Log in or sign up to comment
126 Comments
  • 126 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Posted by automatica

This game is bloody fantastic. I had my reservations with some of the systems prior to going in, particularly the scoring system. Having played this game a ton since release, all of my concerns were put to rest -- this game is amazing. Jeff, I have to respectfully disagree with your review here. You bring up some very valid points, but the game is so fantastically fun that they end up being nothing more than minor annoyances. If you're into brawlers, get this game. It might look like a Smash Bro's clone, but dismissing it as such would mean you'd be missing out on one of the best multiplayer brawlers ever made.

Posted by Superkenon

@Cyrisaurus said:

I know, but he should have put the part about fun first. Starting off with negative talk is a poor choice.

To answer your question, I was excited since the day they announced it because I am a huge Playstation fan and always have been. So yeah, knowing that I could play as Jak and Daxter and beat up Nathan Drake was what got me interested, but now that I have it and I'm playing it, my perspective has changed to looking at this like it's a new IP. Because it's a fighting game, most of these characters obviously don't play like the do in their games. So, take Sweet Tooth. Never have you been able to play as Sweet Tooth outside the truck in any Twisted Metal game. Turns out, he makes a really awesome fighting game character, and he's my favorite so far. Raiden is also really fun, and MGR isn't even out yet, so I can't just be saying that because I like his game. That kinda goes for Big Daddy as well, because I've never played a Bioshock game, but they still made him into his own little fighting game character. Jak and Daxter is my favorite PS character, but I'm not forcing myself to play as them in this game because of that.

I love the super system, so if this was just a new game all together with a full roster of made up characters, I'd still enjoy it.

As for the lack of certain characters on the roster, I'm not worried. They have already announced that they are doing DLC, and it's going to be free.

Not to mention, this is SUPERBOT'S FIRST GAME. You gotta give them a chance first. Let them learn to walk before expecting them to run a marathon. I fully expect the next PS All-Stars to have double the roster. They've already got the gameplay down, so they have all the time in the world to work on the rest.

Thanks for the response. The 'new IP' idea is a pretty interesting way to think about it -- and somehow, makes me realize that this game might even appeal to me more if it was a cast of made-up characters. As it is, since the cast is nothing but known quantities -- half of whom I'm rather indifferent towards -- it ends up serving almost as a needless detriment to the product in my eyes. But you may have a point, that this isn't totally unlike exploring a new batch of characters for the first time. Approaching it with that mindset could be useful for us fence-sitters. I could find that the act of playing Jak's fighting game-counterpart is enough to turn my seething apathy towards him (opinions!!!) into a form of appreciation.

Of course, it'd still be better in the first place if the character was something I gave a flip about, haha. Or at least a blank slate. But, to be fair, that's not really a fault of the game's -- I'm just not the intended audience for it... well, not quite. I'm kind of in a funny spot where I want to see this series succeed and grow a more universally appealing selection, but the current game just isn't exciting me enough to want to play it ahead of other things on my plate. Maybe I'll just buy it anyway in a silly show of support? Whooo.

Anyway, I always see it as a good thing to get the negative stuff out of the way first. To me, the review read as, "there's all this stuff I hate, blah blah but I liked it." Compared to, "I liked it, blah blah, but there's all this stuff I hate," I think the former paints the better picture. Airing the grievances early, and all that. But that could just be me. Either way, I like your take of it. Have you considered taking a crack at a user review? I know I'd like to see your perspective expanded upon.

Posted by Axelhander

Man I'm super glad we got way more words talking about presentation, UI, and menus than about the mechanics and fighting engine. What an excellent review of this game's true qualities.

Can I assume Smash Bros. Brawl, with its contemptuous tripping and backwards design -- but top notch presentation, UI, and menus (since after all, that's what REALLY matters) -- got a more favorable rating? Checking... Yup. Not just another star, but a generally more favorable tone in the review. WHAT A SHOCK.

Far too many gamers already applaud and defend poor design for stupid reasons, while condemning sound design for the same. It's extraordinarily frustrating to see reviewers -- ideally supposed to be much more thoughtful than the average gamer -- completely forget that games are games and should be judged as such.

Posted by Hailinel

@DarthOrange said:

I liked the combat a lot more then Jeff did and it really is deeper then he gives it credit for, especially in stock matches. I personally would give this game five stars for bringing new mechanics to the fighting game genre alone but good on Jeff and other reviewers for giving this game mediocre to average scores. Maybe it will make Sony get their head out of their ass and develop a story to go along with the mash-up and maybe put a commercial or two on the TV.

