• 50 results
  • 1
  • 2
Posted by DarthOrange (3495 posts) -

According to this tweet by Sid Shuman, the full roster for PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale has been revealed (and yes I originally read this on IGN).

Is anyone else disappointed? I figured they still had a few more characters to reveal before launch. Why the hell would they blow their wad two months before the release of the game? Way to kill off any hype building up to the release of this game. They should have spread them out more and revealed them up to the week before launch. Fucking Sony executives are dumber then a sack of potatoes.

It should have had a "Fuck yea, PlayStation!" air about it like this.

PlayStation All-Stars could have (should have) been the biggest marketing tool of all time. It should have included All the stars of PlayStation. It should have been a celebration of all things PlayStation. That blu-ray should have been stuffed to capacity with extras showing mini documentary's of the origins of the playable characters, all of the games they are featured in, and some words from the creators of the franchise, as well as a demo of each of their games, ala Super Smash Brothers Brawl. Unlike Smash Brothers, this game should have only included one character per franchise, the biggest middle finger to Nintendo and Microsoft, a way of telling them "Fuck you, you don't have enough franchises to do this!". It would have allowed casual PlayStation gamers to be able to see the PlayStation in the same light that I do. PlayStation has the biggest, most diverse list of exclusive games out of the current console makers yet Sony does nothing to let people know this. I have already made a blog about the characters I would have liked to see and the problems I have with Big Daddy, Evil Cole, Raiden being in this game so I will not repeat that here (feel free to read that blog post here). Why not teach people about lesser known PlayStation characters like Fred Neuman, Aya Brea, Commander, Selvaria Bles, Leonard, Rohn, Cullen Gray, and Finn? It would have led to some people picking up those games after learning about them in PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale.

A Super Rub 'a' Dub stage would be awesome!

And then there are the stages they made. Did we really need two God of War stages? There were so many other PlayStation exclusive games that would have made for great stages like: Afrika, MAG, Gran Turismo, Starhawk, MLB: The Show, MotorStorm, SingStar, EyePet, Wipeout, Tales from Space, Katamari, Kinetica, Super Stardust, Journey, Calling All Cars!, Echochrome, PAIN, PixelJunk, PlayStation Home, Super Rub 'a' Dub, Eye of Judgment, Mobile Suit Gundam, SOCOM, Crush, Invizimals, Zombie Tycoon, Escape Plan, Rag Doll Fu, Tokyo Jungle, Sports Champions, ModNation Racers, Sound Shapes, Wonderbook or Little Deviants. But no, they decided "let’s use God of War twice!". They literally have enough exclusives to only use each franchise once while making a stage and filling out the roster of playable characters. Once again, a perfect opportunity to stretch that middle finger out to Nintendo and Microsoft wasted.

Then there is the stunning lack of Crash and Spyro. Why the fuck are these two not in the game? I have two theories. 1) Sony was actually selling its roster spots (which is why all the third party characters have a game coming up) and they would have had to pay Activision to use Crash and Spyro and the publisher (that damned publisher) decided it would be an unnecessary waste of money and then went on to green light more Wonderbook games, or 2) They already have the characters and are going to sell them as DLC.

To me, the thing I love most about Super Smash Bros. is that it is a celebration of all things Nintendo. All of the extras you could unlock in “The Vault” the trophies that each had a large description, and the huge amount of songs were great fan service. The combat is also simple to play and understand for people of any and all ages.

Get them while they are young...

...and they are yours forever.

The combat system in PlayStation All-Stars is fun (trust me, I have played it) but unless you play it for yourself it just seems overly complicated. They should have focused on making it simple fun for everyone, but instead Sony hired a group of hardcore fighting game nerds who ended up creating an overly complex fighting system that isn't straight forward and thus isn't inviting to casual players (which is the audience this should be aimed at). Capture the casual audience and once they see all the interesting PlayStation characters, they go out and buy their favorite characters game helping them make the transition from casual gamer to core gamer. And when that transition happens, they will remember who made them fall in love with video games. Taking a new generation of gamers would really help Sony in the long term.

.

This game could have been so much more had it been given more time and a game director that actually was passionate about the PlayStation. Omar Kendall does not seem to give the first shit about PlayStation. Ever since I saw an interview he did with GameTrailers where he said that El Dorado was from Uncharted 2 I knew he was the wrong person to be directing this game (starts at around 1:25 in the video below and you can see even the interviewer is surprised). This game should have had a co-director to go along with Omar (or even replace him entirely with Seth Killian) like Greg Miller, Colin Moriarty, or Will Powers. Yes, I realize a lot of you guys here hate IGN but those two guys, Will (and myself) are the only people that I know of who really understand PlayStation and have an appreciation for all branches of it.

So to sum it all up, I am disappointed that Sony did not do more with this game. If Sony doesn't care then why should anyone else? To call this game a Super Smash Brothers Clone is insulting to Nintendo. While Smash Bros is a celebration of all things Nintendo that happens to also be a fighting game, PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale seems like a fun fighting game that happens to feature PlayStation characters. Those Will Powers tweets really paint a grim picture for the future of PlayStation. He mentioned a few games that have absolutely no PR support, including LittleBigPlanet Karting (which I had assumed they were going to push this year along with Battle Royale). Between Sony laying off a big chunk of its PR staff and then releasing a new PS3 model that is actually more expensive then the old one, do they actually expect to do well this holiday season? Whoever the evil Sony Warlord is that seems hell bent on destroying the company, I hope they get rid of him before it is too late. 

