Escpist: It's no secret that PlayStation All-Stars: Battle Royale bears more than a passing resemblance to Nintendo's famous brawler with a similarly long-winded title, Super Smash Brothers Melee. Even so, Sony's entry to the genre deserves to be judged independently, and for that, you can read our review right here. But while the merits and flaws of PlayStation All-Stars are its own, there's no question that some of the most curious about this title are going to be SSB players. After all, it's been over four years since they've seen a new title, and over ten you go back to Melee, the last to bolster the cult following for which the series is famous. Many of those players are a pretty serious bunch, and with PlayStation All-Stars positioning to be the first direct "competitor" on the market (albeit for a completely different system), it leaves one simple question on people's minds: If I liked Super Smash Brothers, will I like PlayStation All-Stars?
if you love mario zelda ect go for smash bros.
if you love drake sweettooth sly kratos go for ps allstars
ill get both.
I've enjoyed many fighter games without even knowing who the fuck the people fighting in those games were.
Edit: Not as deep? The fighting mechanic is FAR deeper in PSAS than SSB. The variation in levels and how they evolve is on par, if not better, and the roster is as varied and large enough to be comparable.
And this IS the first game; SSB's first entry wasn't NEARLY as robust.
"The fighting mechanic is FAR deeper in PSAS than SSB."
Hahahaha, this is coming from a person who has admitted to never playing SSB. How do you know PSAS is deeper.
You are the biggest hypocrit to ever grace this site.
To simply disregard PSAS after just one game is assanine & pointless. So lets see what happens once PSAS also becomes a franchise than the comparison is justified.