Also, as Jeff stated, they should have gone deeper into the PlayStation history.

At the very least, they should think harder about what characters to include rather than crap the roster full of third-party characters for the sake of cross-promotion.

Online
Posted by Tikicobra

Honestly, this game could totally blow and I would still get it just for Sir Daniel.

Edited by beard_of_zeus

I think this review is pretty fair. I got the Vita version for free with the Amazon Vita bundle they had last week, and have been having a fun time with it so far, though, I've only played for a couple days, who knows if it has legs. I wish there was a bit more to the single-player; it's kinda crazy that I find all the challenge/training/combo training type modes to be the most compelling part, more so than the standard arcade ladder. I think it's because I'm still trying to deconstruct the design decisions of the battle system. Online mode is fun and super-smooth, even on the Vita.

My biggest complaints are the kinda crummy roster, in terms of old-school stalwarts (but I acknowledge licensing issues, business deals that would have to be made, etc.) and the super-duper bland menus, both of which Jeff pointed out. Not sure where I stand on the supers = kills system yet; the match type where everyone has a set number of lives makes this battle system seem most compelling. It's cool getting into standoffs and waiting for everyone to strike with their super; now I'm just working to find the depth of the standard moves, short of filling up your super meter.

Just my two cents.

Posted by laserbolts

This looks like it would be fun for a night of drinking but I don't see how there is any lasting appeal here. I mean once I see all the highest level supers I think I would be done with the game. Also I love how there is always at least one person in review comments that just makes me so embarrassed. Won't say names but it's pretty clear who it is here.

Posted by Nettacki
@DarthOrange said:

Maybe it will make Sony get their head out of their ass and develop a story to go along with the mash-up and maybe put a commercial or two on the TV.  
 

They just made a collaboration with Robot Chicken for a commercial. It's kinda funny.
 
  
Posted by OneManX

@Hailinel said:

@OneManX said:

@Hailinel said:

@Yummylee said:

Concerning the two Coles, I think it's really no different from how there's both Mario and Luigi in SSB's. I mean technically they're different characters, but when it comes down to it Luigi is just a taller Mario wearing a different coloured outfit, and the personalities for each variations of Cole are of course drastically different from one another. I imagine each Cole even has his own unique moveset like in the inFAMOUS games themselves?

I'm not trying to defend this game or anything mind you as I have no interest in playing it anyway, but I just wanted to air my thoughts to anyone who perhaps regarded putting in two different Coles a little weird. Of course I won't deny that the roster is still a little weak all the same... A Big Daddy before even Kazuma Kiryu?! Let alone all of the other bigger Playstation omissions? GTFO, Sony U_U

Mario and Luigi are two different characters with their own identities and personalities (however thin they may be). The idea that they are the same as Cole and Evil Cole (the same character, but one is just pissy) doesn't really fly. In Smash Bros. Brawl, Samus and Zero Suit Samus occupy one roster space. There's absolutely no reason that Sony couldn't do the same for Cole.

Sucker Punch doesn't even treat the Coles as the same character, and they play differently outside of one is red and the other is blue. In the footage I've seen, it seems like they did a good job at showing off the differences between the Coles.

As for the game itself, looks alright, doubtful I'll play it, but I can rent it, have some fun for a weekend.

It's ridiculous that they don't, considering that Cole and Evil Cole are just good and evil variations of the same character. No, they're not identical in every way, but can you really blame people raising eyebrows at the way they were included?

I an't agree to both Coles being the same, the game is different, some of the story beats play out different, and they just play different, MAYBE it is too much to ask for a game like this which just needs diversity. But as long as they make the character play differently, then it's kinda hard to complain. From some people who have played more than me, there seems to be more to the 2 Coles, so to write it off at face value, seems odd.

Posted by gb09

agree with jeff mostly

crash, cloud, lara, snake - and i'm in.

Posted by DarthOrange

I liked the combat a lot more then Jeff did and it really is deeper then he gives it credit for, especially in stock matches. I personally would give this game five stars for bringing new mechanics to the fighting game genre alone but good on Jeff and other reviewers for giving this game mediocre to average scores. Maybe it will make Sony get their head out of their ass and develop a story to go along with the mash-up and maybe put a commercial or two on the TV.  
 
Also, as Jeff stated, they should have gone deeper into the PlayStation history.

Posted by AxleBro

@leejunfan83 said:

Why is Jeff reviewing a game that is of a style that he does not like?

this game didn't need a gb review, you either like this sort of thing or you hate it.