 
Edit: Here are those tweets of Will Powers for those of you who don't want to click through the link. 
#2 Posted by Snail (8468 posts) -

I'll just say that Nintendo has a lot more iconic exclusive characters than Sony has. The same goes for franchises. So how Sony could have raised a middle-finger I'm not sure.

#3 Posted by DarthOrange (3495 posts) -
@Snail said:

I'll just say that Nintendo has a lot more iconic exclusive characters than Sony has. The same goes for franchises. So how Sony could have raised a middle-finger I'm not sure.

Exactly my point.. The quality and quantity of the PlayStation exclusives are better, but Sony does not let the people know. Releasing a game that was an amalgamation of PlayStation would have given Sony the opportunity to show all the great games that they have released. Nintendo has iconic characters because they market the shit out of their products, their are still ads for New Super Mario Bros. 2 on TV all the time. After the marketing blitz for Halo 3 that franchise became just as iconic as Nintendo's (arguably even more then Kirby). Meanwhile Sony sends their stuff out to die with barely any marketing (or sometimes none at all). As I said in that last paragraph, somebody at Sony is fucking shit up. Cutting the PR staff in half and raising the price of the PS3 is just completely crazy to me, as was shutting down BigBig and Sony Liverpool. If they keep this shit up I do not think the PlayStation 4 will survive the entire generation, and it will just fizzle out like the Dreamcast. 
#4 Posted by Phatmac (5686 posts) -

I just think you have too much faith in Sony and this product. It could have been better, but it doesn't look awful.

#5 Posted by PeasantAbuse (5120 posts) -

Why do you want to play on a Wonderbook stage?

#6 Posted by Video_Game_King (34591 posts) -

@DarthOrange said:

Unlike Smash Brothers, this game should have only included one character per franchise, the biggest middle finger to Nintendo and Microsoft, a way of telling them "Fuck you, you don't have enough franchises to do this!".

There are a million reasons why this would have been a dumb idea, but I'll just leave assist trophies on the table.

#7 Edited by Snail (8468 posts) -

@DarthOrange said:

@Snail said:

I'll just say that Nintendo has a lot more iconic exclusive characters than Sony has. The same goes for franchises. So how Sony could have raised a middle-finger I'm not sure.

Exactly my point.. The quality and quantity of the PlayStation exclusives are better, but Sony does not let the people know. Releasing a game that was an amalgamation of PlayStation would have given Sony the opportunity to show all the great games that they have released. Nintendo has iconic characters because they market the shit out of their products, their are still ads for New Super Mario Bros. 2 on TV all the time. After the marketing blitz for Halo 3 that franchise became just as iconic as Nintendo's (arguably even more then Kirby). Meanwhile Sony sends their stuff out to die with barely any marketing (or sometimes none at all). As I said in that last paragraph, somebody at Sony is fucking shit up. Cutting the PR staff in half and raising the price of the PS3 is just completely crazy to me, as was shutting down BigBig and Sony Liverpool. If they keep this shit up I do not think the PlayStation 4 will survive the entire generation, and it will just fizzle out like the Dreamcast.

No, the quality and quantity of the Playstation exclusives isn't better: it's different. What matters most in these games, however, isn't necessarily how good the franchise is but how their quality has translated into iconicism.

You don't achieve that with marketing, or putting your franchise "out there", or whatever it is you're suggesting. Games have to have quality and reside in people's memories, withstand the test of time, all that. Sony doesn't have that nearly as much as Nintendo.

I do think that Spyro not being in that game is complete bullshit though. Maybe there are still hidden characters.

#8 Posted by DarthOrange (3495 posts) -
 @PeasantAbuse
Because it would be hilarious to have the live action woman from the E3 demo in the background shooting fireballs at you.
 
 @Video_Game_King:  
A lot of those assist trophies dip into franchises that are used in the roster like Waluigi, Metroid, and Shadow the Hedgehog.  I would like to see a Nintendog and Cat be playable in the Wii U version though. You claimed there are a million reasons why it would have been a dumb idea. Please, give me three more. 

@Snail:  
Quality and reside in peoples memories you say? You achieve that by marketing to children when their brains are like sponges. Why am I such a Sony fan? I grew up with the PlayStation (after spending a small bit of time with the SNES). To this day I am convinced that Crash Bandicoot: Warped is the greatest game of all time and stands the test of time. Is this true? The fuck if I know, but with the amount of time I put into that game it has made me the person I am today. Sony doesn't market at all anymore (when was the last time you saw a Sony commercial?). How the hell are children supposed to beg their parents for a game when they aren't even aware it exists? PlayStation not getting new young fans is the real problem. A game can't be considered iconic if only a small number of people played it. You get a large number of players through good marketing. Marketing is everything.
#9 Posted by Video_Game_King (34591 posts) -

OK:

  1. Microsoft isn't even involved in this. How would Sony benefit from dragging them into this?
  2. Would a petty pissing match with Nintendo actually accomplish anything?
  3. Sony doesn't have as many franchises as you think; a lot of them are second or third party, which may be a licensing hassle.
  4. This may oversaturate the roster as it is, trying to list off at least one character from every obscure franchise possible simply for the sake of doing so. As I recall, Nintendo didn't really do that. Marth and Roy only made it in because Fire Emblem's big in Japan and America wanted in on that shit.
#10 Posted by DarthOrange (3495 posts) -

@Video_Game_King:

In response to one and two: I'm not actually suggesting Sony should literary say "no one else can do this". If they simply showed off their franchise diversity it would be easy for people to infer.

