• Register
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • @NeoGAF
  • Like

TheBaronOfNA
Banned
(08-06-2012, 03:59 AM)

Originally Posted by Gospel

Platform fans are bipolar, no surprise there.

I like Kamiya's but I just happen to disagree with him and his Twitter persona?
CrisKre
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:00 AM)
CrisKre's Avatar

Originally Posted by TDLink

Oh I completely agree. In glorious fantasy land everything would be new and fun (we can still have sequels of course), without having a dozen franchises that are essentially the same with minor tweaks in a given genre. Trying new things is how new genres and subgenres come to exist in the first place.



I wouldn't use those examples, they are far to specific one way or the other. Although, that video someone posted up there trying to demonstrated the differences did try to use specifics like that (without using those so as to not hurt their point) and that to me is laughable. Being able to grab a ledge in one game and not grab a ledge in the other doesn't really make that large of a difference at a glance. (I'm well aware that on a technical level this is a big deal for pro players but casual players...the core purchaser for either game...doesn't/won't notice, or care).

The thing is, personally, this games cross the line as far as how blantant they are with their plagersim as far as I'm concerned. It just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I can tolerate similarities in games to an extent, but shameless lack of any creative force is a bit offensive for me.
And yes, I thought the clear street fighter rip offs of the nineties where embarrassing too. Some games back then where much worse offenders than others.
BosSin
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:01 AM)
BosSin's Avatar
So what if it's a rip off

/my two cents
ED Cantu
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:01 AM)
ED Cantu's Avatar
I can't believe all the posts that tweet generated, all of this just because he shared his opinion about the game?

Anyway I think he is right so I agree with him.
Risette
A Good Citizen
(08-06-2012, 04:01 AM)
Risette's Avatar

Originally Posted by Meier

I fucking love your avatar. FLCL is the best.

I swear I didn't change it a few minutes ago because you praised it. Weird coincidence.

The bad transparency cutout I did kept bothering me though. I'll bring it back one day!
rouken
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:01 AM)
rouken's Avatar
cmon guys you're better than this. don't let your feelings take you over.

people keep blabbering that it plays different or whatever doesn't really get the point of kamiya's tweet. it's a ripoff, plain and simple. how did you guys think this was proposed to sony executives in the first place? it was greenlit because of the success that smash attained and sony knew that. that's what kamiya was pointing out, that they are ripping off just to make easy money. sure they can improve it and change some aspects of it because that's the beauty of ripping off. so don't defend it with "it's different" statements, it's not. when the game was in the planning process, it's not. they are looking at smash and thinking how they could make a game like that.

just like what kamiya said, "use your brain."
CrisKre
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:01 AM)
CrisKre's Avatar

Originally Posted by TheBaronOfNA

I like Kamiya's but I just happen to disagree with him and his Twitter persona?

So you think he's creative, but you don't understand how as a developer he has a problem with another developer being ripped off by another company?
I don't get it.
TheBaronOfNA
Banned
(08-06-2012, 04:03 AM)

Originally Posted by ED Cantu

I can't believe all the posts that tweet generated, all of this just because he shared his opinion about the game?

So we can't disagree specially when he throws the "no moral" card?
Chuck Norris
Banned
(08-06-2012, 04:03 AM)
PSABR is about as much a rip off of Smash Bros as Ninja Gaiden is of Devil May Cry, as much as Okami is of Zelda, or as much as P100 is of Pikmin

This is coming frm someone who expected it to play just like Smash Bros before playing it
zroid
Banned
(08-06-2012, 04:03 AM)
Okay, here's the thing. I'm going to try and defend/explain Kamiya's comments.

He calls PSAS a "rip-off"; he hasn't played the game. He calls it amoral; "rip-offs" are commonly accepted in this industry as a part of iteration.

Except, that's not really what he's talking about. To use the Okami example that a lot of people have been tossing around, proclaiming it a rip-off of Zelda... well, there's a big difference here. Okami is admittedly a Zelda clone, but it has new ideas of its own. And, indeed, PSAS has a few new ideas too. It's derivative, sure, but not in a bad way.

