By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Sony's Smash Bros. competitor all but confirmed, test images revealed

enrageorange said:

its not the "iconic" characters that will be a problem in this game, its that most of sony's newer big hits have incredibly bad characters for a fighting game at least a super smash bros stype one. Killzone, Resistance, Uncharted, Gran Turismo, Moterstorm, etc. etc. have terrible characters to include in such a game. The only popular ones that would be interesting are sackboy, kratos, Col, Ratchet, Clank, and their older mascots. The problem is many current ps3 owners don't care for or haven't even played games with sony's classic mascots. Super smash bros includes the most popular nintendo characters ever, and those are the ones that sell the game while the lesser known characters please the hardcore crowd. Sony's equivalent popular characters would be generic army guys from call of duty, gangsters from Grand theft auto, and cars from gran turismo. Doesn't really sound too awsome does it.


If Konami put Snake in Brawl, I don't see how the crew fron Killzone, Nathan Drake, and a generic Chimera solider can't be done. MotorStorm, and GT cars could be used as assist trophies. Drake could be used to promote the game as he is arguably the most popular character Sony has right now. Just throw in some 3rd party characters, and you have a game. 



Around the Network
AdventWolf said:
A lot of people are missing the point, a while back there was a topic that asked about Super Smash Bros and how it made people play other games. A lot of people played Super Smash Bros but only knew a few characters, but the game introduced them to the other characters and so they played the other games.
This game does not have to have a multitude of super omega epic characters, the gameplay makes the game and it will introduce people to the other characters. It's called marketing!


This is what made me play Metroid Fusion, only to discover the game was actually awesome. same reason my bro borrowed and beat Starfox Adventures on gamecube. When I played the original Smash Bros on N64, I only knew Mario, Zelda, Pokemon and the Donkey Kong animated series.

    @M.U.G.E.N, camelot made Golden Sun, my favorite RPG.



http://img244.imageshack.us/img244/7530/gohansupersaiyan239du.jpg" type="application/x-shockwave-flash"> http://www.deviantart.com/download/109426596/Shippuden_Team_7_by_Tsubaki_chan.jpg" type="application/x-shockwave-flash"> http://image.hotdog.hu/_data/members0/772/1047772/images/kepek_illusztraciok/Bleach%2520-%2520Ishida%2520Uryuu%25201.jpg" type="application/x-shockwave-flash">

3DS: tolu619

Wii U: FoyehBoys

Vita, PS3 and PS4: FoyehBoys

XBoxOne: Tolu619

Switch: Tolu619

Kugali - We publish comics from all across Africa and the diaspora, and we also push the boundaries of Augmented Reality storytelling. Check us out!

My thread for teaching VGC some Nigerian slangs

enrageorange said:

its not the "iconic" characters that will be a problem in this game, its that most of sony's newer big hits have incredibly bad characters for a fighting game at least a super smash bros stype one. Killzone, Resistance, Uncharted, Gran Turismo, Moterstorm, etc. etc. have terrible characters to include in such a game. The only popular ones that would be interesting are sackboy, kratos, Col, Ratchet, Clank, and their older mascots. The problem is many current ps3 owners don't care for or haven't even played games with sony's classic mascots. Super smash bros includes the most popular nintendo characters ever, and those are the ones that sell the game while the lesser known characters please the hardcore crowd. Sony's equivalent popular characters would be generic army guys from call of duty, gangsters from Grand theft auto, and cars from gran turismo. Doesn't really sound too awsome does it.

you say this "its not the "iconic" characters that will be a problem in this game"

then contradict yourself with the rest of your post... i still don't see why people don't think guys like these are suited for a fighting game

 

etc but think guys like mario whos arguably just a plumber in overalls ( i'm not reffering to his popularity ) is but thats me



bouzane said:
Khuutra said:
Rainbow Yoshi said:


I've got to admit, this is post is one of your best for a while as it is not silly in anyway.

Anyway to the point. Nintendo came up with a fantastic idea when they formed Super Smash Bros. and Sony is really the only other company in gaming to form a vast host of playable characters. I hope Sony don't call this Sony Smash Bros. because I am sure "Smash Bros." is copyrighted.