In response to three: Licensing hassle my ass. Most of those characters are first party characters that belong to Sony (Sony at one point had over a dozen first party studios). And for the ones that aren't, I really doubt small studios like Drink Box Studios or Sumo Digital Ltd. would put up a hassle to allow their property in the game.They would probably be glad just to be a part of it. The only one I can see asking for a large amount of money is Activision for the rights to borrow Crash and Spyro. They would have been worth the money though. I'm thinking it is possible Sony might release them as DLC and give Activision a portion of what is made.

In response to four: I don't think it would over saturate it. These characters are unique enough to warrant their own slot, they aren't just carbon copies of other characters. The Smash Bros Brawl roster is made up entirely by 17 franchises. Sony has already included 2 more then that in its current roster. Perhaps Cullen Gray would be overkill as he is simply a military dude but everyone else I listed here and on my list brings something new and unique to the table. Diversity.

#11 Posted by Hailinel (22697 posts) -

@DarthOrange said:

@Video_Game_King:

In response to one and two: I'm not actually suggesting Sony should literary say "no one else can do this". If they simply showed off their franchise diversity it would be easy for people to infer.

Sony can't compete with Nintendo in that regard. There would be nothing to infer.

#12 Posted by mrpandaman (836 posts) -

@Snail said:

@DarthOrange said:

@Snail said:

I'll just say that Nintendo has a lot more iconic exclusive characters than Sony has. The same goes for franchises. So how Sony could have raised a middle-finger I'm not sure.

Exactly my point.. The quality and quantity of the PlayStation exclusives are better, but Sony does not let the people know. Releasing a game that was an amalgamation of PlayStation would have given Sony the opportunity to show all the great games that they have released. Nintendo has iconic characters because they market the shit out of their products, their are still ads for New Super Mario Bros. 2 on TV all the time. After the marketing blitz for Halo 3 that franchise became just as iconic as Nintendo's (arguably even more then Kirby). Meanwhile Sony sends their stuff out to die with barely any marketing (or sometimes none at all). As I said in that last paragraph, somebody at Sony is fucking shit up. Cutting the PR staff in half and raising the price of the PS3 is just completely crazy to me, as was shutting down BigBig and Sony Liverpool. If they keep this shit up I do not think the PlayStation 4 will survive the entire generation, and it will just fizzle out like the Dreamcast.

No, the quality and quantity of the Playstation exclusives isn't better: it's different. What matters most in these games, however, isn't necessarily how good the franchise is but how their quality has translated into iconicism.

You don't achieve that with marketing, or putting your franchise "out there", or whatever it is you're suggesting. Games have to have quality and reside in people's memories, withstand the test of time, all that. Sony doesn't have that nearly as much as Nintendo.

I do think that Spyro not being in that game is complete bullshit though. Maybe there are still hidden characters.

Keep in mind that Nintendo carries characters over from generation to generation console wise. Sony rarely does not. They have iconic characters that star in quality games for each generation of their console. They don't have multigenerational characters like MS and Nintendo do.

Until the game is properly out, reviews come out, and the gamers finally get their hands on the product then there's no reason to overreact just yet. I remember you bringing up a list before and I think I may have responded to that. I remember a lot of those characters you brought up as mostly being in characters that would be unrecognizable to the franchises they were in. I mean Sony could reach deep, but there's only so far they should go before wasting time on characters that barely anyone would recognize at all. In my opinion, the last few characters they need to get in order for this game to be successful fanservice is just Crash and Spyro, that is all they need. Anyone else they decide to add-in is just fine.

Also unless Sony did not learn their mistakes from the launch of this generation of consoles, then the PS4 or whatever it will be called won't survive the entire generation. Sony does fine in its marketing for what it has. As said before, they do not have multigenerational iconic characters who warrant the massive amounts of money put in advertisement as much as Master Chief or Mario do. Halo was not made into the iconic franchise when Halo 3 came out. It became one when the first one came out and it solidified its position as iconic with the success of Halo 2. Anyways, you do realize that although the new PS3 model may be more expensive than the current model that it does include more than the current model, right? Without the game and whatever the bundle included, it probably would be cheaper, but probably not after you would have to buy a current $60 game for it anyways. Sony has a few missteps here and there, but they're doing fine this year.

#13 Posted by Icicle7x3 (1123 posts) -

I cant wait to play as the red firework from FantaVision.

#14 Posted by JasonR86 (9372 posts) -

Sony doesn't have the roster to make this game a marketing/nostalgia ploy. Very, very few companies do. That's the primary problem with this game. It is based on a thin premise. Though I don't think Sony needs a game like this, or the roster that would come with it, to succeed. Nintendo, on the other hand, does. Nintendo thrives on its creations which is why SSB's roster is so memorable. This brawler fighting game works for Nintendo and not Sony because they have different views on how to run a video game company. I personally think both are perfectly good strategies. But they sure as hell are comparable.

#15 Posted by Slag (3337 posts) -

I didn't think Sony owned Spyro (Insomniac) or Aya Brea (Square Enix) or quite a few of the other you mentioned?

Licensing probably make that prohibitive and in some cases the owners may not want their brand tied only to Sony.

I agree though revealing the whole lineup is silly. Gotta build the hype ya know?

