this game is how every character is different and has their own move list and are not copies of each other with little tweaks. I am a huge ssb fan and the only thing I didn’t like about it was how some of the characters were so similar. An example of this is wolf, falco, and fox or even characters like captain falcon and ganondorf. I am glad Sony finally decided to make a type of game like this. This game was a great start and hopefully becomes an even better series.

[WeAreLegion]

This coming from the site that said Ratchet & Clank had "Too much variety". -_-

[jakmckratos]

Im kinda done with it..I was really excited for it but Im not into multiplayer...people overuse Raiden and are constantly playing because some people are leel 400-900...and they're just disgusting with how cheap they are. Raiden is so overpowered and overused. It's not fun..and no I don't just suck I have a decent record but it's not worth playing when there's so many balancing issues and exploiters