pezus said: miz1q2w3e said: Is this what you have been reduced to? Undertrackzzz? If you mean how I consider the possibility, I've always been that way. We know VGChartz were vastly off with PS3 sales, and if they had no idea how much it sold...why should we believe PSASBR numbers exactly?

Leave VGChartz alone :(

OMG the Ico mention! That's some funny stuff right there.

I find the levels of willing ignorance in this thread hilarious yet baffling. Does nobody understand how game development works? does nobody understand HOW products are made and improved? Is it really so much to ask that people UNDERSTAND that it's common practice for a game developer to see something that works and imitate it?

when Crash Team Racing game out, there was no aggressive hate-storm of gamers complaining about it being a MarioKart clone. when Castle Wolfenstein came out, you didn't see people taking up pitchforks complaining that Doom or Duke Nukem 3D were ripoffs. When Grand Theft auto came out, it was the first of its kind, then Saints Row came out and people were crying "GTA CLONE!", even though it was its own thing.

When a new genre or subgenre is created, there's ALWAYS a first entry in the genre. Nintendo is known for their longevity and strength in the industry BECAUSE they innovated so many ideas. Frankly I'm amazed that it took Sony this long to try this, and you should all be ashamed of yourself for complaining about this; your ire only shows your ignorance, foolishness, and selfishness. How in the world could you possibly play games and not understand this?

oh, right, I forgot, EVERYTHING SONY DOES IS EVIL AND MUST BE PUT UNDER A MICROSCOPE OF HYPER-INTENSE SCRUTINY!. In the last 5-7 years, it's become the cool thing to hate sony, even though they've not done anything worthy of this seething hatred. Microsoft ships a BROKEN, FAULTY console, and people get over it. Sony takes a feature away from their console to ensure it DOESN'T break (the linux support), and they get attacked by hackers resulting in the PSN being down for months.

Fuck you; gamers are such entitled shits. It's a shame I love games and gaming so much because the community is despicable. this is why I rarely post outside the Vita thread.

-moderated by amp316

tg

pezus said: People forget that you can't really be innovative if no one wants to do something similar down the line. That's called being different for the sake of being different. So, if you say Nintendo is innovative YET you say nobody should be inspired by their ideas, that imo is hypocritical.

This I can agree with. Well said.

The flipside to this though, is a company that largely only copies, it can be seen as idea-stealing, on the whole.

pezus said: happydolphin said: pezus said: People forget that you can't really be innovative if no one wants to do something similar down the line. That's called being different for the sake of being different. So, if you say Nintendo is innovative YET you say nobody should be inspired by their ideas, that imo is hypocritical. This I can agree with. Well said. The flipside to this though, is a company that largely only copies, it can be seen as idea-stealing, on the whole. Thankfully they each have their own ideas, but Nintendo seems the least receptive to incorporating advances others have made into their consoles/games (take the recent comment from Iwata about the network as an example).

I think Iwata comments are seen to say something else than originally intended. Iwata took ideas from the competition regarding online, all he wanted to say is that he didn't integrate everything, and instead added a different value-add given a different focus (Mii plaza).

But people see that as "They just want to be different", rather than "They want to offer something alternative", which can cater to a different need. Confirmity is so sought out in this industry, but for what purpose? Most gamers don't ask themselves those questions, but we do.

sales2099 said: Jay520 said: sales2099 said: This whole thread is just pure damage control and excuses that justify the poor sales . For once I wish that the fans would just own up and say: "Ya, its disapointing", rather then blaming the timing, lack of real buzz, false internet buzz, roster, justifying that it made a profit with a low budget, etc. Perhaps you didn't read the title. It says "talk about it." What do you expect. The thread's intended purpose was for people to discuss 1.) if the game has/will flopped, and 2.) why the game has flipped if it did. I think you entered this thread already convinced that Sony fans were up to no good, which is strange to be honest. Well you are doing a big part of said justifying yourself.

Define Justifying. I'm explaining to the best of my ability why the game sold so low which is what THE OP ASKS FOR. If justifying = explaining then i am guilty for responding to the OP. Simply saying "its disappointing" would be incredibly stupid because the op wants to know why.