Anyways like the the passion . Personally I lean Nintendo on games like this so I don't really care if Royale is good. But I figure as long as it does decent they will get better for the next game.

I do agree though that I think at the corporate level Sony seems lost at the moment. The Vita, what the heck is going on with that? They keep this up they will be the Sega not Nintendo.

I like my PS3 a lot and would really be upset if they don't make it to the next round of consoles. Nintendo is supposedly stating to poach japanese publishers back to their platform, if that's the case I'll probably follow .I just don't know if Sony knows who they are anymore.

#16 Posted by Hippie_Genocide (510 posts) -

I really want to like this, but everytime I see it, it just looks so blah to me. I like Smash Bros. because it has better iconic characters. Sony characters don't seem to fit this type of game that well.

#18 Posted by JoeyRavn (4885 posts) -

@DarthOrange said:

According to this tweet by Sid Shuman, the full roster for PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale has been revealed (and yes I originally read this on IGN).

The comments on that IGN article are amazing. Amazingly stupid. People try to justify the lack of characters saying that the first Super Smash Bros. only had 12. 13 years ago.

The stupidity of the raging, butthurt fanboy will never cease to amaze me.

#19 Posted by DarthOrange (3495 posts) -
@Hailinel said: 

Sony can't compete with Nintendo in that regard. There would be nothing to infer.

@JasonR86 said:

Sony doesn't have the roster to make this game a marketing/nostalgia ploy. Very, very few companies do. That's the primary problem with this game. It is based on a thin premise. Though I don't think Sony needs a game like this, or the roster that would come with it, to succeed. Nintendo, on the other hand, does. Nintendo thrives on its creations which is why SSB's roster is so memorable. 

@Hippie_Genocide said:

I really want to like this, but everytime I see it, it just looks so blah to me. I like Smash Bros. because it has better iconic characters. Sony characters don't seem to fit this type of game that well.

These kinds of responses are exactly the reason why Omar Kendall is the person to be directing this game. A game like this needs to have a vision that people can see, a love that is sincere. Look at Twisted Metal. Yes, that game was disappointing but leading up to the games launch and post launch I was able to see Jaffe's vision for why the game and car combat are still awesome (I blame the staff at EatSleepPlay for that games failure, there was only so much Jaffe could do). Every time Omar speaks about PlayStation All-Stars he focuses on the gameplay instead of the characters. The dude has a monotone voice and he has never once seemed excited for this game. They needed someone who could say "This is why PlayStation matters, and this is why PlayStation sells well around the world to all the different markets". Omar Kendall can't do that because he doesn't care about the company. Why the fuck they didn't get Will Powers to direct that game is beyond me.   


.
@mrpandaman said: 

Anyways, you do realize that although the new PS3 model may be more expensive than the current model that it does include more than the current model, right? Without the game and whatever the bundle included, it probably would be cheaper, but probably not after you would have to buy a current $60 game for it anyways. Sony has a few missteps here and there, but they're doing fine this year.

It doesn't matter if it comes bundled with more shit. Being able to say "PlayStation 3 only $199" (the price of a 3DS XL and almost half the price of the sold out Wii U) would have been much more appealing to consumers then "it's now ten dollars more then it was last year but you get a free game and 30 Dust monies!" They are doing far from fine.  
The Vita's marketing has been a complete mess. First of all, they did not give the damn thing a Super Bowl Spot, that was a huge mistake. Then the ads they do end up putting out don't look appealing at all. Why make Unit 13 the focus of your commercial, the game looks like ass. They should have used brighter colorful games like Super Star Dust, Tales from Space, Rayman, Plants Vs Zombies, and Escape Plan. Games that look crisp instead of games that look like they are from the PS2. And would it have killed them to use a child playing these bright video games? No parent is going to see this ad and think "My child would love one of those!". They are going to say "fuck that, I'll get my child the more age appropriate 3DS". 
And why did they have BigBig studios make a mini-game collection (Little Deviants) instead of letting them make another Pursuit Force game? That would have been a better system seller then the Uncharted portable no one wanted. And why is Nihlistic working on Call of Duty Vita? And why are Vita Memory card so damn expensive? And why do they have to be proprietary, why not make it a normal format. Sony is not Apple, they can not make shit that only works for them and expect people to buy it like it was crack. And why is the Vita so expensive? A price drop to $199 to compete with the 3DS XL would have been great, even if they would take a loss on hardware, software sales would go up. Of course that would only work if they got their head out of their asses and did some good marketing. 
Then there was Sony firing half of its already small PR team and leaving titles like Wonderbook, LittleBigPlanet Karting, and Sports Champions 2 with no support at all. I have included the Will Powers tweets in the original post since I am going to assume most people didn't actually click on the link to find out what I was saying.  With even less PR support then they had before I can't see how Sony will possibly do "fine" this year. 


-
@Slag said:

I didn't think Sony owned Spyro (Insomniac) or Aya Brea (Square Enix) or quite a few of the other you mentioned?

Licensing probably make that prohibitive and in some cases the owners may not want their brand tied only to Sony.

Those Parasite Eve games have only appeared on PlayStation, they are already associated with Sony. Square would probably give Aya for free if Sony agreed to throw Lightning into the roster as well to build up some hype for the next Final Fantasy 13 game. Sony used to own the rights to Spyro but sold them to Activision along with the rights to Crash. I can't imagine Activision having a problem with Sony using Crash, but with Skylanders becoming such a big thing perhaps they don't want to let go of Spyro. 