Posted by mister1337

Another Shitty review from Giant Bomb.

Posted by Godzilla_Sushi

I think you are spot on with this review Jeff. It's something that deserves to be played but I think there are even deeper omissions than the ones you listed. I just think that it might be something worth revisiting in a few years and iterate on these ideas. If they get that chance, I'm sure they could have their Smash Bros. Brawl. Lest we forget, the original Smash Bros. isn't going to blow anyone away today.

Posted by whatisdelicious

@Hailinel: Cole and Evil Cole have different powers and play differently.

Posted by Nightfang
Edited by bhhawks78

@Cyrisaurus said:

Mention Smash Bros in first sentence - check

Complain about characters not being in that Sony doesn't have control over - check

figured Jeff wouldn't make the same dumb mistakes other reviewers did, but oh well.

It's a really fucking fun game, and in case everyone kinda forgot why they started playing games to begin with, Fun is kind of the most important factor.

FYI Jeff, Sucker Punch requested Good and Evil Cole. They are not palette swaps, they have different move sets.

Rip off all the worst parts of smash bros but not the good parts? Check

Make a game called playstation all stars without getting the right characters signed up before development? Check (fucking lol at Sony for this)

Letting a C tier dev like sucker punch take two character slots because they asked? Fucking lol If they asked for 4 slots should they have had good and evil barry too since they asked so nicely?

Posted by Hailinel

@whatisdelicious said:

@Hailinel: Yeah well Smash Bros. also has like three different versions of Link, three versions of Fox, two of Captain Falcon, etc.

Just because Smash does something doesn't mean that All-Stars is bound to doing the same thing. Smash makes plenty of mistakes too. That people are getting so incensed over there being two versions of Cole that play appreciably differently, representing a game where you're supposed to end up with radically different versions of the same character by the end of the game, is laughable. Like I said, it's like trying to represent Shepard in one slot.

I'm not saying that they couldn't or shouldn't have forced Cole into one slot. I'm just saying that it's not a big deal, and that people should just cut the game some fucking slack already. Jeff said it himself in his review that everybody is going to obsess over their own dream roster. Well, it's a dream roster, Jeff. By definition, it can't and won't exist, so just judge the game as-is rather than listing all the ways it falls short of your perfect fantasy version of the game.

Ryu and Ken have many of the same moves, but you'd be hard pressed to call them clones at this point. Same goes fro Smash Bros. characters. Characters like Captain Falcon/Gandondorf have similarities certainly, but they're different enough to require different styles of play. And even for all their similarities, they are still different characters. Cole and Evil Cole are still just Cole. Samus and Zero Suit Samus are still just Samus. Zelda and Sheik are both just Zelda.

Online
Edited by bhhawks78

The funniest thing about all these angry fanboys is that I honestly think the review was too kind.

This game is a fucking joke.

I love my vita and I can't think of a single released game for my vita that I would want to play less than this.

Posted by King9999

I stopped reading once I read the paragraph about the missing characters.

Posted by JesterPC238

@Deathpooky said:

@JesterPC238 said:

It's... Not though...

I mean Jeff didn't particularly love it, fine, that's totally his right. I don't know if you've played it, I don't feel that it is bad, antiseptic or "all business." Yes, there are a lot of Bioshock references in it, but they are all fun, and none of them feel like they hurt the game. Big Daddy is a lot of fun to play as, and mixes in well from a gameplay perspective.

Personally, I like this game a hell of a lot more than Smash Bros. Every Smash character falls into one of three categories for me: Heavy, medium, and light. Aside from the maneuverability of each character they all feel very, very similar. Not to mention the number of clones (Fox/Falco/Wolf, Link/Toon Link, Roy/Marth, Mario/Luigi, Daisy/Peach etc.). All Stars' characters feel much far more differentiated, and the Super System makes the game about fighting, not about zone control.

Look, I'm not saying one or the other is definitely "better," but they are just very different mechanically, and some will still prefer Smash and some will like this more. They are both great.

I've played a few matches, but haven't liked it. For the roster, Sony just has less to work with, and a lot to me seemed shoehorned in to meet their requirements, as opposed to starting with a base of characters you've known for decades. That was the initial appeal of Smash Brothers back on N64. They did good with what they had, but it doesn't pull the heartstrings the way Nintendo's roster did.

