GR: "The minute I first got wind that Sony would be bringing us a brawler in the vein of Super Smash Bros., I knew instantly that this would inevitably be a terrible decision for the company. Now don't misunderstand me, I'm not adverse to the game because it rips off Nintendo's popular brawler. I am against the concept because Sony simply can't pull it off."
150°
130°
70°
170°
Ad 
120°
0°
30°
40°
40°
30°
^ I feel like this is exactly what people said in like 1993 when the company announced it was going to make a game platform.
"... Sony's library of first-party franchises doesn't lend itself to a character mash-up brawler."
THAT'S the reason? As if SSB's characters mesh ANY better?
WEAK.
Somebody please tell me such a sad excuse for writing won't get approved.
Sounds to me when he spoke of that he was also saying later that there is no unity among the characters? What does that even mean. I mean what does Zelda have anything to do with Super Mario other then the fact that they are Nintendo? That's like Kratos and Sackboy right there if you ask me.
There are plenty of PS characters, just as much as Nntendo and each of their characters have no common similarities other then the fact that they are Nintendo/Sony.
"The reason Super Smash Bros. is such a beloved game franchise has everything to do with the fact that it capitalizes on Nintendo's strengths. Sony clearly is adept in different areas, namely quality single-player experiences. So instead of copying Nintendo, Sony would have been far better off pouring their resources into a new IP, or (dare I say) better marketing for their tragically overlook exclusive titles."
Well lets see:
Killzone:Merc
Beyond Two Souls
Last of Us
A bunch of new games announced at Gamescom
Last Gaurdian,
the list goes on. Sony has been doing this for a very long time
I did read the article and even grabbed quotes.
All those "valid" concerns can be used on SSB. His main argument is that the characters don't mash well because they are completely unrelated to one another -_-
but we don't yet have a clue to what brings these characters together, it's called all-stars... maybe that has something to do with the concept.
This game can't get slack for being a Rip Off and being too different at the same time. that's an oxymoron, choose one and continue...
But you're right Ness... Sonic... Ice Climbers?... Mario & Zelda in a game is like putting Nathan drake and Crash Bandicoot in a game, same developer, totally different designs and concepts.
Its completely ridiculous /s
I want to get into this beta, because in the end, its how fun the game is that matters in this genre
and everyone i know who has played the beta has praised it. Let's see when its released till than shut up.
Nintendo fanboys so you hate darksiders because its too much like zelda too? almost every game takes some other games idea and do 2 thing either copy and paste or improve on it. Let's hope this game brings something new to the table.
every day we have to get another article on why the game will be bad. If people are hating on this game that much than there must be something sony is doing right. And i hope they announce more 3rd party characters who the heck cares whether that mesh together. Its called battle royal so anything and any goes.
If you don't agree with my opinion that is fine, but I should be able to share my feelings on the game regardless of whether or not it is in line with yours.
That said I would rather Sony have remade Bushido Blade instead that game was an incredible ps1 fighter
And don't tell me that they did. I played SSBB all the time and it never escaped me how awkward fighting Ness was with Samus and Marth. And BTW i would like to again point out that many characters in Nintendo's line up are characters not used in decades and that despite fanboy delusions several of Sony characters are well known like Parappa,Sir Dan,Spike,Heihachi and Sweet Tooth? Am I the only one who remembers that hundreds of millions of people owned PlayStations back then and that many modern gamers still remember these people and that many modern gamers haven't a clue who Marth, Ness,Pit,Ice Climbers, ROB or Mr Game and Watch are?
More people probably know who Sly,Jak and Ratchet are more then they know who Ness and Ice Climbers are. Just because Nintendo dug them from out of their basement after not using them for twenty plus years doesn't make them relevant. Sony has modern relevance on their side. Nintendo has to dig up the distant ancient past just to fill out their roster
This kills the guys whole argument.
I love it
The beta is my favorite thing to do right now.
I have been participating in idiotic facebook contests, for the last 2 weeks, and I still come up empty handed
I've been a PS plus member since day 1, and nothing :(
Sorry you didn't get in, man. The closed beta extends to Plus members in September. :)
I start university in september, I have no time to play it... that means that getting in early is my only chance to really play it
Even though I get to try it on thursday, I need more time to appretiate the game F**K
I'm not interested in opera, but I don't go writing about the fact.