Nintendo is supposedly stating to poach japanese publishers back to their platform, if that's the case I'll probably follow .I just don't know if Sony knows who they are anymore.


Nintendo taking Monster Hunter from Sony was a huge blow, as it was basically allowed the PSP to survive and be profitable. It seems like their is to much internal conflict from the different divisions of Sony. 
#20 Posted by Video_Game_King (34591 posts) -

@DarthOrange said:

Every time Omar speaks about PlayStation All-Stars he focuses on the gameplay instead of the characters.

Maybe because it's a game?

@DarthOrange said:

They needed someone who could say "This is why PlayStation matters, and this is why PlayStation sells well around the world to all the different markets".

Why would Sony need to say that? Maybe if it was the Vita, which some people still have doubts over, then yea, the message may be warranted. But it isn't. It's the PS3. It's already proven itself, and it's already enjoyed a good amount of success. Sony has nothing to prove.

#21 Posted by TheSlothKing (326 posts) -

My biggest problem with PSABR is the super ugly UI and lack of personality.

#22 Posted by DarthOrange (3495 posts) -
@Video_Game_King said:

@DarthOrange said:

Every time Omar speaks about PlayStation All-Stars he focuses on the gameplay instead of the characters.

Maybe because it's a game?

But the man has no passion!  See any interview the man has done, like this one he did at comic-con for example. How can he (as the game director) make a character like Jak have his level 3 super basically be he turns into Dark Phoenix? Did he even play the Jak and Daxter games? The whole point of Light Jak was that he was non-violent. He was the yin to Dark Jaks yang. Light Jak revolved around the powers to heal, shield himself, stop time, and fly. He couldn't shoot beams and he didn't cause chaos as Omar claims in this interview, he did that as Dark Jak. Light Jak was all about control. How the fuck did no one at SuperBot stop and say, wait, this is nothing like the character! Same goes for when he is talking about inFamous. It is clear the man has never played any of these game, how did they not have his thunderstorm be his level three? It is an attack you do within the first five minutes of both inFamous 1 and 2 and it was the last power you would gain the ability to use at will in both games because it was ridiculously overpowered. Look how interested Mr. Kendall looks in the video below (he can't even keep his eyes open). This was the wrong man to direct this game. 

@DarthOrange said:

They needed someone who could say "This is why PlayStation matters, and this is why PlayStation sells well around the world to all the different markets".

Why would Sony need to say that? Maybe if it was the Vita, which some people still have doubts over, then yea, the message may be warranted. But it isn't. It's the PS3. It's already proven itself, and it's already enjoyed a good amount of success. Sony has nothing to prove.

This game is on the Vita as well, and there should have been a cast that reached out and grabbed for all corners of PlayStation history, from the minis and the PSP games to the PSN games and the home console PlayStation releases. A way of showing the history of the PlayStation and why it always has mattered and why it always will. This shouldn't have been about just PlayStation 3, it should have been about all of PlayStation. Once again, a celebration of all things PlayStation, similar to how Smash Bros is a celebration of all things Nintendo. 
#23 Posted by Slag (3337 posts) -

@DarthOrange said:

Those Parasite Eve games have only appeared on PlayStation, they are already associated with Sony. Square would probably give Aya for free if Sony agreed to throw Lightning into the roster as well to build up some hype for the next Final Fantasy 13 game. Sony used to own the rights to Spyro but sold them to Activision along with the rights to Crash. I can't imagine Activision having a problem with Sony using Crash, but with Skylanders becoming such a big thing perhaps they don't want to let go of Spyro.

Perhaps, but I think you are giving large companies too much credit for how logical they are. I suspect it's much more involved than you think.

but yeah I do agree with you on that Sony has been making some pretty poor decisions as of late.

#24 Posted by jimmyfenix (3679 posts) -

i want crash thats all i want.

#25 Posted by Hailinel (22697 posts) -

@DarthOrange: For Smash Bros., Sakurai has always focused on both the gameplay and the notalgia/fanservice element. He's done just as much in other games he's directed (see: Kid Icarus: Uprising).

Comparatively, Kendall is no one special. What is this love and vision he presents that you shower him with admiration for? Because I've played a demo version of it, and I have no idea where it is. The game feels soulless. The combat isn't fun. It's such a shameless copy of what it aspires to be that it has no heart of its own.

#26 Posted by Miketakon (512 posts) -

Id take a broken ass Sony Smash Budz over another GoW prequel. But yeah duder this is just Sony being Sony. They seem not care about making shitty decisions.

#27 Posted by Djnuttty (135 posts) -

No Crash or Spyro = No sale.

#28 Posted by Nottle (1912 posts) -

@shootermcclay: Quite a few of those are 3rd party. Absolutely games I would associate with playstation but they are still 3rd party.

@DarthOrange: I think @mrpandaman brings up a good point about the Nintendo vs Sony roster. Sony may have "more" games to choose from, but many of them are from short lived series. Jak had moves that were a lot like Crash in the orignal Jak game. Then he got guns and superpowers. That was the 1 change he had as a character. Drake's been in 4 fantastic games, but all he does is punch and use guns. He's done that since game 1 with no real variation. So many modern Sony franchises revolve around shooting and some of the more obscure franchises you've mentioned would be better fit for assist characters. That said I'm watching some of the trailers for the first time, like Haihatchi's, Dante's and Cole's; they look interesting and unique. They aren't just dudes that shoot guns. Sure, Dante has guns but he's just so damn stylish with them because his moves are exactly how they were in Devil May Cry.

