Playstation All-Stars Battle Royale - Review [GamingLives]

GamingLives takes a look at Playstation All-Stars Battle Royale.

"The balance that All-Stars somehow manages to strike is between structured combos that can be very lengthy and combat that is rather chaotic at the best of times is perhaps its greatest triumph. The focus of All-Stars, for the most part, is kills, as they are rewarded more than dying is punished. This system creates a high speed, aggressive environment, where players are unafraid of pushing hard to gain an extra kill, even if it means losing their own life."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
pain777pas2179d ago (Edited 2179d ago )

Dude don't do reviews like this again. The first few lines ruin the review and no one wants to read anymore. Know that companies take ideas like Nintendo got the idea of Kirby from Kid Chameleon or SSB from that Namco game and the irony is Namco is making the next Smash. If you get uptight about platformers or fighting games than MK should not exist because SF, Tekken should not exist because of VF, Forza should not exist because of GT, Halo should not exist because of Doom... The list goes on. Remember that game designers are paid and this is just a business. Miyamoto was inspired by the eyetoy to make the Wii. Everyone inspires others and being closed minded that others are not watching you and going to "copy" you which is flattering like Kobe did Jordan or Lebron does Magic is just LIFE. Get over bias.

gaminglives2178d ago

It's actually commonplace for reviewers to juxtapose, otherwise those who are unfamiliar with the IP have no basis for comparison. No different to someone saying that they weren't looking forward to "To Wong Foo, Thanks for Everything! Julie Newmar" because it looks like a cheap immitation of "The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert". It did; it really did.

If it's fine to compare like for like when it comes to movies, or for someone to point out the similarities between Oasis and The Beatles when it comes to chord progressions and melody, then why not apply the same logic to video games?

I think it's important to remember that reviews are opinion, rather than fact. They may be based on fact, but they're still essentially an opinion. Keegan's approach to this review wasn't one of bias, it was just that he opened with a personal observation.

As one of the thousands of people present at the Sony press conference at last year's E3, I can tell you that the footage shown of All-Stars Battle Royale was met with a lot of murmurs about how it looked very similar to Super Smash Bros. Personally speaking, I've never really played Nintendo, and even I thought the same.

We'll pass on your comments to Keegan, naturally, but I imagine he'll continue to reference other games which follow a similar theme in future reviews. It's not bias though, just observation.

pain777pas2177d ago

Its nice to see that you would actually respond. This is constructive criticism and when your are just starting out or don't have a huge name in the industry it is best to just review the game THOROUGHLY. As long as you experiment with the game and play it for a sufficient amount of time then just let people know what you thought about the mechanics, presentation etc... Whenever you dive in with almost "the thought even looking at this game made me want to pass up on it" does not make me want to read more no matter the score. That is all I am getting too. Save opinions for the end of the review in the conclusion. Let people know what they need then you do what you want to. Put the people first. Just my 2 cents.

gaminglives2177d ago (Edited 2177d ago )

Oh I totally get what you're saying, but we're not a review site, we're primarily an opinion site. Out of over 1600 published articles, only 232 of them are reviews and those who read the site know what we're about. We will always be opinion-driven, and if people would rather not read that then there are tens of thousands of other sites where they can read pure-bred reviews.

We also do review games thoroughly, and if a game needs a playthrough to the end-game before putting pen to paper then we'll do that, even if we have PRs and publishers screaming for their reviews to go up. Some adhere to this more than others and I personally won't review a game until every aspect of it has been completed, such as maxing out Skyrim before writing a single word.

To each their own though, but we're not about competing with the likes of IGN et al for high traffic. Our 150,000 per month grows steadily and we're happy with it as it is. We write how we do because it's what we want to see being put out there, not what other people expect to see. So many sites do the same thing, because they believe in following protocol. I'm not into that. I was a magazine editor in 1988 for a couple of years, and it was all about pleasing the masses. Now it's about pleasing those who want to read what we're writing.

Thanks for the comments though; we're not one of these places who get all up-in-arms when someone 'dares' to criticise the way we do things. We do read every comment, and care what people think, but may not necessarily change our ways to accommodate individual preferences. We still read/listen though.

Also, thanks for not being a dick. Too few take the time to respond with rationale :)

Apologies for not replying inline, but the option isn't there for some reason.