I agree entirely with Runa. If gamers haven't gotten worse over the years, because it really is just how people are, the widening communication capabilities of the average joe has given ignorance and oppression a stronger voice. Maybe you've heard of the concept of Group Think, where the decision making process degrades as the size of the group increases? That goes the same for the internet. dsgrue3, you mentioned the Dunning Kruger effect in another thread, this is happening but on a large scale.

People are writing their thoughts all over the internet and reading opinion. Reading and writing is a rather solo individual experience, even if others are involved in the dialogue it is far different that talking to someone in person. These interactions are hardly conversational and if people are addressed for misconception or falsehoods they can easily dismiss it, ignore it, or deny it and suffer little to no repercussion. This is exactly the Dunning Kruger effect of the unskilled overestimating their capacities due to the lack of mistake acknowledgement. Place that upon the worlds greatest source of information and we are developing a culture of ignoramuses. They believe what they want to believe instead of seeking truth.

Bias opinion has always existed, but never have we been able to spread opinion on such a large scale. It is affecting the market, politics, everything. Misinformation on the internet is having a profound effect on our world yet the individual, blinded by the Dunning Kruger effect don't buy that they have any effect.

JWeinCom said: Jay520 said: JWeinCom said: Hmmmmmmm... So Sony released a derivative fighting game with a poor roster and a lack of polish and its sales are poor. Whodathunk. The game might reach 1.5 M. Maybe 2M if you want to count bundles. Ok for the average game. For a game that features all of Sony's biggest franchises, and was their big release for the holiday... kind of sad. Edit:  What's with this new IP rationalization?  Calling this a new IP is maybe technically correct, but willfully dishonest.  When a game launches with 20 supposedly well known characters that should negate a huge portion of the trepidation most new IPs face.  This isn't some risky obscure new title... Huh? Perhaps I phrased that poorly, but the point is that this game has characters like Kratos, Drake, Sack Boy, and a bunch of other Sony's main franchises.  So, it instantly has far more name recognition than something like Dishonored or Catherine.   And no, that does not negate the roster sucking :)

Aside from Nintendo, since when were mere characters strong enough to negate the disadvantage of being a new IP? Sure, consumers may recognize the characters, but that's only a tiny part of the game. That doesn't mean they're going to be convinced to buy the game. There are much more important gameplay factors. The game could be crap from a consumer's perspective and that's why its treated like a new IP.

The characters in PABR may be slightly recognizable but the actual game is not. So I'd expect a low opening just like I'd expect a low opening for a game nearly every film-to-video game adaptation, or a game like DC Universe, even if they have memorable characters. Merely having memorable characters isn't enough to encourage consumers to risk their money like its an established franchise. Consumers still know nothing about how the game plays, which is the most influential factor in the game's enjoyment.

Not to mention Sony doesn't have a single character with the popularity of say...Mario, Master Chief, etc. Kratos and Nathan Drake are the biggest characters in the game and they are not big characters at all.

I think PASBR is a missed opportunity for SCE, indipendently on how successfull the game will be.
It's clear their intention was to try replicating SSB success on Ps3, and doing so by putting a bunch of (not very) famous PS characters in a single brawl game. My question is, why did they have to replicate the "Nintendo characters" strategy? I think it would have been much better if they opted for a completely new brawl IP, using new characters instead of "all-stars".

From a gameplay point of view, this decision would have given game designers more freedom. They would have been able to make character and moves expecially designed for the purpose of brawling, instead of adapting characters taken from totally different fileds. They would have been able to add more player customization or RPG elements; on the other hand the chioce of "famuos" is limiting since you can't alter too much intellectual properties.

From a marketing point of view it may seem better to use famous characters but I have my sincere doubts about it. Sure, for Nintendo who has characters like Mario, Link and Pikachu it is an obvious choice.
SCE, on the other hand, doesn't have very popular characters (except for Kratos maybe, which is uncomparable to Mario anyway) but more importantly, they have never been too attached to characters. On the contrary SCE has always been about creating new characters, new stories, new IPs and that's not considered as a weakness but as a strenght by both the media and Sony fans.

I'm not into judging the final work of the developer, but everything about PASBR presentation (starting from the terrible -imo- name) made it look like a cheap SSB ripoff, a game without its own identity.
Imo if they made (and presented) it as a brand new IP it would have gathered more (and more positive) attention from both gamers and the media, so, in the end, it wold have sold more copies.