Nintendo is simply iconic. People always complain about how Nintendo has never changed anything, but I disagree, if you look at the subtle ways any character controls or their move sets in SSB you can trace back to certain games in that characters 10-30 year history. Look at the Mario characters in SSB.

Mario throws punches like he did in SM64, the FLUUD is from Sunshine, his cape from Super Mario World, he's got fireballs from Super Mario Brothers, and his uppercut is from the orignal Mario Bros. Almost every animation has a history to it. Sure some characters don't show that off well like Captain Falcon because his game is all about driving cars, but they at least make Captain Falcon fast (like a race car) and even if his moves weren't iconic, they became iconic.

I just feel like the playstation roster isn't as zany or interesting in certain ways. Most characters are either zany and not that iconic or iconic and not that zany. But Nintendo's 2 biggest franchises feature a plumber that shoots fire and and electric mouse. That's just insane.

#29 Posted by DarthOrange (3495 posts) -
@Hailinel said:

@DarthOrange: For Smash Bros., Sakurai has always focused on both the gameplay and the notalgia/fanservice element. He's done just as much in other games he's directed (see: Kid Icarus: Uprising).

Comparatively, Kendall is no one special. What is this love and vision he presents that you shower him with admiration for? Because I've played a demo version of it, and I have no idea where it is. The game feels soulless. The combat isn't fun. It's such a shameless copy of what it aspires to be that it has no heart of its own.

What the hell is wrong with you? Have you read anything at all that I have written? Is this your idea of sarcasm or is English not your first language? 
 
@Nottle said: 

I just feel like the playstation roster isn't as zany or interesting in certain ways. Most characters are either zany and not that iconic or iconic and not that zany. But Nintendo's 2 biggest franchises feature a plumber that shoots fire and and electric mouse. That's just insane.

And that is the problem with Sony. They have no big franchises at all. They spread themselves way to thin and many series come and go with little fan fare. Once again, if they had a hype man, anyone other then Omar Kendall (like Will Powers) that loved PlayStation and was able to articulate to the people why these franchises are awesome, people would be able to see the PlayStation in a new light. If you haven't played a franchise you can't really understand it as well, but everyone I have mentioned does bring something unique. Jak could have had the eco powers from the first Jak and Daxter (which was basically a better Mario 64), where he had different ability's with different eco, even fireballs with yellow eco. Fred Neuman can take off his head and replace it with another for new powers. Rohn rides a dragon. Finn is a wizard. These dudes are not all generic soldiers with gun. If anything Drake is the only generic character that only uses guns besides Cullen Gray from Socom.
#30 Posted by Nottle (1912 posts) -

@DarthOrange: Radec and Sweet Tooth came to mind as well when it came to character that seemed gun heavy. I know sweet tooth has mines and stuff too and a mecha icecream truck. But he still has guns which just seems weird.

Another thing I have a problem with is that I don't know who Finn, Rohn and Cullen Gray are.

#31 Posted by sodacat (212 posts) -

@Video_Game_King said:

@DarthOrange said:

Every time Omar speaks about PlayStation All-Stars he focuses on the gameplay instead of the characters.

Maybe because it's a game?

No one is going to buy, or even look, at Sony Smash for the gameplay.

How this game got made with a palette swap of a second string character and freaking Mr. Bubbles but not Crash or Lara Croft absolutely blows my mind.

Wait a minute, there's only two female characters in the game: Nariko and Fat Princess. Man, Sony, come on. Come on!

#32 Posted by Video_Game_King (34591 posts) -

@sodacat said:

How this game got made with a palette swap of a second string character and freaking Mr. Bubbles but not Crash or Lara Croft absolutely blows my mind.

You do realize that they don't own these characters, right? They belong to other companies, and those other companies would have to license them out to Sony.

#33 Posted by sodacat (212 posts) -

@Video_Game_King: I was kind of expecting that Sony would try at least as hard as Nintendo or CAPCOM to do a crossover game proper. Either they don't care as much or they don't have as much clout, and in either case that would be unfortunate.

#34 Posted by Video_Game_King (34591 posts) -

@sodacat said:

I was kind of expecting that Sony would try at least as hard as Nintendo or CAPCOM to do a crossover game proper.

You mean like Tatsunoko vs. Capcom? Expecting that type of effort from Sony is insane. As for Nintendo, it was only two characters. One of them involved somebody approaching them, and the other was an obvious choice with some precedent. Not a lot of effort out of Nintendo.

#35 Posted by sodacat (212 posts) -

@Video_Game_King: Strange, I could have sworn there were a lot more crossover characters in brawl. I guess I was remembering wrong.

Regardless Sony's strength has always been their 3rd party support, and they should have been leveraging that as hard as Nintendo leverages their first party properties. Would have have been easy? No, but it's what they needed to do. All-Stars already looks kind of silly next to Brawl, and its going to look downright prehistoric when the eventual WiiU/3DS Smash comes out.

#36 Posted by DoctorDanger99 (686 posts) -

@DarthOrange: you literally said it your self. smash bros is a celebration of nintendo. the only thing all stars is is a shameless rip off and cash in. i could say alot of shitty things about nintendo but i honestly couldnt say they dont care very deeply for thier franchises.

all sony is doing is taking somthing that worked great for one company and then literally doing the exact same thing. i wont say all stars wont be a good game but i will say it's nothing more than a SOULESS cash grab from a company who clearly has no idea what in the fuck they are doing.