Capcom, Konami, and Namco - to name only three - have larger stables of iconic characters than Sony do.


I certainly don't agree but I can understand both Capcom and Konami, however claiming that Namco has more iconic characters than Sony is just absurd.

Not at all - any major fighting game series has a higher number of iconic characters than the vast majority of other game series. How many characters from Street Fighter are recognizable at a glance? 15? 20? In comparison, the only really recognizable character from God of War is Kratos himself. Throw in Darkstalkers, along with Capcom's other franchises, and it's really one-sided in that respect. Hell, Capcom's roster of recognizable characters is really very comparable to Nintendo's.

It's easy to dismiss Namco, but it would be a lot harder in fighting game or JRPG circles - they do own Tekken, Soul Calibur, Tales, and many other different series. One doesn't associate them with their characters as quickly as one does with Capcom, but their roster is enormous.



RolStoppable said:
bouzane said:
RolStoppable said:

Namco has Pac-Man, Klonoa and the huge casts of Tekken and Soul Calibur. Namco has also a long history which means they have many lesser known characters from the arcade era and their Tales games.

They also have Dig Dug which would be fantastically sadistic in a fighting game. That being said, it still pales in comparison to the potential roster for Sony.

Seriously? The casts of Tekken and Soul Calibur are pretty iconic.

Out of the three companies Khuutra mentioned, Konami is actually the one with the least amount of iconic characters. Capcom is obviously far ahead of both, Namco and Konami.

Tekken and Soul Calibur may have plenty of characters to draw upon but so does Metal Gear Solid. Toss in a few from Castlevania, Contra and Silent Hill and I would expect a superior roster to Namco. Although I do certainly agree about Capcom clearly having the lead over both of the examples provided by Khuutra, but still not Sony.



Around the Network
tolu619 said:
AdventWolf said:
A lot of people are missing the point, a while back there was a topic that asked about Super Smash Bros and how it made people play other games. A lot of people played Super Smash Bros but only knew a few characters, but the game introduced them to the other characters and so they played the other games.
This game does not have to have a multitude of super omega epic characters, the gameplay makes the game and it will introduce people to the other characters. It's called marketing!


This is what made me play Metroid Fusion, only to discover the game was actually awesome. same reason my bro borrowed and beat Starfox Adventures on gamecube. When I played the original Smash Bros on N64, I only knew Mario, Zelda, Pokemon and the Donkey Kong animated series.

    @M.U.G.E.N, camelot made Golden Sun, my favorite RPG.


yeah they turned out to be good it seems justl ike Ready @ Dawn...but they made those games way after the games in question



In-Kat-We-Trust Brigade!

"This world is Merciless, and it's also very beautiful"

For All News/Info related to the PlayStation Vita, Come and join us in the Official PSV Thread!

Khuutra said:
bouzane said:
Khuutra said:
Rainbow Yoshi said:


I've got to admit, this is post is one of your best for a while as it is not silly in anyway.

Anyway to the point. Nintendo came up with a fantastic idea when they formed Super Smash Bros. and Sony is really the only other company in gaming to form a vast host of playable characters. I hope Sony don't call this Sony Smash Bros. because I am sure "Smash Bros." is copyrighted.


Capcom, Konami, and Namco - to name only three - have larger stables of iconic characters than Sony do.


I certainly don't agree but I can understand both Capcom and Konami, however claiming that Namco has more iconic characters than Sony is just absurd.

Not at all - any major fighting game series has a higher number of iconic characters than the vast majority of other game series. How many characters from Street Fighter are recognizable at a glance? 15? 20? In comparison, the only really recognizable character from God of War is Kratos himself. Throw in Darkstalkers, along with Capcom's other franchises, and it's really one-sided in that respect. Hell, Capcom's roster of recognizable characters is really very comparable to Nintendo's.

It's easy to dismiss Namco, but it would be a lot harder in fighting game or JRPG circles - they do own Tekken, Soul Calibur, Tales, and many other different series. One doesn't associate them with their characters as quickly as one does with Capcom, but their roster is enormous.

