Why Playstation All Stars failed...

#1poopnolanPosted 2/4/2013 7:22:18 AM
http://www.ign.com/blogs/tehcanadian/2013/01/31/opinion-why-playstation-all-stars-battle-royale-failed

I usually hate ign and their sensational, nonsense articles and reviews, but this time they nailed it.
---
Wow
#2McFordmansonPosted 2/4/2013 7:41:59 AM
Was expecting fanboy drivel, but this actually had some good points.

Let's face it, as much as I love the roster, they're missing some much-needed third party characters like Cloud and Crash Bandicoot. Problem being, this isn't so much Sony's fault as it is Square's and Activision's. Licensing.

And the game was marketed EXTREMELY poorly, as in almost not at all. No magazine ads, no commercials, barely any online presence, nothing. The only banner ads I've seen for it were when I was browsing this forum. It was rather pathetic.

The one point I'm going to have to disagree on is the mechanics. True, the super system can be confusing at first, but so was Smash Brothers: A game where you could pummel an opponent to bits and be sent flying by a random bob-omb. It was when you stopped trying to play it like the game you were used to (Street Fighter or Mortal Kombat) that you started to understand how the game worked and what you were meant to do. People need to do the same for this game.
---
Official Big Daddy of the PSASBR Board.
#3blaze19_0XPosted 2/4/2013 8:08:59 AM(edited)
The simplicity argument is extremely stupid. Because PSASBR is still a much simpler game than Smash ever has been. Not even going into the deeper mechanics are you really telling me he thinks casuals would grasp the percent system quicker than the Super system? The concept of recovering alone in Smash takes ages for new players to understand.

If you're going to say PSASBR failed because of complexity than Smash should have failed twice as hard.

IGN proves time and time again they don't understand fighting games at all of any kind. I remember they gave TTT2 a 7.5 because of the menus or something.
#4RagnoraokPosted 2/4/2013 8:10:44 AM
blaze19_0X posted...
The simplicity argument is extremely stupid. Because PSASBR is still a much simpler game than Smash ever has been. Not even going into the deeper mechanics are you really telling me he thinks casuals would grasp the percent system quicker than the Super system? The concept of recovering alone in Smash takes ages for new players to understand.

If you're going to say PSASBR failed because of complexity than Smash should have failed twice as hard.

IGN proves time and time again they don't understand fighting games at all of any kind. I remember they gave TTT2 a 7.5 because of the menus or something.


hi blaze. I can't really tell, but how do you feel about this game (not sarcasm). I remember when it was first announced you were pro and constantly defended this game, but now it seems you have switched over to the darkside. I dont blame you, but it is kind of interesting to see your transition.
---
Here at gamefaqs, you are either a troll, noob, or fanboy.....choose wisely.
#5blaze19_0XPosted 2/4/2013 8:17:38 AM
I like the game and feel it has a lot of potential. But right now it has glaring fundamental flaws gameplay wise and is missing key features.
#6bartz90Posted 2/4/2013 8:52:25 AM(edited)
This game could have sold many time better as is, roster and mechanics, if the marketing was actually there. There should have been commercials on major cable channels for weeks, ads in magazines and more. Sony should've put everything they had in marketing power behind this game and it was barely there.

Even if a product is objectively bad, and I don't think this is, if there are enough ads and advertisement it will sell.
---
-
#7xXxSuQingXinxXxPosted 2/4/2013 8:53:08 AM
This article gets everything right, but there's still tons that the author could have added.

- The atrocious online functionality (the types of bugs and game breaking glitches present in this mode is wayyyy too enormous. There seems to be a new one posted on this board every day.)