The problem is best summarized here:

What Sony is doing is attempting to leech off of SSB's popularity and give people the impression that it's the same game, but on PS3. In fact, everything about the game from the way it was revealed to this youtube video evidences the likely scenario that Sony pitched this game to be a SSB clone. That was probably their goal from the start, and above all else, they seem to want people to think it's Sony Smash Bros. This is how they're selling it.

Okami may have been similar to Zelda in key ways, but they didn't rely on Zelda to sell the game. The fact that Kamiya is so easily able to jump to the conclusion that PSAS is identical to SSB is indicative of the fact that this is what Sony wants us to believe.

I respect what Superbot is doing. They're adapting a game design which they love, putting a spin on it, and making it their own. Of course, how would anyone else know that? If Sony wanted to emphasize PSAS's differences from SSB they would have. Instead we're forced to play the game for ourselves merely to see that it isn't a carbon copy.

That's why Kamiya doesn't have much respect for Sony in all of this. Rather than try to make a pretty cool game that stands on its own merits (which it probably does), they're trying to make an SSB clone which happens to be a cool game in spite of that.
Misterhbk
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:03 AM)
Misterhbk's Avatar

Originally Posted by Figboy79

How about this:

I've been gaming since 1985 on Nintendo systems. I cut my teeth on the NES. I loved the SNES and I loved the Sega Genesis. Both equally, and with crazy fanboyism.

I was turned on to PlayStation in high school, when it released in 1995, and I was 16 years old.

I didn't play Smash Bros until Melee hit on the Gamecube, because I never owned an N64. The N64 and the Wii are the only Nintendo home consoles I never owned. After playing the Wii U at E3, I'm actually kind of sold on it, and will pick one up eventually. Since I just dropped $300 on a Vita earlier this year, I probably won't buy the Wii U during it's launch period, but I WILL buy one, and probably when the new Smash comes out, if not before.

You can be a fan of PlayStation AND Nintendo. Your comment was really silly, and makes no sense. The same argument can be said about the Smash games, and it wouldn't make it any less silly.

This game, like Smash Bros, is a fan service game. It's GOING to excite the fans of PlayStation, like Smash excites the fans of Nintendo. Why is that so hard for some people to accept. PlayStation has fans. Many of which have been gaming on PlayStation platforms for over 17 years, in the same way that I've been gaming on Nintendo platforms for 27 years.

If you aren't a Nintendo or PlayStation fan, I can't really see how you'd be terribly excited about either Smash OR PBR outside of maybe being intrigued by the combat systems in both games, and even then, you'd have to be some level of fighting game fan to even bother going that far.

Say it with me: Fan Service. This game...is...fan...service. Just like Smash Bros is fan service. Marvel vs Capcom is ALSO fan service. Most cross over fighters are.

And you my friend are the winner.
CrisKre
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:03 AM)
CrisKre's Avatar

Originally Posted by BosSin

So what if it's a rip off

/my two cents

You, as a consumer, may not have a problem with it. He, as a developer, feels strongly about it.
TDLink
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:04 AM)
TDLink's Avatar

Originally Posted by Figboy79

How about this:

I've been gaming since 1985 on Nintendo systems. I cut my teeth on the NES. I loved the SNES and I loved the Sega Genesis. Both equally, and with crazy fanboyism.

I was turned on to PlayStation in high school, when it released in 1995, and I was 16 years old.

I didn't play Smash Bros until Melee hit on the Gamecube, because I never owned an N64. The N64 and the Wii are the only Nintendo home consoles I never owned. After playing the Wii U at E3, I'm actually kind of sold on it, and will pick one up eventually. Since I just dropped $300 on a Vita earlier this year, I probably won't buy the Wii U during it's launch period, but I WILL buy one, and probably when the new Smash comes out, if not before.

You can be a fan of PlayStation AND Nintendo. Your comment was really silly, and makes no sense. The same argument can be said about the Smash games, and it wouldn't make it any less silly.

This game, like Smash Bros, is a fan service game. It's GOING to excite the fans of PlayStation, like Smash excites the fans of Nintendo. Why is that so hard for some people to accept. PlayStation has fans. Many of which have been gaming on PlayStation platforms for over 17 years, in the same way that I've been gaming on Nintendo platforms for 27 years.

If you aren't a Nintendo or PlayStation fan, I can't really see how you'd be terribly excited about either Smash OR PBR outside of maybe being intrigued by the combat systems in both games, and even then, you'd have to be some level of fighting game fan to even bother going that far.

