By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
JWeinCom on 22 October 2012
Edit Thread
Jay520 said:
JWeinCom said:

@Jay-  Why not?  Darksiders was able to take the Zelda formula and make it something unique and different.  Bioshock was able to make a unique take on the FPS genre.  Sonic made platforming games while breaking off from the Mario formula.  Bayonetta followed the Devil May Cry formula but added more than enough to stand up on its own (yes I know the developer was the same).  Okami was another take on the Zelda formula with tons of originality, Power Stone was a wholly original 4 player brawler, and so on so forth.

In every single genre we have examples of a developer taking the basic formula and putting their own spin on things.  So why would this be an exception?  Nobody ever criticized Little Big Planet for being a Mario clone, did they?


I'm not really sure what you're saying here.

As for LittleBigPlanet, I've never heard anyone call that a Mario clone. The only similarity LBP has with Mario is the fact that it's a 2D platformer.

My point was that PABR and SSB similarities only appear to be skin deep. They look the same, sure, and they share the same genre (platforming fighter). But other than that, I don't see enough similarities to warrant calling it a clone. 

I think people are calling this game a clone because only Nintendo has been successful in such an obscure genre like platforming fighters. If this was any other genre with lots of different games, then people wouldn't call it a clone. But genres like platforming fighters are pretty much synonymous Nintendo, so if another game tries to tackle that genre, then it's considered a clone.


My point is that people can see through skin deep similarities.  Mario and Little Big Planet are in the same genre, but people recognize that they're still very different games with very little in common.  So it's not as though Nintendo fans just pounce on anything remotely similar to a Nintendo franchise.  

With PASBR there are a whole mess of similarities.  Same control scheme?  Check.  Aside from a couple of minor differences, the control scheme migrated over from Smash.  Even directional throws and airdodges made the transition.  We still have universal double jumping and rolling as well.  It's as if Mortal Kombat 5 would have included focus attacks.  Aesthetics are shockingly similar considering Sony's different lineage, down to the menus and HUD.  

Aside from the method by which you KO opponents, what are the differences between Smash Bros Battle Royale and Smash?