[POLL] Anarchy Reigns VS. Power Stone

#1EnyalbPosted 2/9/2013 11:23:05 AM
Which is better? - Results (44 votes)
Anarchy Reigns
65.91% (29 votes)
29
Power Stone
34.09% (15 votes)
15
This poll is now closed.
Just curious and wanted to hear opinions, since I got my hands on the Power Stone Collection for PSP (ugh, why that system?). I dunno if it's because I didn't grew up with Power Stone, but I like Anarchy Reigns a bit more. PS is only a simple 3D brawler... Nothing wrong with that, but AR just has more variety, like capture the flag and death ball. AR also has more combo focus then PS, which only has a simple punch/kick chain (I'm aware of mixing the attacks, but you're still relatively doing the same); PS 2 changes that in which they replaced the kick button with a combination of a grab and heavy attack, something I don't like. However, PS has more items, stage gimmicks, and vehicles compared to AR's poles, berserker mutants, and one long cutscene. It also has local play, which a lot people wished AR had.

But alas, If I had a choice, I would pick Anarchy Reigns over Power Stone. Again, this is coming from someone who didn't grew up with the series, so I would like to hear what you guys think.
---
* Insert witty anime/video game reference here *
PSN ID: BLAYNEproject
#2sworderPosted 2/9/2013 2:13:20 PM
Power Stone 2 is better. The great thing about the game was getting together with 3 other friends and playing in the same room. The PSP doesn't do it justice in a small screen and AR doesn't even have local multiplayer.
#3mogrockPosted 2/9/2013 6:12:10 PM
For local MP and item collection = Power Stone 2

Everything else = Anarchy Reigns

Anarchy Reigns' stage design and ATEs are the new benchmark for multi-player brawlers. The only thing the stages are missing are more deathtraps like the spiked walls in Madworld.
---
http://youtu.be/82aYFrsMGsQ?hd=1
http://youtu.be/5Ns-kXeQCMk
#4masterdevil007Posted 2/9/2013 6:21:12 PM
You can't properly compare the mechanics in these games because they're just so different. Ultimately, what is the superior game boils down to what is the most polished and feature-complete.

If I'm going to tank, Power Stone, AR and Smash Bros., it would be: Power Stone > Smash > AR.

All three have solid mechanics and concepts, but PS is easily the most polished. AR is great, but there are so many imperfections in the final product (buggy and laggy netcode, no local multi, glitches, lack of many important custom options). In any case, all three are unique and each one has its place in the medium. I don't see why they can't all exist and be enjoyed side-by-side when millions can enjoy CoD along with Halo and Resistance and Killzone and so on and so forth.
#5WandrianPosted 2/9/2013 6:26:24 PM
They're all pretty different, I think.

Power Stone 1 seemed equal parts brawler and fighter. It had unique combo inputs for every character, made every character really feel unique.

Power Stone 2 was more a brawler, with simplified controls, four players on the same screen, and that nifty item system. Seeing a VMU pop up was always a good feeling, knowing it'd have your oversized tennis racket/flamethrower/bastard sword/whatever "aw yeah, time to kick some ass!"


I think though if AR had local play and didn't have lobby glitches that it'd be perfect.
#6Enyalb(Topic Creator)Posted 2/9/2013 7:21:42 PM(edited)
Well the reason I compared the two is because it seems something a lot of people are saying, and I didn't know what to feel because... I never played power stone, nor do I have a dreamcast to play it. Playing it now, it does have it's charms and whatnot to have a cult following... But I just like Anarchy Reigns better.

Although I do hope Capcom takes that poll they had seriously and give a HD remake of Power Stone for 360/PS3, cause really? The collection is on the PSP? Why, just why?
---
* Insert witty anime/video game reference here *
PSN ID: BLAYNEproject
#7masterdevil007Posted 2/9/2013 8:18:37 PM
Yeah, PSP was a poor choice. Wii or PSN/XBLA would have been perfect. Wii was already a popular multiplayer-centric system and it has that Nintendo-esque universal appeal so both casual and core gamers would have been interested in it. They didn't even go for an XBLA/PSN HD re-release, when they did just that for SF and vs. Capcom. I wouldn't even care about online play, I just the ability to play the game without having chock up money for a DC and an original copy of the game. Even Darkstalkers got dumped on PSP.

Not saying the PSP is a bad system, it has its fair share of great games, but stuff like PS and Darkstalkers would be more appropriate on a console. Like how many are going to pick Smash 3DS over Smash U? Yeah...
#8shivaPosted 2/9/2013 10:10:22 PM(edited)
Personally, I don't just prefer Power Stone 1 & 2. They destroy the living daylights out of this game.

I was lured to this because Platinum are my favorite developers this gen, it's one of the very few arena style multiplayer games that have come out since Power Stone, and one review described it as "a mix of God Hand with Power Stone". God Hand is my favorite PS2 game, and the PStones are in my top 5 games ever made.



To say that Anarchy Reigns failed to live up to the excellence of either would be my understatement of the year.

Anarchy Reigns is pretty flawed mechanically. Throws have too wide an escape window, and you can get instantly stunned on counter hits. This favors a turtling mentality to a degree I can't think of a game where it would be more prevalent.

