Jump to content


Photo

Is Playstation all-stars a Smash Bros. beater?

Sony Smash Bros playstation Nintendo PS3 Wii U N64 GCN

  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#21 Usman Mohammad

Usman Mohammad

    Bullet Bill

  • Members
  • 350 posts

Posted 30 November 2012 - 11:57 AM

It's far away from being anything better than smash bros. From the outside looking in it looks like a smash bros clone. When playing the game, the mechanics are completely different, so the way it actually plays is unique.

It'll hold me over until the Wii U smash bros is released.

#22 Colinx

Colinx

    Pokey

  • Members
  • 1,301 posts
  • Fandom:
    Animal Crossing & SeaWorld

Posted 30 November 2012 - 12:23 PM

Sony tried to beat Nintendo to the punch by releasing All Stars with the cross over function. Once again, they fail with another knock-off Nintendo idea.

2lvmghw.png


#23 Guest_Lone_Gamer_*

Guest_Lone_Gamer_*
  • Guests

Posted 02 December 2012 - 11:05 AM

I've played it looks like Smash bros. but plays entirely different, Kratos spammers are the absolute worst.

#24 ChrisD

ChrisD

    Nyah, see! Nyah!

  • Members
  • 138 posts
  • Fandom:
    PCSoTendo. Because fanboyism is dumb.

Posted 04 December 2012 - 03:27 PM

I wouldn't say either of them beat, well... Either of them. They may look the same, but they play vastly different. The playstyles are different, the graphical style is different, and the entire gameplay mechanic is different. So in these regards I would say that you can't even compare them unless under the simple statement of them being in the 'Fighter' genre.

If I had to choose between Brawl and All-Stars under that genre however, I think that All-Stars actually wins by just a little bit. Brawl has become a bit stagnant and this game is quite refreshing. If there's one thing I absolutely hated while we demo'd it though, it has to be the pure amount of hitstun. Someone hit you? Well you can't do anything for a second or two because you're combo'd. What's that, Kratos attacked you once? Well you aren't moving for a second or two then, because you must fly across the screen. What I liked about it is that, unlike Smash Bros, the more competitive nature of the game is shown more and as such people are probably not going to go the route of button-mashing as often. While yes, I did just complain about combos, it was nice to see most everyone who played it trying to fire off combos instead of just spamming the 'Basic Attack' Button.

Though that is just my opinion from the open beta, and as such the full game itself may be completely different, making this reply irrelevant.

#25 Nightbane30

Nightbane30

    Shy Guy

  • Members
  • 33 posts
  • NNID:Nightbane30
  • Fandom:
    KINGDOM HEARTS!!!!!! RPG LOVER, ANIME

Posted 04 December 2012 - 05:43 PM

It feels so slow compared to SSBB and it almost feels like a flashy button masher arcade game.
In other words, it sucks compared to Smash.
Posted Image

I am me! Nobody else!
I also have an account on 3DSForums.com and my username is the same there.

#26 ChrisD

ChrisD

    Nyah, see! Nyah!

  • Members
  • 138 posts
  • Fandom:
    PCSoTendo. Because fanboyism is dumb.

Posted 04 December 2012 - 10:18 PM

Err... It felt too fast to me honestly. Like I said, you can't even compare them since they're so different. It's like comparing Smash to Street Fighter - would you argue them under the same gameplay? No, you'd debate between the two under the statement that they're simply fighters. So saying that it sucks compared to Smash really is a rather nonsensical statement to make.

Yes, attacks were sorta' flashy however they seemed no worse than Smash's. And the colors DEFINITELY didn't stand out enough to be called flashy; my brother and I got lost so often with the smooth colors that blended together all too well with our characters. And as for the button-mashing I refer to my above post. With the amount of hitstun that goes on you can't really button mash if you want to get anywhere as then all you have is people flying across the screen, leaving you with no AP in the timed environment matches are held in. You HAD to combo if you wanted to make it anywhere.

Not trying to say either is better though. They are both simply great and I would greatly recommend either of them if it looks like a game you would enjoy. In this case however, I do believe that All-Stars is better than it's being given credit for, so I am backing it up more and apologize if my reply looks biased because of it.

#27 ChrisTerror

ChrisTerror

    Blooper

  • Members
  • 161 posts
  • NNID:ChrisTerror

Posted 05 December 2012 - 01:17 AM

I have PSASBR on my Vita and i like it, and it does Have items in the levels to use against your opponents. Anyways, Is is better than SSB? Not at all.... But i think its still fun for what it is.

Edited by ChrisTerror, 05 December 2012 - 01:19 AM.


#28 PedanticGamer

PedanticGamer

    Bullet Bill

  • Members
  • 370 posts

Posted 07 December 2012 - 06:08 AM

NOTHING can beat smash bros. I mean come on..... but to be honest i Played A TON of smash bros and only watched a few videos on All-stars so my opinion may not be worth much but through out my experiences I'm going to have to say that smash bros is better


I think the OP needs to understand neither is better as whilst Playstation All Stars Battle Royale is iterative, it ultimately plays very differently despite on the surface looking extremely similar.

I do wonder how much all the people who flat out said no in this thread have playes PASBR for any extended period of time. I'm guessing not all the many.





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Sony, Smash, Bros, playstation, Nintendo, PS3, Wii U, N64, GCN

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Anti-Spam Bots!