Why is there less STUFF than Melee/Brawl?

  • Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale
  3. Why is there less STUFF than Melee/Brawl?

User Info: peephole303

4 years ago#21
and MK 1 had like 7 characters.... I wonder if MK is more popular than SSBB...

User Info: legendofskyland

4 years ago#22
peephole303 posted...
and MK 1 had like 7 characters.... I wonder if MK is more popular than SSBB...


User Info: Charizard18

4 years ago#23
peephole303 posted...
and MK 1 had like 7 characters.... I wonder if MK is more popular than SSBB...

Aw, but that was 1992. This is 2012, durr hurr hurr.
Who would win, Jedi Charizard or Jedi Jigglypuff?
Help Robbit make it into the PSAS dlc roster! http://www.petitionbuzz.com/petitions/robbitfirstallstar

User Info: XpLiCiT_GaMiNg

4 years ago#24
Original SSB had 12 characters, 16 levels. Like... 8 items
Everyone's posts should at one point include a "tl;dr" because this is GameFaqs: honestly, no one cares for your opinions.
PSN: Triple_Threat

User Info: Crabhammar

4 years ago#25
Habefiet posted...
All of the presented points make sense to me except these two:

Everything in this game had to be checked for balance

As far as I can tell no one thinks the game is balanced. It's too early to tell imo (people crying about this or that being broken when the game hasn't even been out a month yet, give it time), but if they really checked everything for balance, they might have rushed a little bit for release purposes. Just my impression though.

Because in Melee, there were two Cpt Falcons, three Marios, two Foxes, two Links...

In PSABR, we have 20 characters that play nothing alike.


Also I dunno where you're pulling the three Marios number from. I'm guessing you're referring to Melee, but by that game Luigi actually had a completely different moveset from Mario. And Dr. Mario isn't in Brawl, they're back down to just Mario and Luigi (thus no Mario clones).

ALSO basically all the clones play very differently at a high level of play, to the point that some of them aren't even the same level of goodness. I'm gonna use examples from Melee since that's the game I know better. Some clones, like Pikachu and Pichu, are kinda dumb because Pichu really is just a worse Pikachu for all intents and purposes, but take, say, Marth and Roy. Their moves all do look the same, but differences in hitboxes, weights/fallspeeds, etc. cause them to require completely different play--they have different combos, different tactics for recovery, and Roy's a hell of a lot worse, lol. Fox and Falco are both mad good and their moves all "look" the same but are very, very different.

ALSO you named almost all the characters that are clones. Even if we remove every single "clone" character from the game, Brawl still has about 30 unique characters and Melee has ~20.

The other points that everyone has made all seem relatively sensible imo and include some stuff I hadn't thought of. I appreciate the viewpoints.

SEE, oh doubtful poster from earlier? There's like no rage going on here anywhere. Good stuff GameFAQs.

Yeesh, I have a name.
Sent from my iPhone via PowerFAQs 1.9
PowerFAQs... is not that bad for quoting.

User Info: Chzrm3

4 years ago#26
To be fair, we should also compare Melee/Brawl to other fighting games.

Compare it to SF, for example. Pick any SF in that entire franchise's catalog, and they'll all seem incredibly bare-bones by comparison. Or you can even look at MvC3, which is a game that, like this, is supposed to be a celebration of a company's history (and in that case, two companies!), and it's got absolutely none of the fun auxiliary stuff that Smash has. UMvC3 came out in 2011, it was an expansion for a pre-existing game, and Capcom had an enormous budget, and compared to Brawl or Melee it's an absolute joke content-wise.

Even my beloved Tekken doesn't measure up well to Melee. TTT2 has some pretty awesome stuff, like all the unlocks you can get for individual character customization, the combot trials, how insanely fun tag mode is, etc, but it still comes up lacking when compared to Melee. And to Brawl? Not even close. XD

I guess the main takeaway here is that the Smash series is just flat out excellent. It's the best example of fan-service and attention to detail in a fighting game, ever. There's a reason Brawl is the best selling fighting game of all time, and Melee follows closely behind.

If you compare any fighting game to Smash, it'll come up short, because Smash is incredible.