Gameplay wise, I just didn't get into it and came away with a lot of complaints:

The second to second fighting isn't as important as getting off your supers correctly, which makes a lot of the game seem unimportant. I have almost no fun with the basic fighting itself, since the damage I'm doing could all be for naught, instead of chipping away on someone's percentage efficiently. It makes it seem a lot more random when death can come out of nowhere, even if there is some strategy there. Smash Brothers was random, but you could plan around it, and out of nowhere deaths only occurred through specific items or once you had some damage on you - here every character has an instakill move they can pull out at almost any time. This all also made me not care about any of the character variation beyond finding a reliable super.

Managing your super meter doesn't work the same way as managing your percentage, though that appears to be what they intended it to be. For instance, there's no fun/strategy of surviving since there's no damage - instead just trying to avoid supers, regardless of how well you've fought. On the flipside, the lack of damage causing guys to fly away takes away a ton of the fun in smacking people around and trying to kill them once they've been heavily damaged. And one guy sucking can "feed" another person's super meter, letting him come after me even if I've played well.

Finally, the third level supers, supposedly the big "fun" part of the game, for the most part all have the feel of the hammer from Smash Bros - an annoying, largely undodgeable effect that will get automatically get some kills. We always turned off the hammer for that reason. I can't see ever using them really, which means the craziest part of the game goes by the wayside.

If you had caught me back during the beta, I'd have agreed 100% with you. If you only play a few matches it feels like a button mashy mess, and THAT'S something worth criticizing. The only reason I stuck with it is because a friend of mine was swearing up and down that there's depth to be found. Play some ranked matches and you start to see how important standard attacks are.

I think of the level 3 supers as being like final smash moves from Brawl. They are fun, kind of nostalgic little nods that are capable of wiping a screen, but the time it takes to charge them up means that it is far more efficient to use the level 2 moves.

They really should have come up with a better way to explain why the systems work the way that they do. There are actually combo tutorials for every character, but it's buried in a menu marked tutorial, which you wouldn't select given that you play a tutorial when you start the game. I only found the advanced lessons because I was having a friend play the tutorial. Something like that warrants criticism, I just really hope that the cynicism surrounding the game from those who haven't "gotten it" doesn't hurt sales so much that Superbot isn't given a shot at a sequel.

Edited by gosukiller

I actually like that's alot like SSBM, but where it's different it makes mistakes.

What kind of person thought it was a good idea to make Super-moves the only way to score?! It's literally THE thing keeping me and my SSBM friends away from it.

Having your characters fly out of the level at warp speed with 300% damage is one of the best things about Smash Bros.!

Posted by dropabombonit

Good review. I was willing to give this game the benefit of the doubt up until release but playing the beta let me see that although a fun fighting game, there was no personality

Posted by Cheebahh
If you catch me on the right day, I might even go so far as to say that if you can't lock down those three characters for your Sony fighting game, you probably shouldn't make your Sony fighting game.

Nailed it. How they ever planned on releasing this game without Crash, Cloud or Lara is frankly as laughable as the devs attempts to astro-turf the Internet with their "It's not Super Smash Bros!" mantra.

Posted by MormonWarrior

@Yummylee said:

@MormonWarrior said:

The dude from MediEvil?

This guy? He's in there actually.

@Sauson said:

@MormonWarrior said:

And where the heck is Spyro? Croc? The dude from MediEvil? This game just ain't what it should be. Fortunately, few other companies take as long to come out with sequels as Nintendo so...maybe a future one will be cool?

The guy from MediEvil IS in the game...

Well geez, I stand corrected! The other glaring omissions are...well, glaring. And the core game seems awfully dull from what I played of the beta. I'm gonna pass on this one.

Posted by Eyz

This brawler sounds a bit...mmmh.. not lacking, but definitively rushed.

Oh, well... back to Power Stone it is - for me :P

Posted by whatisdelicious

@Lysergica33: It's still a really fun game. At a certain point, does it really matter what characters are in it if it's fun as hell? I mean, they've got Heihachi spawning bears, Parappa rapping Gotta Believe, Toro doing... Toro stuff, etc. The roster, for the first game in what hopefully ends up being a series, is super weird and full of deep cuts. The last boss is Polygon Man for Christ's sake. Just because there isn't Vib Ribbon or Crash Bandicoot doesn't mean they played it safe with the roster. My housemates (who both play games) already recognize only like half the characters. They did fine with having a quirky roster, and it's a super fun game to boot. Judge it on that, and support them so they'll get a chance to make another game that does have Crash and others in it.

Posted by whatisdelicious

@Hailinel: Yeah well Smash Bros. also has like three different versions of Link, three versions of Fox, two of Captain Falcon, etc.

