kamui22 posted...I find it ironic that some will call people Sony fanboys and point out that the Smash games have better metacritic scores than Battle Royale; however, the sole reason this is true is due to Smash featuring Nintendo characters...
The scores for the Smash games automatically get points for featuring Nintendo characters and this only shows how much more fanboyish Nintendo fans are than Sony ones. It is a no brainer that Sony characters are not even close to as loved and recognized as Nintendo characters, and this seems like it may give Battle Royale the characteristic of being moreso judged on its own merits of being well designed and fun. This is in contrast to character fanboyism creating the delusion of a perfect score game.
As much as I am not a fanboy of any kind, I have to disagree.
While the Nintendo characters certainly did help with sales, I don't think it had any merit when it came to scores. Smash Bros was scored well because it really didn't have anything else to compare it to except for Power Stone. (That's not a jab at Power Stone).
Smash Bros was actually a really fun party game, with great mechanics. The reason I like it way more than All Stars is because there was a damage meter. In PSABR, all you do is continue to hit people until you gauge fills up, then you try to hit someone with your special and you get a point.
In Smash, the more damage you take, the farther you fly. You have to continuously be aware of your surrounding and items or risk getting knocked off the screen.
Anyone that says PSABR isn't very, very similar to Smash is in denial.
Again, I'm not knocking PSABR because it is enjoyable for what it is, but it's no where near as fun and exciting as Smash was, especially Melee.
---
"You still play SNES & Genesis games? Yeah, they are terrible by today's standard. Graphics sells .. like it or not." - nariusseldon
Facebook | 
Twitter