Say it with me: Fan Service. This game...is...fan...service. Just like Smash Bros is fan service. Marvel vs Capcom is ALSO fan service. Most cross over fighters are.

I think taking sides as a hardcore fanboy of either Nintendo or Sony has always been a pretty stupid stance to take. Why not just enjoy everything? Even if you can't afford to have multiple systems it really isn't a good reason to hate on the stuff you can't play or don't want to play for whatever reason. Alas, this is a core debate to video game discussion that will likely never go away.

I will say though (and this truly is all fanboyism aside) it isn't just the easy and accessible game design of Smash Bros. that makes it so appealing but also the character selection. Now, I don't mean obscure stuff no one really knows like Marth, or Ness, or even Captain Falcon. Smash Bros. does however have some characters instantly recognizable by almost anyone, including (And most importantly) casual gamers and people who are essentially not gamers at all but will play smash bros every now and then. Ie, Mario, Luigi, Donkey Kong, "that guy from Zelda/Zelda (referring to Link)". Playstation All Stars does not have any characters like this that are pervasive in culture and have become part of the mainstream mind-space, which will undoubtedly hurt it in terms of appeal to non-gamers.
CambriaRising
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:05 AM)
CambriaRising's Avatar

Originally Posted by CrisKre

You, as a consumer, may not have a problem with it. He, as a developer, feels strongly about it.

And you, as a Kamiya fan, feel the need to defend the man when he clearly does not care what people think.


Fascinating.
TheBaronOfNA
Banned
(08-06-2012, 04:05 AM)

Originally Posted by CrisKre

So you think he's creative, but you don't understand how as a developer he has a problem with another developer being ripped off by another company?
I don't get it.

Because that is how the industry has grown?

And he "ripped off" Zelda?

Because he and Sony will not be the last ones to Rip Nintendo and other developers?
Laughing Banana
Weeping Pickle
(08-06-2012, 04:05 AM)
Laughing Banana's Avatar
"Inspired" is such a popular word of euphemism.
CrisKre
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:07 AM)
CrisKre's Avatar

Originally Posted by Figboy79

How about this:

I've been gaming since 1985 on Nintendo systems. I cut my teeth on the NES. I loved the SNES and I loved the Sega Genesis. Both equally, and with crazy fanboyism.

I was turned on to PlayStation in high school, when it released in 1995, and I was 16 years old.

I didn't play Smash Bros until Melee hit on the Gamecube, because I never owned an N64. The N64 and the Wii are the only Nintendo home consoles I never owned. After playing the Wii U at E3, I'm actually kind of sold on it, and will pick one up eventually. Since I just dropped $300 on a Vita earlier this year, I probably won't buy the Wii U during it's launch period, but I WILL buy one, and probably when the new Smash comes out, if not before.

You can be a fan of PlayStation AND Nintendo. Your comment was really silly, and makes no sense. The same argument can be said about the Smash games, and it wouldn't make it any less silly.

This game, like Smash Bros, is a fan service game. It's GOING to excite the fans of PlayStation, like Smash excites the fans of Nintendo. Why is that so hard for some people to accept. PlayStation has fans. Many of which have been gaming on PlayStation platforms for over 17 years, in the same way that I've been gaming on Nintendo platforms for 27 years.

If you aren't a Nintendo or PlayStation fan, I can't really see how you'd be terribly excited about either Smash OR PBR outside of maybe being intrigued by the combat systems in both games, and even then, you'd have to be some level of fighting game fan to even bother going that far.

Say it with me: Fan Service. This game...is...fan...service. Just like Smash Bros is fan service. Marvel vs Capcom is ALSO fan service. Most cross over fighters are.

Fan service games are awesome. The problem is they made a fan service game that LOOKS LIKE A CARBON COPY of their competitions fan service game. I'd love it if they had built a fan service game that lived by it's own merits, since I really like some of playstations properties. This is not that game.
OnimaruXLR
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:08 AM)
OnimaruXLR's Avatar
Devil's Advocacy: There could be an original idea with some clever twists on the Smash formula in there, and maybe Sony is presenting the game poorly, in a way that invites comparisons which will naturally make Super Sony Bros. look creatively bankrupt and clunky.