Just because Smash does something doesn't mean that All-Stars is bound to doing the same thing. Smash makes plenty of mistakes too. That people are getting so incensed over there being two versions of Cole that play appreciably differently, representing a game where you're supposed to end up with radically different versions of the same character by the end of the game, is laughable. Like I said, it's like trying to represent Shepard in one slot.

I'm not saying that they couldn't or shouldn't have forced Cole into one slot. I'm just saying that it's not a big deal, and that people should just cut the game some fucking slack already. Jeff said it himself in his review that everybody is going to obsess over their own dream roster. Well, it's a dream roster, Jeff. By definition, it can't and won't exist, so just judge the game as-is rather than listing all the ways it falls short of your perfect fantasy version of the game.

Posted by Lysergica33

I have no problems with the idea of Sony doing a Sony themed Smash Bros game but the roster is unfathomably awful. A bunch of characters from multi-platform games, big daddy from a game that released on PC and 360 a year earlier than the subpar PS3 version, and no Crash Bandicoot? Yeah... Going to give this one a miss. Shame really. I wanted to give Sony all of my moneys for this :<

Posted by Hailinel

@OneManX said:

@Hailinel said:

@Yummylee said:

Concerning the two Coles, I think it's really no different from how there's both Mario and Luigi in SSB's. I mean technically they're different characters, but when it comes down to it Luigi is just a taller Mario wearing a different coloured outfit, and the personalities for each variations of Cole are of course drastically different from one another. I imagine each Cole even has his own unique moveset like in the inFAMOUS games themselves?

I'm not trying to defend this game or anything mind you as I have no interest in playing it anyway, but I just wanted to air my thoughts to anyone who perhaps regarded putting in two different Coles a little weird. Of course I won't deny that the roster is still a little weak all the same... A Big Daddy before even Kazuma Kiryu?! Let alone all of the other bigger Playstation omissions? GTFO, Sony U_U

Mario and Luigi are two different characters with their own identities and personalities (however thin they may be). The idea that they are the same as Cole and Evil Cole (the same character, but one is just pissy) doesn't really fly. In Smash Bros. Brawl, Samus and Zero Suit Samus occupy one roster space. There's absolutely no reason that Sony couldn't do the same for Cole.

Sucker Punch doesn't even treat the Coles as the same character, and they play differently outside of one is red and the other is blue. In the footage I've seen, it seems like they did a good job at showing off the differences between the Coles.

As for the game itself, looks alright, doubtful I'll play it, but I can rent it, have some fun for a weekend.

It's ridiculous that they don't, considering that Cole and Evil Cole are just good and evil variations of the same character. No, they're not identical in every way, but can you really blame people raising eyebrows at the way they were included?

Online
Posted by Hailinel

@whatisdelicious said:

Also, the complaining that Cole and Evil Cole isn't just a "press triangle" thing is silly. The whole premise of inFAMOUS is that being good or evil has a real tangible effect on your powers, your play style, everything. That's the point of the game. Good Cole is all about precision. Evil Cole is all about chaos. They have different powers. SuperBot made it pretty clear that they wanted to represent every character in a way that is extremely faithful to the source material. The way to do that with Cole is to split him up. And sure enough, the characters feel appreciably different, much more than just palette swaps.

Imagine trying to represent Shepard from Mass Effect as one character in a fighting game. How does he play? Does he use powers or guns or both? Does he work alone or heavily use his squadmates? What class is he? Is he a paragon or a renegade? Is he even a "he"?

You just couldn't do it.

I said it before in these comments and I'll say it again; they could have easily given Cole and Evil Cole a single roster slot, just as SSBB gave Samus and Zero-Suit Samus, and for that matter, Zelda and Sheik, shared roster slots. Separating Cole and Evil Cole into distinct character slots just smacks of the dev team not having enough characters to work with, and so they doubled up. It doesn't matter that they have different powers; Zelda and Sheik are completely different in terms of their play-style, as are both variations of Samus.

Online
Posted by OneManX

@Hailinel said:

@Yummylee said:

Concerning the two Coles, I think it's really no different from how there's both Mario and Luigi in SSB's. I mean technically they're different characters, but when it comes down to it Luigi is just a taller Mario wearing a different coloured outfit, and the personalities for each variations of Cole are of course drastically different from one another. I imagine each Cole even has his own unique moveset like in the inFAMOUS games themselves?