- The terrible assortment of offline modes

- Shoddy attempts at patches

I could go on, unfortunately... :(
---
PSN: Su-Qing-Xin
I like to play video games.
#8RagnoraokPosted 2/4/2013 9:00:56 AM
blaze19_0X posted...
The simplicity argument is extremely stupid. Because PSASBR is still a much simpler game than Smash ever has been. Not even going into the deeper mechanics are you really telling me he thinks casuals would grasp the percent system quicker than the Super system? The concept of recovering alone in Smash takes ages for new players to understand.

If you're going to say PSASBR failed because of complexity than Smash should have failed twice as hard.

IGN proves time and time again they don't understand fighting games at all of any kind. I remember they gave TTT2 a 7.5 because of the menus or something.


I am reading the article now, and actually, he has a point about the simplicity. SSB is way more complex and deep than this game, but you could just pick it up and start playing. However, with PSAS, you cannot do this, because the only way to kill is with supers. With newcomers, this is not as fun or simple, because of this. with Brawl, you could have a fun time at a casual level. Here, you actually need to put in work, and even then, the depth of the game is superficial and has a limiting factor, due to the wild character imbalances. Newcomers will not want to play this, especially casuals.


Like I said from the very beginning, why rip-off a popular franchise, if you are not going to take the best ideas? Why overly limit the fighting system in a genre that is supposed to be chaotic and spontaneous? the super kill only system ruined this game.
---
Here at gamefaqs, you are either a troll, noob, or fanboy.....choose wisely.
#9blaze19_0XPosted 2/4/2013 9:45:38 AM(edited)
Ragnoraok posted...
blaze19_0X posted...
The simplicity argument is extremely stupid. Because PSASBR is still a much simpler game than Smash ever has been. Not even going into the deeper mechanics are you really telling me he thinks casuals would grasp the percent system quicker than the Super system? The concept of recovering alone in Smash takes ages for new players to understand.

If you're going to say PSASBR failed because of complexity than Smash should have failed twice as hard.

IGN proves time and time again they don't understand fighting games at all of any kind. I remember they gave TTT2 a 7.5 because of the menus or something.


I am reading the article now, and actually, he has a point about the simplicity. SSB is way more complex and deep than this game, but you could just pick it up and start playing. However, with PSAS, you cannot do this, because the only way to kill is with supers. With newcomers, this is not as fun or simple, because of this. with Brawl, you could have a fun time at a casual level. Here, you actually need to put in work, and even then, the depth of the game is superficial and has a limiting factor, due to the wild character imbalances. Newcomers will not want to play this, especially casuals.


Like I said from the very beginning, why rip-off a popular franchise, if you are not going to take the best ideas? Why overly limit the fighting system in a genre that is supposed to be chaotic and spontaneous? the super kill only system ruined this game.


I don't deny that the Super system has its flaws and isn't as engaging as a health or percent system. I think they should have gone with a percent system as well especially since that's what people wanted. That much is obvious now.

However, again I would say even at the most casual level, Smash is harder to pick up for newbies.

Who hasn't played with their newbie friends at one point in Smash only to have them lose all their lives in a matter of seconds because of constant suicides? At least nothing like this happens in PSASBR. You actually need to get hit by a kill move to die.

So if initially sucking at a system or not understanding it all was a major issue for platform fighters there's no way Smash would have succeeded. I think the key difference here is that in Smash you can have no idea what's going on and still have a blast. It just has that instant fun factor and charm.
#10blaze19_0XPosted 2/4/2013 9:41:58 AM
bartz90 posted...
This game could have sold many time better as is, roster and mechanics, if the marketing was actually there. There should have been commercials on major cable channels for weeks, ads in magazines and more. Sony should've put everything they had in marketing power behind this game and it was barely there.

Even if a product is objectively bad, and I don't think this is, if there are enough ads and advertisement it will sell.


I don't think the problem was just no advertising, it was bad advertising.

In the one commercial that people posted about here, Fat Princess of all characters was the main draw. She also takes a good chunk of space on the cover.

Most casuals would see this and go "who the hell is she? Where's my favourite PS characters?". It was an extremely biased and stupid move.