In that sense, PSASBR actually fares pretty well. Considering it's the first entry in this (hopefully) franchise, it actually beats out games like SF 4 and UMvC3 when it comes to content. MK9 beats out PSASBR because MK9 had an awesome story mode and the exhaustive challenge tower, but that's okay, because it was MK9. TTT2 also has more content than PSASBR, but again, Tekken is a massive franchise.

I think the fact that you can point to games like SFxT and say "PSASBR puts that to shame." is pretty legitimately exciting.

As an aside, this game certainly could've had more levels if they'd allocated their resources a bit better. While the mash-ups are fun, there are a few cases where they basically created an entirely new environment solely for the mash-up. (Look at the LocoRoco stage, and how there's an incredibly detailed robot/city in the background that really has nothing to do with the level). So there's a give-and-take there - do you prefer highly interactive levels with a lot going on, or having a huge selection of levels that are diverse because of how their platforms are laid out, what IPs they represent and what music you listen to on them?

Personally, I prefer Smash's approach. Melee had 29 stages and the vast majority were like Termina Bay or Fourside - a different way of laying out platforms and some AWESOME fanservice/music/details. But that's just me, and I know a lot of people love the mash-ups so I won't harp on that.

Sorry, this post ended up being massive.

TL;DR - Smash is amazing and is better than every other fighting game in the world when it comes to additional content.
If I haven't mentioned Trivio in my post, it's because she is so beautiful and precarious that I just wanted to show her how much she means to me.

User Info: rumbalumba

4 years ago#27
^SF doesn't have adventure, etc. because it is a fighting game, so is Tekken.

All-Stars is stuck between trying too hard to be both a fighting game and a party brawler, therefore it falls flat along the way. these fighting game "experts" don't know how to make a video game.

Sony mandated them to do a mascot brawler, and wherever you go, SuperBot always says this is a mascot brawler. then these fighting game "experts" thought it's a good idea to make the mechanics skewed to fighting games. therefore we got this game with FFA, items, stage hazards, platforms, etc. everything you'll see in a party brawler, then we got a combo-focused game mechanic and game modes you'll only see in fighting games.

what a mess. either do one or the other. it feels incomplete as a fighting game. no 1v1 online, supers are unbalanced, so are the characters. then when you look at it as a party brawler, it's even more incomplete. lack of fun, objective-based game modes and only focused on deathmatch-type ones, stage design isn't that great, no differentiation between stage mashups, etc.

User Info: peephole303

4 years ago#28
^ or they used Sackboys god status to create their own style of game instead of copying the others

User Info: rumbalumba

4 years ago#29
peephole303 posted...
^ or they used Sackboys god status to create their own style of game instead of copying the others

their own style of game? rofl. they copied half of smash and half of street fighter, which of course doesn't work and it shows. even reviewers think the same. SB thought it was a good idea to mix a party brawler and a fighting game. look at Smash, it's competitive and a party brawler too. SB tried to shove down our throats how "competitive" this game is, and how it's made by fighting game "experts". biggest mistake ever. let the players decide if it's competitive. don't run around with what looks like a party brawler then try too hard to differentiate your game from a party brawler by saying "oh it's balanced. it's competitive!", etc.

and that supers-only system didn't help their case, either. tried too hard to not be like Smash. the difference between this and Smash is that the ringout/percentage system of Smash got it right the first time. and truly anyone can play a Smash, be it competitive or casual. this game isn't meant for casuals at all. you can mash buttons, but it won't be as enjoyable.

User Info: NewVirtue

4 years ago#30
sry cant read the whole wall of text, but what u said about melee characters.

2 part answer.

part 1. melee has 6 clones where as All-stars has none. to be fair I'm not counting luigi like im not counting evil cole.

part 2. melee is a sequel, if we look at how many NEW characters there are, you find that its only 13 new characters (counting the clones)

part 2 minus part 1. in reality, melee only has 7 new characters. the rest are recycled from a previous game or clones. PSA has 20 NEW characters built from the ground up.

not saying your whole argument is bad or anything like that, this is just in response to the first point
  1. Boards
  2. PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale
  3. Why is there less STUFF than Melee/Brawl?

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

  • Topic Archived