Euphoria14 said: iasta said: the fans of both platforms agree its a rip off. the developper himself said it's a rip off so i still wonder why still discuss that. by the way this doesn't effect the value of the game and the pleasure of gamers with it. It is discussed because for some reason we have gamers who are offended by it. Reminds me of back during the days of 3D Dot Game Heroes.

This is so hypocritical, just one post earlier you were saying that it was inspired and not a rip-off. How do you jump like that?

Euphoria14 said: Chandler said: Destructoid gets ignored because it's a piece of shit garbage site that always goes where the most controversy is because being the Armond White of video games is a massive cash generator. Also, those who are in the Beta have a certain interest in this game succeeding because they are most likely Sony fans if they have gone through the trouble of signing up for a beta. The average run of the mill joe schmoe does not participate in betas. It's the same with Kid Icarus and Gravity Rush, where both camps would SWEAR that those games are legitimate games of the forever and ever. See what I mean? It's always some sort of conspiracy and you people always have some bogus excuse for why something that goes against your opinion does not count.

Did you even read the article? It's a piece of shit honestly. The article is over-euphemised (that much), makes constant references to super smash bros, and has its points all wrong. If you really want, since you keep referring to it, I will make a thread demolishing it, and no I haven't even played the beta. The article is that bad that I could deconstruct it without having even played the game.

 

All this whining is why gamers are never taken seriously. One day Nintendo fans cry about IGN, then Gamespot, next stop we get Destructoid. Every site is nothing more than an entire group of journalists who have it out for Nintendo.

Whining? The article is crap, period.

And don't get me started on whining all I have to say is Uncharted 3 metacritic and the criticism you pretend dies.

 

Destructoid's opinion means much more than Hideki Kamiya who never even touched the damn game. Why don't you go shit all over Kamiya? Isn't he obviously just going for the controversial route to bring more attention to his WiiU title?

I haven't played the game either and I trust my opinion immensely because I know for a fact that you don't have to play the game to know how it plays, that is basic logic. All you need is to see the controller map, some videos of gameplay and badang you're done.

Also, Kamiya made some of the best games (DMC) and he and other devs in the industry (the tekken guy) are speaking out and it was about damn time.

arcane_chaos said: JWeinCom said: arcane_chaos said: I wouldn't go as far as a rip-off because Sony hasn't really taken anything from Nintendo(let me explain) I define a rip-off as a game that steals from another franchise from characters/character models/story/world design in PSABR I don't see any red capped-looking plumber, some brown-colored looking ape, or some green capped warrior, and as of yet I haven't seen any map that looks like anything from the SSB world I would definitely call it a copy-cat game, what Nintendo did with SSB hasn't been dove into, I didn't hear all this outcry(somewhat) when S-E did "Dissidia" or when NB did "Tales of VS." true there fighting style is way different then SSB or PSASBR, but they had the same goal in mind: to give their fans somewhat for a what-if scenario of seeing the most noticeable characters of their franchise to fight along side or against each other. PSASBR seems like it will have more than just one mode, so that might be something Superbot is doing to further distance themselves apart and give their fans more to look forward to. So... it doesn't count if you rip off game mechanics?  Your definition is incredibly narrow. As for Dissidia, there was no outcry because it was not even the slightest bit similar to Smash Bros.  Nobody is claiming that Nintendo has the sole rights to make a crossover fighter.  They weren't the first and they won't be the last.  The big difference is that Square didn't take Brawl's mechanics and swap Mario for Cloud.  They created a unique fighting engine that made sense considering their franchises heritage, implemented their own visual style, and shifted the emphasis of the fighting franchise to accomodate story. Oh, and Smash Brothers has way more than one mode.  I think it has like, the most modes of just about any fighter O_o... and thus is why I call it a copy-cat game; we can't call every game the emulates another gameplay mechanics as a rip-off...should we critize every game that copied Mario, Halo: combat evolved, God of war(or DMC for that matter) or Uncharted 2's(or Gears of War) mechanics? I'm not saying PSASBA is some newly creative IP, but it will do enough that it can seperate itself from the competition. and as I said in my previous post, Dissidia's gemaplay is vastly different from SSB, I was just stating that Sony has the same concept in mind; of giving their fans a little fanservice, is it that bad that they copied SSB's gameplay?