As if that wasn't bad enough, Guard and Evade master are in the game, two abilities that make people that can evade every throw (which is 90% of the players) almost completely invincible. And then we have rampage. To allows this sort of stupidity in the multiplayer modes is beyond appalling, I don't even wanna comment on it. There are also infinites (that thankfully you don't see much of outside of cage matches, because they take so long) and all sorts of annoying glitches, like lag Baron's infamous one hit kill, or that AKW Bayonetta can pull that gives her a tremendously unfair edge in kill stealing.

It's lacking in options. You're forced to play in "score for kills" mode, without an alternative. Kill steal is the name of the game. You could be the player that landed the most damage to the enemies and have 0 kills. You have to adopt a kill stealing mentality very fast, or you won't get anywhere. I'm now used to it, but I find it weak sauce.

Graphics are kind of a mess. Ugly blurry filter, apparently there to mask the crude texture work of the stages, and a pretty disappointing 30FPS, constantly dipping below that whenever you're in that lava area, in the coliseum or whenever those planes decide to bombard the stage.

It features no multiplayers mode on the same console. Let me repeat this part: what's essentially a multiplayer game has no multiplayer options outside of online play. This means in two years time, maybe even less, I'll own a useless game disc.

Story mode is a waste of disc space. If they had spent 1/100 of the resources they used on those cutscenes to give us a solid Streets of Rage style mode, or at least something along the lines of Mad Survival, I'd feel like at least the solo mode had paid off.



Meanwhile, the Power Stone games are excellent competitive multiplayer games, with a strong emphasis in using the arenas to your advantage. The arenas of Power Stone are actually interactive, unlike this game's. There's not much you can level against them in terms of mechanical flaws - maybe Mel and Pride lacking invincibility in their wall/pole attacks, but that's nothing compared to the flaws of Anarchy Reigns. The games run at 60 FPS, with vibrant designs and a lot going on constantly, with Power Stone 2 featuring ever-changing stages. You can play the second one with four other players on the same console (lol). They're the best arena fighters you can get with your money.
---
Power Stone 1 & 2 with online play - the dream will never die. Meanwhile, get a piece of reality with Anarchy Reigns!
#9Gen2000Posted 2/10/2013 2:35:49 AM
Power Stone simply being local multiplayer already is a big advantage in itself. Anarchy Reigns can be fun but doesn't compare joking and laughing with the person right within arms reach of you.

Mechanic wise AR seems better on surface but solid defense renders a majority of characters useless still even with that going for the game, it doesn't help there are abilities that boost defensive the nature even more in some modes. It's usually not a matter of properly outplaying the opponent but more of who gets bored the fastest and slips up first or who benefits/takes advantage of situations better that the unstable connection causes for certain mechanics. I mean a win is a win but it becomes unsatisfying in this game quickly even when you're the one winning a majority of the time.

Even though there was no proper guarding in Power Stone mindgames and properly outplaying an equally skilled opponent just felt more rewarding and when it comes to a Vs. game, no matter what genre it falls under that's usually the most important aspect to keep people playing it. The Power Fusions in PS1 were over the top but still very dodgeable. In PS2 they even more crazy but there was invincible frames on your characters certain attacks (unless you were Mel or Pride) so it wasn't completely transform and auto-win.

It's annoying to drag on this subject for those who is steadily playing this game still or those just jumping into the game recently but this game's lifeblood being entirely online focus gives it maybe 1 more year tops before basically becoming a coaster. AR is not only competing with the attention of other upcoming games from non-related genres but other, more legit online fighters that actually puts some focus on proper offensive vs. defense mechanics balancing.
---
The Storm Is About To Rage.....
#10masterdevil007Posted 2/10/2013 6:49:52 AM
shiva posted...
And then we have rampage. To allows this sort of stupidity in the multiplayer modes is beyond appalling, I don't even wanna comment on it.


So what's wrong with Rampage? Or are you just one of those scrubby-elitist who think it's a "cheap" mechanic and "anti-competitive" and whatnot? People using turbo-controllers sucks, but that's not inherently the mechanic's flaw.

Blurry graphics? The aesthetic is not amazing, but everything is crystal clear which what matter the most when it comes to multiplayer games.

The defense is a problem in this game, but it's not as black and white as people like you pretend it is. How powerful the defense is situational. If you attack someone in a wide open area, yeah they'll escape and regenerate their health. That said, there are many situations and modes where it's quite difficult for players to escape and get away: team-modes, trapping them in corners, chasing them in smaller arenas (the 4-player maps), etc.

Scoring is not entirely about getting kills. You can still rank in first place for dishing out tons of damage and getting fewer kills than other players. And complaining about kill stealing? Really? Don't pretend that is not possible or never happens in other multiplayer games with more than two players (and that includes PS).

The game has legitimate flaws of varying degrees of severity, but it's not a ***terrible*** game like you claim it is. It seems you're just frustrated because you were expecting PS, but got something else different. It's understandable, but get over it. AR is not PS, it's something else and while there are things that AR could learn from PS, there are also things that it does better. Not to mention both games have several properties that are unique to their design and would not work in the other game.