What about Ares, Zeus and Hades? I thought that they all stood out just as much as Kratos. Personally, I think you are selling Sony short.

 

Edit: I just remembered Perseus, he would be perfect for a fighting game. It would be fantastic if they could get the original voice actor yet again.



bouzane said:
Khuutra said:

Not at all - any major fighting game series has a higher number of iconic characters than the vast majority of other game series. How many characters from Street Fighter are recognizable at a glance? 15? 20? In comparison, the only really recognizable character from God of War is Kratos himself. Throw in Darkstalkers, along with Capcom's other franchises, and it's really one-sided in that respect. Hell, Capcom's roster of recognizable characters is really very comparable to Nintendo's.

It's easy to dismiss Namco, but it would be a lot harder in fighting game or JRPG circles - they do own Tekken, Soul Calibur, Tales, and many other different series. One doesn't associate them with their characters as quickly as one does with Capcom, but their roster is enormous.

What about Ares, Zeus and Hades? I thought that they all stood out just as much as Kratos. Personally, I think you are selling Sony short.

This merits a very serious laying out of hat constitutes iconography.

Now, the thing about being "iconic" is that it's as much a matter of building up the image of a series as it is about the memorable characters from a game. The iconography of Metal Gear Solid, to look at Konami, is built around Solid Snake, Liquid Snake, Big Boss, the Boss, Volgin, and a few others. These are the characters used to estalbish the imagery of the series even for people who have never played it. You may not know who Solid Snake is, but if you've ever seen anything about Metal Gear Solid then you probably recognize him at a glance, even if you don't know his name.

On the same note, even if you don't know who Chun-Li is, chances are extremely good that if you've ever even heard of Street Fighter then you would recognize her when you see her. The same goes for Ryu and the Shotokan crew, Blanka, M. Bison, Dhalsim, on and on.

Kratos, on the other hand, is pretty much the sole image around which Sony has built the God of War franchise's knowledge base. Yes there are more and more interesting characters in the context of God of War, but for a person who doesn't know anything baout the games, Kratos himself is going to be the only guy they know. Do you expect people to recognize Cronos or Atlas by looking at them? I would think you probably don't.

Now, there's two corrolaries to this that need to be set in stone.

1. Being "iconic" and being suitable for a fighting game aren't the same thing. The Helghast is pretty much the only icon to come out of Killzone, but that doesn't mean that random bad guy #1 is necessarily the only Killzone character suitable for a Smash Bros. type of game. On the same note, Zeus would also be a good fit, in spite of the fact that he's not iconic in the same sense that Kratos is.

2. A game like this is good in that it can help bolster the iconography of a given character or series, elevating them in a way that their own series does not. Marth is much more of a Smash Bros. icon than he is a Fire Emblem icon at this point, and that's fine: he's still an iconic character, he was just built up to worldwide iconography in a different way. Was he really iconic before Smash Bros. Melee? No, not at all. Is he now? Yes.

Part of the problem of talking about iconography in Sony franchises is that their marketing for games tends to focus on the image of single characters - even Dr. Nefarious isn't iconic in comparison to Ratchet or Clank, and he has much more personality than the good guys.

So yeah, that's it. Saying "iconic" isn't saying "good", it's saying "characters around whose image a series is built". I think in that sense you will very much agree that Sony's band of iconic characters is more narrow than the likes of Nintendo, Capcom, Namco, or Konami - but that a game like this also has the potential to establish different characters as icons, bringing them to the forefront for more and more people.



Fighting cars are cool I remember fighting vipers and that had a Daytona USA car in the roster .



Research shows Video games  help make you smarter, so why am I an idiot

What would be the interest of playing a character from an already established fighting franchise?

No what's so amazing about Super Smash Bros. is that I get to fight with Peach or Jigglypuff.

It's also about which characters are hot right now. Every characters from Tekken or Soul Calibur are absolutely not hot lately.

But playing with Nathan Drake or Kratos is the reason why I would be excited for a Sony fighting game.