It really depends on the case.  Let's take Uncharted 2 and Gears of War.  They obviously take Gears of War's cover based combat system, but that's about where the similarities end.  Unhcarted 2 features an entirely different aesthetic, an emphasis on exploration, and many different mechanics (i.e. not being a team based affair).  So that's not a ripoff.

In the case of ASBR, they took just about everything wholesale from Smash, down to the airdodge mechanics and art style.  Aside from KOing people via super moves, people seem to struggle to find any differences.

If Sony wants to give fan service, that's great.  But they could do so creatively.  Take Smash Bros itself for instance.  If Nintendo just made a Street Fighter clone with Kirby and Mario, would the series be what it is today?  Instead, they made their own unique take on the 2-D fighter and created the most successful fighting franchise out there.

most successful fighting game franchise out there and you imply they were first to make a 4 player brawler. HAHA!

This reminds me of the ppl who think apple created the touch screen phone. :D

ikol said: most successful fighting game franchise out there and you imply they were first to make a 4 player brawler. HAHA! This reminds me of the ppl who think apple created the touch screen phone. :D

Nintendo invented gaming....didn't you know?

happydolphin said: enditall727 said: realsubzero said: Im a gaming fan, not a nintendo or sony fan, just like gaming in general. but this really bugs me. sony especially, they seem to just rip off everyone elses ideas without bringing anything original to the table. although im sure nintendo have ripped off other peoples ideas too. id like to know if instances of that, i havent heard of any, but im sure they must have, as they all do it. and this is what its all about people :) nobody cares when a company copy's UNLESS its Sony you dont know anything that Nintendo copied because nobody in the media talks about it enough for a fan like you to know about it. It is almost impossible for a Sony fan to NOT know what Sony supposedly copied because EVERYBODY talks about and it gets blasted in the media. It definitely matters more when it is a main competitor, of course. Why wouldn't it though. If some random stranger somewhere you have no idea about copies an idea of your in a market that doesn't affect yours in any way, but then say your brother comes along and makes something almost cookie cutter yours and attempts to take some of your market, isn't that worse? I would say so. Regardless as I said there are pros and cons to this, all I'm asking for is cut the denial crap guys.

but they ARE main competitors though.. Im only talking about Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft when i say "company" and they would all fall in the "main competitor" category. nobody cares when M$ or Nintendo copy from a competitor but its world war 3 when Sony does it. i see what you mean with the whole "market" thing but now that i think about it, i dont remember seeing too many PlayStation fans getting mad about Microsoft infiltrating the PlayStations market with the Xbox. Playstation and Nintendo have pretty much always been in their own respective markets since day 1 in this gaming universe except for the select few switchs like Final Fantasy and the fewer than now multiplat games. Nobody complained when M$ greatly and BLATANTLY pursued the Playstations market right? ok. I'm sure you and everybody in this thread can remember when Sony attempted to do something similar when they tried to get a just a small piece of Nintendo Wiis market with the PS Move right? ok now I want you ask yourself if people complained when Sony attempted to do this. just take a wild guess ;). Now everybody knows that Nintendo is CLEARLY getting ready to expand on the PS market that M$ infiltrated with the Wii U so could you tell me how many people you've seen complain about Wii U doing this so far? nobody you say?? yea, same as me ;). I'm just saying that nobody ever complains when companys do sh!t UNLESS its Sony. That's all im saying :)

Turkish said: Its sad that you have to accuse someone of trollin. I see people doing that way too much as of lately.