If you don't understand why I wrote it, why did you click on the article and bother to comment?
Probably because worthless opinion articles like this have become all too common on N4G, and it's irritating for those who come to this site for news.
This opinion piece is laughable (good thing it's your opinion, otherwise you would be ostracized for such blatant ignorance) take note of what I quoted from what you wrote. SONY can't pull off a SSB type game?? have you seen the same game, Playstation All-Stars Battle Royale, is an exact duplicate of SSB, it's gameplay mechanics are identical, with the exception of what Superbot tweaked to make the game their own. If anything, that's the problem, Playstation All-Stars Battle Royale, is too much like SSB. The premise of Playstation greats battling it out is great, but instead of going the SSB route, SONY/Superbot should've went with a beat em up type game, i.e. Gekido, basically a more fighting based game instead of a party based brawler.
You look at the PASBR on the surface and if you go in thinking it's exactly the same you will get dominated. You have to completely change your smash bros mind set when playing it and you will see a world of deference. In Smash the character variety aren't all varied as one would think. Most if not all character are based on one concept, get in close and smash. In smash you never get that one true specialist other than the close-up fighter. You don't get to see someone like Conolel Redec or Sackboy who's main purpose is to stay far away and zone there enemies as far away as possible. The closest smash has is Link and Samus, characters that are balanced in long and close range options. The reason it's like this for Smash is because it favors their knockout mechanics. You never spend a whole round with Link and Samus playing from a far because other than Samus fully charged shots you can't get knockouts that way. In the end what will truly differentiate the two are it's characters and how they work within each games' game mechanics. That's how all fighting games differ from each other.
There's more 'capitalising on Nintendo's strengths' in SSB? Writer doesn't define what that means. You need to give examples. If anything Sony's brawler has a strength in being more contemporary with newer exclusive IPs and revolving backgrounds with even more non-playable NPCs (Buzz, Hades, Qwark etc).
Saying Sony should instead invest in creating more new IPs is puzzling to anyone who watched Gamescom and the debut of several new IPs including the Puppeteer, Tearaway, Rain, Until Dawn and presentations for Ni No Kuni, The Last of Us, and Beyond: Two Souls. Ironically, PS:AllStars is itself a new IP.
[QUOTE]Please don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that this is by any means a bad thing.[/QUOTE]
Sure you are. You admit you called it a "gaming travesty" before you had even played it. Your mind was already made up.
[QUOTE]An expansive selection of vastly different types of games is what makes Sony's platform so great; however, shoehorning them all into a fighting game is absolutely ridiculous[/QUOTE]
Except when Nintendo did the exact same thing you called it "capitalising on Nintendo's strengths."
[QUOTE] but because Sony doesn't have the overarching sense of unity among its franchises, it ultimately fails in this regard.[/QUOTE]
The overarching sense of unity is they're almost all brand name exclusive charachters (Nathan Drake, Kratos, The Helghast, Sackboy, Nariko, Ratchet, Jak, Sly, Sweet Tooth, Cole McGrath) sitting on my shelf right now with some 3rd party ones (BigDaddy, Dante, Heihachi) as well.
SSBB had R.O.B the robot (a peripheral from over 25 years ago) alongside Mr 'Genesis does what Nintendon't himself (Sonic), a Pokemon and a race car driver from F-Zero. What's the unity, other than they're all old as sin?
When you see things like -
- Fat Princess chasing a fleeing Radec on a giant Chicken trying to KO him
- Parappa doing his thousand kick move on top of Big Daddy's head
- Drake shooting Parappa at point blank range as he falls flat to the ground in his 2D form
- Sackboy suplexing new Dante
It all just works well. They nailed the fun aspect of the mashup. This game has a certian charm to it that's all its own.
Most of Sony's characters are pretty easy to translate to the game - Kratos , Cole , Ratchet , Drake , Jak , Sly , etc ..... they are going to play and feel like we would mostly expect them to from their games. And some of the others like Sweet Tooth , Parappa , and Fat Princess .... they did a good job of capturing their essence well for a game of this type.
I'd consider the contrast of the mashup and how they translated the characters as strengths.