My Actual Opinion: This shit is less clone-ier than Fighter's History
Blood Diamonds
Banned
(08-06-2012, 04:08 AM)

Originally Posted by TheBaronOfNA

I like Kamiya's but I just happen to disagree with him and his Twitter persona?

Nobody was saying anything about you.
Nodody.
Chuck Norris
Banned
(08-06-2012, 04:08 AM)

Originally Posted by CrisKre

Fan service games are awesome. The problem is they made a fan service game that LOOKS LIKE A CARBON COPY of their competitions fan service game. I'd love it if they had built a fan service game that lived by it's own merits, since I really like some of playstations properties. This is not that game.

They have. Don't judge a book by its cover
KevinCow
Banned
(08-06-2012, 04:09 AM)
KevinCow's Avatar

Originally Posted by CrisKre

And yes, I thought the clear street fighter rip offs of the nineties where embarrassing too. Some games back then where much worse offenders than others.

And yet, the competition pushed Capcom to do an even better job with future versions of their fighters. Some of them even introduced good new ideas that Capcom themselves adopted. The many Street Fighter 2 ripoffs helped legitimize fighting games as a genre. While many of these ripoffs were complete garbage, they had an overall positive effect on the genre and gaming in general.

So again, I ask: why are these kinds of ripoffs so morally objectionable?
DeviousAngel
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:09 AM)
DeviousAngel's Avatar
Ripoff... no ripoff... all I know is that more games like SSB can't be a bad thing.
CrisKre
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:11 AM)
CrisKre's Avatar

Originally Posted by TheBaronOfNA

Because that is how the industry has grown?

And he "ripped off" Zelda?

Because he and Sony will not be the last ones to Rip Nintendo and other developers?

By god, it's not. This industry grows through gameplay innovation. That's what it should strive for, not your conformist view, which I personally find pretty disgusting.
Again, I already answered this, but I'd you imply that okami is a Zelda rip off on the same level that all stars is a smash rip off you are delusional or trying to push your own fan boyish agenda. I already replied why it is not. Use your brain. Jeez.
TheBaronOfNA
Banned
(08-06-2012, 04:11 AM)

Originally Posted by YoungBlade

Nobody was saying anything about you.
Nodody.

Well, I got confused as a fanboy, sorry If I just calling out the black and white generalizations around here...
CrisKre
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:12 AM)
CrisKre's Avatar

Originally Posted by Chuck Norris

They have. Don't judge a book by its cover

They haven't. I played it. I judged the book by its cover and it's content.
Tricky I Shadow
Banned
(08-06-2012, 04:13 AM)
Tricky I Shadow's Avatar
LOL, 26 pages over this? Really?
CrisKre
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:13 AM)
CrisKre's Avatar

Originally Posted by KevinCow

And yet, the competition pushed Capcom to do an even better job with future versions of their fighters. Some of them even introduced good new ideas that Capcom themselves adopted. The many Street Fighter 2 ripoffs helped legitimize fighting games as a genre. While many of these ripoffs were complete garbage, they had an overall positive effect on the genre and gaming in general.

So again, I ask: why are these kinds of ripoffs so morally objectionable?

One thing doesn't negate the other one. Rip offs are objectable still as far as he creative immorality of their makers as far as I'm concerned.
TDLink
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:14 AM)
TDLink's Avatar

Originally Posted by Zeer0id

Okay, here's the thing. I'm going to try and defend/explain Kamiya's comments.

He calls PSAS a "rip-off"; he hasn't played the game. He calls it amoral; "rip-offs" are commonly accepted in this industry as a part of iteration.

Except, that's not really what he's talking about. To use the Okami example that a lot of people have been tossing around, proclaiming it a rip-off of Zelda... well, there's a big difference here. Okami is admittedly a Zelda clone, but it has new ideas of its own. And, indeed, PSAS has a few new ideas too. It's derivative, sure, but not in a bad way.

The problem is best summarized here:



What Sony is doing is attempting to leech off of SSB's popularity and give people the impression that it's the same game, but on PS3. In fact, everything about the game from the way it was revealed to this youtube video evidences the likely scenario that Sony pitched this game to be a SSB clone. That was probably their goal from the start, and above all else, they seem to want people to think it's Sony Smash Bros. This is how they're selling it.