I'm not trying to defend this game or anything mind you as I have no interest in playing it anyway, but I just wanted to air my thoughts to anyone who perhaps regarded putting in two different Coles a little weird. Of course I won't deny that the roster is still a little weak all the same... A Big Daddy before even Kazuma Kiryu?! Let alone all of the other bigger Playstation omissions? GTFO, Sony U_U

Mario and Luigi are two different characters with their own identities and personalities (however thin they may be). The idea that they are the same as Cole and Evil Cole (the same character, but one is just pissy) doesn't really fly. In Smash Bros. Brawl, Samus and Zero Suit Samus occupy one roster space. There's absolutely no reason that Sony couldn't do the same for Cole.

Sucker Punch doesn't even treat the Coles as the same character, and they play differently outside of one is red and the other is blue. In the footage I've seen, it seems like they did a good job at showing off the differences between the Coles.

As for the game itself, looks alright, doubtful I'll play it, but I can rent it, have some fun for a weekend.

Posted by JuMP

I'll be honest that my Avengers knowledge is limited to the film, so I'll give both of you that, but I still think my point about the developer setting expectations and not fulfilling those expectations is still valid.

Posted by whatisdelicious

@JuMP said:

That statement is true but irrelevant. If I'm going to see a movie titled "The Avengers" I'm not expecting Spiderman to be in it. But if I go to see a film called "The Avengers" and The Avengers are not in it, then I'd be legitimately disappointed.

Spider-Man has been in The Avengers before. So his analogy is kind of perfect, actually.

Posted by whatisdelicious

Also, the complaining that Cole and Evil Cole isn't just a "press triangle" thing is silly. The whole premise of inFAMOUS is that being good or evil has a real tangible effect on your powers, your play style, everything. That's the point of the game. Good Cole is all about precision. Evil Cole is all about chaos. They have different powers. SuperBot made it pretty clear that they wanted to represent every character in a way that is extremely faithful to the source material. The way to do that with Cole is to split him up. And sure enough, the characters feel appreciably different, much more than just palette swaps.

Imagine trying to represent Shepard from Mass Effect as one character in a fighting game. How does he play? Does he use powers or guns or both? Does he work alone or heavily use his squadmates? What class is he? Is he a paragon or a renegade? Is he even a "he"?

You just couldn't do it.

Edited by JuMP

: @Cyrisaurus said:

@Deathpooky said:

@Cyrisaurus said:

So does that really make me an asshole? Because I'm willing to understand that a lot of this game's potential was not in the hands of the developer?

How should that affect the review of the game? I don't care if the game ended up sucking because the cafeteria stopped serving Taco Tuesdays - all that matters is the end product. You don't give movie games leniency because they have tons of contract and time constraints put on them.

No, you don't get it.

It would be like saying The Avengers movie sucks because Spider-Man isn't in it.

That statement is true but irrelevant. If I'm going to see a movie titled "The Avengers" I'm not expecting Spiderman to be in it. But if I go to see a film called "The Avengers" and The Avengers are not in it, then I'd be legitimately disappointed. If the game had a different name (eg: PS3 All-Stars or Random Video Game Character Battle Royale), I wouldn't be as disappointed with the lack of a Crash Bandicoot. But if you're going to make and market a game that's supposed to capture the whole legacy of Playstation gaming (which from all the coverage I've seen, that seems to be the angle they're going for), then you are setting up expectations for gamers about the roster of that game that you need to fulfill, regardless of how hard the business is to pull off.

That being said, I'm still looking forward to playing this game, and although my own personal nostalgia with the Playstation doesn't go that far back to PS1 (I got onboard with PS2), I like Smash Bros and would like to play a similar type of game in HD graphics.

Posted by whatisdelicious

There's nothing more boring in a discussion about PS All-Stars than "why don't they have this character?" Who fucking cares? The original Super Smash Bros. had 12 characters. Now Super Smash Bros. has like a billion and half of them are just carbon copies of the other half. I'm totally fine with this game having the characters it has. They'll add more in the next game if people stop being such dicks about it so they actually get a chance to make another one. Just stop getting so hung up on the "All-Stars" term and judge the game on whether or not it's fun as-is with the characters it does have rather than constantly complaining about the characters it doesn't.

Posted by probablytuna

Well for what it's worth, at least PaRappa is back in the game. Well, a game. Here's hoping we see a next generation PaRappa title!

Posted by Scotto

@Cyrisaurus said:

So reviewing your review makes me an asshole?