#37 Posted by Video_Game_King (34591 posts) -

@sodacat said:

All-Stars already looks kind of silly next to Brawl, and its going to look downright prehistoric when the eventual WiiU/3DS Smash comes out.

That...sounds useless. "Sure, cars are amazing, but they're gonna be shit compared to space hoverboards of the future."

#38 Posted by sodacat (212 posts) -

@Video_Game_King said:

@sodacat said:

All-Stars already looks kind of silly next to Brawl, and its going to look downright prehistoric when the eventual WiiU/3DS Smash comes out.

That...sounds useless. "Sure, cars are amazing, but they're gonna be shit compared to space hoverboards of the future."

Except that Mattel already announced the hoverboard last year, and it'll probably be out within two more years (Nintendo announced that Sakurai would oversee a Smash after finishing Kid Icarus at E3 2011). Also there's three different sports cars out this season for the same MSRP as Sony's economy car, so there's really no rush to pick it up.

#39 Posted by Video_Game_King (34591 posts) -

@sodacat:

Those sports cars are of entirely different genres. And to move away from the analogy, we know nothing about the next Smash Bros other than "it's a thing".

#40 Posted by Hailinel (22697 posts) -
@DarthOrange Did you think I was arguing or agreeing with you?
#41 Posted by csl316 (7344 posts) -

@DarthOrange: I listen to Podcast Beyond because it's really the only place that I hear Playstation-centric talk. They were the first ones talking up Playstation Plus, they're consistently talking about ways to improve the Vita, and the fact that their primary place for multiplatform games is the PS3 really gives a unique perspective compared to so many other sites. You're right, people hate on IGN as a whole, but I do wish more people appreciated some of the quality stuff they put out.

#42 Posted by MiniPato (2657 posts) -

I'm sure it probably plays well, but my problem with the game is the presentation. Not liking the graphical style, don't like the long winded title, don't like the design of the title logo, and don't like the look of the menus.

#43 Posted by ExplodeMode (852 posts) -

I agree with you that there could be a much better roster and that peoples perception that Sony doesn't have enough character to fill a game like this out is crazy. But, they really cannot compete with Nintendo on that front. Just the Pokemon franchise alone has hundreds of dumb obscure monsters they could fill content with. Still, they should be/have been able to change that overall perception with this game.

I also agree that one of the the coolest things about smash bros is that is fosters a fanbase for those characters. Fire emblem is probably more popular than it was in America pre-melee. Nintendo could make an F-Zero spin-off that was just captain Falcon punching people in the face and it people would be into it. The last time people really cared about Star Fox was over 10 years ago, but because of smash, these characters persist and the franchise stays relevant. I could go on and on down most of the roster, but the point is smash bros isn't just a fighting game it's a really clever marketing tool, even if that wasn't it's intention. But you can't make a game that way from the start. It has to be a good game above all else and seed it's own fanbase first. If I we're having this game made I would put people on it who wanted to, above all else, make a good game.

If they can just manage that, and people really like it, there will be more games with more fan service and bigger rosters. You say it's fun, that's good, because that is the first step on the path to exactly what you want.

#44 Posted by mrpandaman (836 posts) -

@DarthOrange said:

@Nottle said:

I just feel like the playstation roster isn't as zany or interesting in certain ways. Most characters are either zany and not that iconic or iconic and not that zany. But Nintendo's 2 biggest franchises feature a plumber that shoots fire and and electric mouse. That's just insane.

And that is the problem with Sony. They have no big franchises at all. They spread themselves way to thin and many series come and go with little fan fare. Once again, if they had a hype man, anyone other then Omar Kendall (like Will Powers) that loved PlayStation and was able to articulate to the people why these franchises are awesome, people would be able to see the PlayStation in a new light. If you haven't played a franchise you can't really understand it as well, but everyone I have mentioned does bring something unique. Jak could have had the eco powers from the first Jak and Daxter (which was basically a better Mario 64), where he had different ability's with different eco, even fireballs with yellow eco. Fred Neuman can take off his head and replace it with another for new powers. Rohn rides a dragon. Finn is a wizard. These dudes are not all generic soldiers with gun. If anything Drake is the only generic character that only uses guns besides Cullen Gray from Socom.

I don't think that they spread themselves thin. From the 3 generations of home consoles they had, they like to operate within the generation, meaning they like to have new franchises rise and be the faces for the console. They've somewhat broken out of that with God of War, and Killzone, but those are exceptions because they did come out near the tail end of the PS2's cycle.

Omar Kendall is not a hype man, he's a lead game designer. I feel like you're getting so hung up on that as well as PSAS not digging deep enough with their franchises in which I would say there's a line where the characters that you brought up cross. Cullen Gray isn't recognizable and would be confused from being in any modern shooter, Rohn has only been in one game and looks like a generic fantasy character, Finn was in one game no one played, Fred Neuman maybe because he looks odd and fun enough. In your list characters like Gex, or that dude from the Yakuza franchise are characters more easily recognized for being on Sony consoles and from franchises people can recognize would be more suitable choices. Even Tomba, or Abe from Oddworld would be awesome choices to put in the game.

#45 Posted by DarthOrange (3495 posts) -

@Nottle said:

@DarthOrange: Radec and Sweet Tooth came to mind as well when it came to character that seemed gun heavy. I know sweet tooth has mines and stuff too and a mecha icecream truck. But he still has guns which just seems weird.