Okami may have been similar to Zelda in key ways, but they didn't rely on Zelda to sell the game. The fact that Kamiya is so easily able to jump to the conclusion that PSAS is identical to SSB is indicative of the fact that this is what Sony wants us to believe.

I respect what Superbot is doing. They're adapting a game design which they love, putting a spin on it, and making it their own. Of course, how would anyone else know that? If Sony wanted to emphasize PSAS's differences from SSB they would have. Instead we're forced to play the game for ourselves merely to see that it isn't a carbon copy.

That's why Kamiya doesn't have much respect for Sony in all of this. Rather than try to make a pretty cool game that stands on its own merits (which it probably does), they're trying to make an SSB clone which happens to be a cool game in spite of that.

Quoting this because I pretty much agree with all of this. I am also going to say that Okami defined itself away from Zelda in its central mechanic (drawing) for its abilities opposed to Zelda's items. These abilities were all also very different from what Zelda items can do for the most part in those games and this is very apparent just looking at it. Structurally Okami and Zelda are the same. There's a field area, there are dungeons, and there are town areas. You get an item/ability in the dungeon and you utilize it to defeat the boss at the end. The difference is Okami did new and interesting things with this formula and it is easily apparent just by glancing at the game. Apart from this topic I have never actually seen someone look at Okami and go "that's just Zelda". Everyone says PSABR is just Smash Bros for Sony. Sony even seemingly encourages this. It doesn't matter how different or not it actually is, that is the perception (and let's be honest it is not a wrong one since it is one they want to have).
TheBaronOfNA
Banned
(08-06-2012, 04:15 AM)

Originally Posted by CrisKre

By god, it's not. This industry grows through gameplay innovation.

Generally inspired by other games or developers

That's what it should strive for, not your conformist view, which I personally find pretty disgusting.

Borrow, inspiring or Ripping Off are not exactly terms for conformism.

Again, I already answered this, but I'd you imply that okami is a Zelda rip off on the same level that all stars is a smash rip off you are delusional or trying to push your own fan boyish agenda.

Fanboy Agenda?

I already replied why it is not. Use your brain. Jeez.

:(
HyperCubed4
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:15 AM)
HyperCubed4's Avatar

Originally Posted by Figboy79

This game, like Smash Bros, is a fan service game. It's GOING to excite the fans of PlayStation, like Smash excites the fans of Nintendo. Why is that so hard for some people to accept. PlayStation has fans. Many of which have been gaming on PlayStation platforms for over 17 years, in the same way that I've been gaming on Nintendo platforms for 27 years.

If you aren't a Nintendo or PlayStation fan, I can't really see how you'd be terribly excited about either Smash OR PBR outside of maybe being intrigued by the combat systems in both games, and even then, you'd have to be some level of fighting game fan to even bother going that far.

Say it with me: Fan Service. This game...is...fan...service. Just like Smash Bros is fan service. Marvel vs Capcom is ALSO fan service. Most cross over fighters are.

The fact that it is a platform fighter with Playstation's mascots is why people call it a ripoff or "uninspired". A 3D fighter like Dissidia or a 2D fighter like Street Fighter (although I'm sure Seth wants some time away from 2D fighters) could have been done, but they chose to use a platforming fighter. I think that's why people are making comments like that, and that's probably why Kamiya is making those comments, as well. Also, items randomly spawn and there are background hazards and whatnot.

I'm not saying I'm not buying it; hell, I preordered it. Mainly because of this skin, but also because I'm a fan of the Playstation consoles. Sure, Nintendo practically built my childhood, but that doesn't mean I can't enjoy kicking Sly Cooper in the head with Kratos.
Misterhbk
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:16 AM)
Misterhbk's Avatar

Originally Posted by rouken

cmon guys you're better than this. don't let your feelings take you over.

people keep blabbering that it plays different or whatever doesn't really get the point of kamiya's tweet. it's a ripoff, plain and simple. how did you guys think this was proposed to sony executives in the first place? it was greenlit because of the success that smash attained and sony knew that. that's what kamiya was pointing out, that they are ripping off just to make easy money. sure they can improve it and change some aspects of it because that's the beauty of ripping off. so don't defend it with "it's different" statements, it's not. when the game was in the planning process, it's not. they are looking at smash and thinking how they could make a game like that.

just like what kamiya said, "use your brain."