No, phrasing your "review" like an asshole does. Going down a "checklist" of what you apparently think are ignorant cliches surrounding the reviews of this game, is being a dick, and you know it. And then saying "oh I thought you'd be better than this!" for good measure.

Posted by solidejake

Well, as usual, I don't agree with your rating, but what are opinions for, right?

Posted by Deathpooky

@JesterPC238 said:

It's... Not though...

I mean Jeff didn't particularly love it, fine, that's totally his right. I don't know if you've played it, I don't feel that it is bad, antiseptic or "all business." Yes, there are a lot of Bioshock references in it, but they are all fun, and none of them feel like they hurt the game. Big Daddy is a lot of fun to play as, and mixes in well from a gameplay perspective.

Personally, I like this game a hell of a lot more than Smash Bros. Every Smash character falls into one of three categories for me: Heavy, medium, and light. Aside from the maneuverability of each character they all feel very, very similar. Not to mention the number of clones (Fox/Falco/Wolf, Link/Toon Link, Roy/Marth, Mario/Luigi, Daisy/Peach etc.). All Stars' characters feel much far more differentiated, and the Super System makes the game about fighting, not about zone control.

Look, I'm not saying one or the other is definitely "better," but they are just very different mechanically, and some will still prefer Smash and some will like this more. They are both great.

I've played a few matches, but haven't liked it. For the roster, Sony just has less to work with, and a lot to me seemed shoehorned in to meet their requirements, as opposed to starting with a base of characters you've known for decades. That was the initial appeal of Smash Brothers back on N64. They did good with what they had, but it doesn't pull the heartstrings the way Nintendo's roster did.

Gameplay wise, I just didn't get into it and came away with a lot of complaints:

The second to second fighting isn't as important as getting off your supers correctly, which makes a lot of the game seem unimportant. I have almost no fun with the basic fighting itself, since the damage I'm doing could all be for naught, instead of chipping away on someone's percentage efficiently. It makes it seem a lot more random when death can come out of nowhere, even if there is some strategy there. Smash Brothers was random, but you could plan around it, and out of nowhere deaths only occurred through specific items or once you had some damage on you - here every character has an instakill move they can pull out at almost any time. This all also made me not care about any of the character variation beyond finding a reliable super.

Managing your super meter doesn't work the same way as managing your percentage, though that appears to be what they intended it to be. For instance, there's no fun/strategy of surviving since there's no damage - instead just trying to avoid supers, regardless of how well you've fought. On the flipside, the lack of damage causing guys to fly away takes away a ton of the fun in smacking people around and trying to kill them once they've been heavily damaged. And one guy sucking can "feed" another person's super meter, letting him come after me even if I've played well.

Finally, the third level supers, supposedly the big "fun" part of the game, for the most part all have the feel of the hammer from Smash Bros - an annoying, largely undodgeable effect that will get automatically get some kills. We always turned off the hammer for that reason. I can't see ever using them really, which means the craziest part of the game goes by the wayside.

Posted by courage_wolf

The roster should be much better, but it is passable. I think what hurts this game most is the fighting mechanics. As far as I can tell the developers went for a weird Smash Bros and Capcom fighting game hybrid to the detriment of the game. The more technical aspect makes it less flashy and chaotic than Smash Bros and the random items and stage effects ensure that it won't get a second glance from people who care about EVO. The game puts itself in the awkward place of disappointing fans of both game styles and has to be a lot more bland than it should be. PS All Stars would have been a lot more fun if the devs had not tried to make a semi serious fighting game out of it.

Posted by Gold_Skulltulla

I feel like this game is less an homage to the PlayStation brand and more of a representation of its current status. It shows a company clinging to marketing tie-ins where they can get something out of it. The whole thing feels very "PS3" instead of encompassing the whole of the world of PlayStation. And I'm talking about "launch PS3" with it's gaudy gloss and Spiderman font. There's been great stuff on PS3 to be sure, but it's not a rich enough valley to mine for nostalgia.

Posted by Chalphy

I just don't get why Capcom insisted on using Donte over classic Dante? Did they think this game wouldn't sell well in Japan and forced him in for more sales? At least Project X Zone got it right.

Posted by Levio

I hope it gets a sequel with a way bigger budget. That could be great.

Posted by JesterPC238

@Deathpooky said:

@JesterPC238 said:

I do think that the picking on the game for being like Smash is going a "little" far. Yes, it is very similar, but plenty of games take the Zelda formula whole-cloth (Okami anyone?) and don't get nearly as much flak for it. It's not like the developers have ever claimed that Smash wasn't the inspiration for the game.