Another thing I have a problem with is that I don't know who Finn, Rohn and Cullen Gray are.

Radec is gun heavy but he uses futuristic guns. Sweet Tooth has a shotgun but that is it for guns he uses in Battle Royale. Have you played the new Twisted Metal? In that he also uses a machine gun, rocket launcher, a magnum, and even a ray gun. Finn is the wizard from PlayStation Move game Sorcery and Rohn is the protagonist in the dragon game Lair. Cullen Gray is the dude from SOCOM.  
 @mrpandaman :  
Your right, Mr. Kendall is not a hype man but I do think the game should have someone who is be the one to give the demos and interviews for this game. Also I wouldn't want Rohn to fight on foot, I would want him to be on top of a dragon at all times! 

@DoctorDanger99 said:

@DarthOrange: you literally said it your self. smash bros is a celebration of nintendo. the only thing all stars is is a shameless rip off and cash in. i could say alot of shitty things about nintendo but i honestly couldnt say they dont care very deeply for thier franchises.

all sony is doing is taking somthing that worked great for one company and then literally doing the exact same thing. i wont say all stars wont be a good game but i will say it's nothing more than a SOULESS cash grab from a company who clearly has no idea what in the fuck they are doing.

No, it is is not a shameless rip-off. This game has the most unique mechanics in a fighting game since UFC 2009. It isn't really a cash in either. My biggest problem was that it seems like it is running parallel to where it should be, and if Omar Kendall had a co-director who knew his PlayStation history, this game could have been even better then anything Nintendo has done. 


-
@Hailinel said:
@DarthOrange Did you think I was arguing or agreeing with you?
You know what, I apologize, I found out the cause of the misunderstanding.  I said: 


These kinds of responses are exactly the reason why Omar Kendall is the person to be directing this game. A game like this needs to have a vision that people can see, a love that is sincere. Look at Twisted Metal. Yes, that game was disappointing but leading up to the games launch and post launch I was able to see Jaffe's vision for why the game and car combat are still awesome (I blame the staff at EatSleepPlay for that games failure, there was only so much Jaffe could do). Every time Omar speaks about PlayStation All-Stars he focuses on the gameplay instead of the characters. The dude has a monotone voice and he has never once seemed excited for this game. They needed someone who could say "This is why PlayStation matters, and this is why PlayStation sells well around the world to all the different markets". Omar Kendall can't do that because he doesn't care about the company. Why the fuck they didn't get Will Powers to direct that game is beyond me.   


That was an error on my part. I meant to say the wrong person to be directing this game. I totally thought he should have had nothing at all to do with the making of this game, as you can see in every other post I mention him I just talk a mess of shit on him. And I really meant all of it until  @ExplodeMode  said: 

I agree with you that there could be a much better roster and that peoples perception that Sony doesn't have enough character to fill a game like this out is crazy. But, they really cannot compete with Nintendo on that front. Just the Pokemon franchise alone has hundreds of dumb obscure monsters they could fill content with. Still, they should be/have been able to change that overall perception with this game.

I also agree that one of the the coolest things about smash bros is that is fosters a fanbase for those characters. Fire emblem is probably more popular than it was in America pre-melee. Nintendo could make an F-Zero spin-off that was just captain Falcon punching people in the face and it people would be into it. The last time people really cared about Star Fox was over 10 years ago, but because of smash, these characters persist and the franchise stays relevant. I could go on and on down most of the roster, but the point is smash bros isn't just a fighting game it's a really clever marketing tool, even if that wasn't it's intention. But you can't make a game that way from the start. It has to be a good game above all else and seed it's own fanbase first. If I we're having this game made I would put people on it who wanted to, above all else, make a good game.

If they can just manage that, and people really like it, there will be more games with more fan service and bigger rosters. You say it's fun, that's good, because that is the first step on the path to exactly what you want.

 
 I totally agree with you ExplodeMode. I think I have been way to knee-jerk for most of this on how it could have been better, but I haven't stopped to think how much worse it could have been. The fact that they nailed giving this game's fighting system its own unique feel is a huge stepping stone, and I seriously doubt this is the last fighter we are going to see from Sony. I guess Omar was a good pick, but for any sequels I really hope they give him at the very least another adviser to help with the making of the game. Seth Killian helps work out the gameplay kinks but they also need someone who can tell them more or less the personalities of the characters.
#46 Posted by Nottle (1912 posts) -

@DarthOrange: Yeah I played the recent Twisted metal. I also don't remember the killzone weapons being THAT futuristic.

The characters you suggested like Finn seem just a little bland.

#47 Posted by Sackmanjones (4609 posts) -

That is extremely saddening that they could not work out a deal to get Crash Bandicoot in the game.  Absolute shame

#48 Posted by Peanut (952 posts) -

Do people honestly think a better hype man will make people give a shit about Jak & Daxter the way people give a shit about Mario? Get a fucking grip, kids.

#49 Posted by Dalai (6876 posts) -

@Peanut said:

Do people honestly think a better hype man will make people give a shit about Jak & Daxter the way people give a shit about Mario? Get a fucking grip, kids.

That pretty much sums it up.

Sony's most popular mascots don't compare to Nintendo's mascots. Simple as that. Even if they were to get a deal that would bring Crash and Spyro into the game, it wouldn't compare.

#50 Posted by RankRabbit (394 posts) -

Crash and Spyro both belonged to Universal up until recently when they were sold to Activision. They were once playstation exclusive but didn't belong to sony.