Yes, Sony fans included, go see for yourself

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4716050

A Nintendo fan and a Sony fan in this occurence say so. I think if a troll is spotted, he should be recognized as such, unless there really is no reason to say so.

kowenicki said: Chandler said: Ok I'll bite. I think it's definitely a rip-off. ripped-off parts: -Their mascot brawler is in 2D, just like Nintendos. Problem is, nearly all of Nintendos mascots have 2D roots so it makes sense to represent their mascots in 2D because people are familiar with them this way. Sony on the other hand actively discouraged developers for years to make 2D games on their plattform and like 99% of the fighters in battle royale have 3D roots. It makes no fucking sense to represent their "mascots" this way other than the convience of knowing how it is done (from Nintendo). -The whole physics engine seems to be a massive rip-off. This is the part that really grinds my gears because they were really shameless with this one. The double jumps, the floatiness of the jumps, the way attacks impact other players just screams smash brothers. There is really no denying possible, watch that one side by side video and if you don't see it then you are blind, sorry. -The whole visual representation looks like they really really want to attract Smash Bros. fans with this. -Some of the characters have a really similar moveset. -The fricken Developer had a Wii hooked up to a PC in one of those Webcam shots or whatever that was. Seriously, this is either stupidity or mockery. Unique stuff: -All new characters (duh!) -All new concept of 1-upping Nintendos concept of stage design. A stage inspired by one franchise? Bah, we have stages inspired by TWO franchises! -They were showing off a game mode with new rules: no ring outs, filling up meter to K.O. your enemies with super attacks. So every character has pretty much 3 attacks to beat an enemy, everything else is meter dancing. -There will be more game modes and custom options. I would not be surprised if there will be either a mode that is really similar to how smash plays or options that are conveniently placed to customize the game in a more smash bros like direction. That about does it.

I was thinking the same thing. The game is obviously a rip-off of SSBB. There's no doubt about it.

happydolphin said: Kantor said: A rip-off? No. It just so happens that Brawl's genre has been largely ignored by other companies because they don't have enough mascot characters (Ubisoft or EA might be able to manage it as well). -They went to great pains to completely change the scoring system -There are multiple levels of finisher -I don't believe it has any of the minigames (could be wrong here) It's certainly inspired and heavily influenced by Smash Bros. But it's no more a Smash Bros clone than Dawn of War is a Starcraft clone or Call of Duty is a Wolfenstein 3D clone. To those calling it a clone: what could they have done, within the genre, to make it any more different from Smash Bros? Easy, powerstone was very different. They could change the aspect ratio of their characters as compared to the level, make some characters taller rather than chibi. Did they need to be Sony mascots? What about whole new characters with unique moves? Why double-jump, why not some form of temporary gliding? Or a SFIII style high jump? Could there be some kind of items they could pick up what are integrated in the victory system? What about smaller levels, and more intricate levels like temple? Why not full 2D or Stree-fighter IV style graphics? Is rolling in all fighting games? Did it have to be 2D, what about isometric? What about 3D? For every alternative, the choice was in almost every case to go the smash route. Honestly I have no problem with it, I just have an issue when the debate can't go past a baseline from where more discussion could be made. Here's a follow-up question: How awesome is Shadow of the Colossus, despite the sense of adventure it shares with the legend of Zelda? How did it get there, was it by basing itself off of another idea? I wouldn't think so. Would we have had SotC if the PABR approach was taken? Probably not. What ideas could have been birthed had the studio taken a different approach, given the caliber of Sony's studios? COULD SONY AFFORD IT? (in caps to show that we are a sales chart and haven't even gotten to that level yet) I just hope we can all evolve, all of us, and get to topics that are actually interesting when it comes to topics like these. This is constructive criticism.

Fair point. They went with what was known to work rather than taking risks, which is understandable.

Shadow of the Colossus was a very risky game. It was unlike anything else that had been developed. It could have been hated by everyone, but it wasn't, and it ended up being one of the best games on the PS2. We do need people like Team Ico to push boundaries and take risks like that. But not everyone can do it. Hell, look at how much trouble it's giving them with The Last Guardian, and that game isn't even out yet.