Also cyrisaurus' tone may have been a little dickish, but it's not like everyone needs to get on the flame train, he's made some valid points.

I don't think it's just that it's Smash Brothers. It's that it's a bad Smash Brothers that seems antiseptic and all business. And lacking a lot of things that make Smash Brothers fun, like lots of beloved characters and compelling gameplay for more than a few seconds per match.

Darksiders or Okami are Zelda riffs, but as good games, they become an homage or "Zelda-inspired", not just a rip-off. Plus they improve on the inspiration in interesting ways, either through story or gameplay. This feels like some business guys got together and said they wanted Smash Brothers on their platform. And the changes they make from the Smash Brothers formula seem bad.

It's... Not though...

I mean Jeff didn't particularly love it, fine, that's totally his right. I don't know if you've played it, I don't feel that it is bad, antiseptic or "all business." Yes, there are a lot of Bioshock references in it, but they are all fun, and none of them feel like they hurt the game. Big Daddy is a lot of fun to play as, and mixes in well from a gameplay perspective.

Personally, I like this game a hell of a lot more than Smash Bros. Every Smash character falls into one of three categories for me: Heavy, medium, and light. Aside from the maneuverability of each character they all feel very, very similar. Not to mention the number of clones (Fox/Falco/Wolf, Link/Toon Link, Roy/Marth, Mario/Luigi, Daisy/Peach etc.). All Stars' characters feel much far more differentiated, and the Super System makes the game about fighting, not about zone control.

Look, I'm not saying one or the other is definitely "better," but they are just very different mechanically, and some will still prefer Smash and some will like this more. They are both great.

Posted by Cyrisaurus

@Deathpooky said:

@Cyrisaurus said:

So does that really make me an asshole? Because I'm willing to understand that a lot of this game's potential was not in the hands of the developer?

How should that affect the review of the game? I don't care if the game ended up sucking because the cafeteria stopped serving Taco Tuesdays - all that matters is the end product. You don't give movie games leniency because they have tons of contract and time constraints put on them.

No, you don't get it.

It would be like saying The Avengers movie sucks because Spider-Man isn't in it.

Edited by Advancedcaveman

I think they should have put UmJammer Lammy in this game. Don't get me wrong, I'm not one of those weirdo Parapa fiends or anything, it just seems like a glaring omission if you're going to make a game about Playstation characters.

Also, they should've had Mega Man Volnutt, Tomba, Klonoa, Robbit, Kurt Hectic, Gerdy, Parin, Vibri, The King of All Cosmos, Kingsley, Croc, The Ribbit King, Squire Flicker, Mr. Domino, a rubber duck, a skullmonkey, Wex Major, Mister Moskito, an FMV sprite of Jack Curtis, one of those little robots from Ape Escape that looks like a cross between a pig and pile of dung, the little kissy man from Chulip, an irritating stick, and the farting cat from Boombots.

Also I want a Smash Brothers clone starring characters from early 90s shareware DOS games. Commander Keen vs Jazz Jackrabbit vs Jill of the Jungle vs the kid from Word Rescue.

Posted by Stradimus

I think the first part about the choice of characters is a little subjective. It isn't that I disagree but subjectivity can be a tough thing to adequately comment on. Either way, awesome review and I think I mostly agree with the whole thing! Makes me very sad to say this though as I really wanted this to be an A++ game.

Edited by durden77

Great review Jeff.

It's a shame that the game is brought down by the lacking presentation and features outside the gameplay, by some weird roster choices, and by missing some key figures it needed to be a true Playstation celebration. (Although like you said, I do feel like the roster still is fairly solid).

It's a shame because the gameplay is actually very fun and exciting. Once you take everything in and start understanding it's weird systems, it actually has a surprising amount of satisfying depth and enjoyment that sets it apart from Smash. It plays more along the lines of a traditional fighting game, which is cool seeing realized in a party fighter. Honestly at this point, I'm just enjoying it for it's gameplay systems as a brawler. The PS characters are just a plus.

But yes, it's missing that "everybody needs to join in on this celebration" spark it needed. And without that, it's positioning itself as just more of a niche brawler that a certain audience will enjoy. While that audience will enjoy it, it needs more life injected for the mainstream.

While I truly love the gameplay, I really hope to see the con notes you talked about improved in the future. If this game just had at least a couple of those honestly key characters, and some more energy around the seams, it could've really been something special. And I hope that happens, because it has a lot of potential. But for now, it's just an awesome interesting fighter with some PS characters.

  • 126 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3