Though they did need to be Sony mascots, since that's the central premise of the game. That in itself is not copying.

But it's not a rip-off, and it's not a clone. It's a fairly safe game which is inspired a great deal by Smash Bros. That weird Arab Uncharted ripoff was a ripoff, and looked terrible to boot.

JWeinCom said: arcane_chaos said: JWeinCom said: arcane_chaos said: I wouldn't go as far as a rip-off because Sony hasn't really taken anything from Nintendo(let me explain) I define a rip-off as a game that steals from another franchise from characters/character models/story/world design in PSABR I don't see any red capped-looking plumber, some brown-colored looking ape, or some green capped warrior, and as of yet I haven't seen any map that looks like anything from the SSB world I would definitely call it a copy-cat game, what Nintendo did with SSB hasn't been dove into, I didn't hear all this outcry(somewhat) when S-E did "Dissidia" or when NB did "Tales of VS." true there fighting style is way different then SSB or PSASBR, but they had the same goal in mind: to give their fans somewhat for a what-if scenario of seeing the most noticeable characters of their franchise to fight along side or against each other. PSASBR seems like it will have more than just one mode, so that might be something Superbot is doing to further distance themselves apart and give their fans more to look forward to. So... it doesn't count if you rip off game mechanics?  Your definition is incredibly narrow. As for Dissidia, there was no outcry because it was not even the slightest bit similar to Smash Bros.  Nobody is claiming that Nintendo has the sole rights to make a crossover fighter.  They weren't the first and they won't be the last.  The big difference is that Square didn't take Brawl's mechanics and swap Mario for Cloud.  They created a unique fighting engine that made sense considering their franchises heritage, implemented their own visual style, and shifted the emphasis of the fighting franchise to accomodate story. Oh, and Smash Brothers has way more than one mode.  I think it has like, the most modes of just about any fighter O_o... and thus is why I call it a copy-cat game; we can't call every game the emulates another gameplay mechanics as a rip-off...should we critize every game that copied Mario, Halo: combat evolved, God of war(or DMC for that matter) or Uncharted 2's(or Gears of War) mechanics? I'm not saying PSASBA is some newly creative IP, but it will do enough that it can seperate itself from the competition. and as I said in my previous post, Dissidia's gemaplay is vastly different from SSB, I was just stating that Sony has the same concept in mind; of giving their fans a little fanservice, is it that bad that they copied SSB's gameplay? It really depends on the case.  Let's take Uncharted 2 and Gears of War.  They obviously take Gears of War's cover based combat system, but that's about where the similarities end.  Unhcarted 2 features an entirely different aesthetic, an emphasis on exploration, and many different mechanics (i.e. not being a team based affair).  So that's not a ripoff. In the case of ASBR, they took just about everything wholesale from Smash, down to the airdodge mechanics and art style.  Aside from KOing people via super moves, people seem to struggle to find any differences. If Sony wants to give fan service, that's great.  But they could do so creatively.  Take Smash Bros itself for instance.  If Nintendo just made a Street Fighter clone with Kirby and Mario, would the series be what it is today?  Instead, they made their own unique take on the 2-D fighter and created the most successful fighting franchise out there.

why I think PSASBR, it getting the rip-off tag is clearly because the what nintendo has created hasn't really been explored: theies no deny that Sony copied Nintendo's battle system, but then what makes Street Fighter/Tekken/Mortal/Blazblue so different from each other? all basically have: light/medium/heavy hit/block but the buttons are somewhat changed,(albeit Tekken moves in a 3 demensional space) or the standard L1 R1 to shoot or O to chrouch/hold to prone formual that has been ABUSED this gen.

I think are line of what a rip-off means come from are own understanding of the word, you can call PSASBR a rip-off and it will affect me none, and I will respect your opinion.