In that case, I can't wait to see the threads for the new Prince of Persia game. It was "greenlit" with God of War in mind apparently so everyone get ready to start the ripoff wars over there.

Honestly, who cares. Most people crying over it being a rip off haven't and don't plan on playing it. When Smash Wii U comes out will everyone scream it ripped off PBR's online?

Probably not because it still won't be as good. /troll

I know. I don't troll as well as Kamiya.
KevinCow
Banned
(08-06-2012, 04:17 AM)
KevinCow's Avatar

Originally Posted by CrisKre

By god, it's not. This industry grows through gameplay innovation. That's what it should strive for, not your conformist view, which I personally find pretty disgusting.

His conformist view, which you find pretty disgusting?

...The fuck?

But on the part of this quote that actually makes sense, the industry grows equally through innovation and evolution. We wouldn't be where we are today without new ideas, but we also wouldn't be where we are today without people refining and building on old ideas.

Again, I already answered this, but I'd you imply that okami is a Zelda rip off on the same level that all stars is a smash rip off you are delusional or trying to push your own fan boyish agenda. I already replied why it is not. Use your brain. Jeez.

Having played both, Okami is far more of a Zelda ripoff than All-Stars is a Smash ripoff.
Neat Machine
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:18 AM)
Neat Machine's Avatar
I guess it's just the connotations that bother me about this.


He seems to be implying that there's nothing more to this game than Smash Bros., which isn't the case. He also seems to be taking some kind of 'morality' stance against the game, which I think is really silly because it is different enough to be its own game and it's a game that people want.

It's not like PS All-Stars' purpose is to trick people into buying it instead of Smash Bros. It's meeting a demand, and it's actually doing so in a way that is more creative than I think people initially wanted.
The_Hitcher89
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:19 AM)
The_Hitcher89's Avatar
Wonder how many people have sat their typing 'Use your brain' with a smug look on their face, as though they're in on some kind of exclusive joke in this thread
CrisKre
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:19 AM)
CrisKre's Avatar

Originally Posted by TheBaronOfNA

Generally inspired by other games or developers



Borrow, inspiring or Ripping Off are not exactly terms for conformism.



Fanboy Agenda?



:(

Inspired is one thing. Riping off the concept, physics, controls, mechanics and making a few rule alterations here and there is ripping off in the most shameless manner. To be clear you are saying this game is not a rip off of smash brothers with a straight face?
Loghorn150
Banned
(08-06-2012, 04:19 AM)

Originally Posted by ~Devil Trigger~

its as much as a rip off as Tekken was to VF

While true, it was Sega's fault for not keeping the franchise relevant towards the fighting game community like Namco did with Tekken.
Platy
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:19 AM)
Platy's Avatar
As a person who would love Smash Bros even if it was like originaly intended (without the insane nintendo fanservice), all I have to say is :

Yes, PSASBR IS a Smash bros Clone.

No, this is in NO WAY a bad thing. The more smash bros clones (warning : jurassic thread), the best
Net_Wrecker
(08-06-2012, 04:20 AM)
Net_Wrecker's Avatar

Originally Posted by The_Hitcher89

Wonder how many people have sat their typing 'Use your brain' with a smug look on their face, as though they're in on some kind of exclusive joke in this thread

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost...postcount=1186

I'm mad smug right now, you have no idea
CrisKre
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:20 AM)
CrisKre's Avatar

Originally Posted by KevinCow

His conformist view, which you find pretty disgusting?

...The fuck?

But on the part of this quote that actually makes sense, the industry grows equally through innovation and evolution. We wouldn't be where we are today without new ideas, but we also wouldn't be where we are today without people refining and building on old ideas.



Having played both, Okami is far more of a Zelda ripoff than All-Stars is a Smash ripoff.

You think this game is an evolution? Really? I think is a blantant copy with some slight variations, that actually make it worse than smash. Go figure.

And yes, implying this industry grows not through original ideas but by copying others concept is conformism and disgusting to me.
Zen
Banned
(08-06-2012, 04:23 AM)
First of all you need to learn to read because you're maligning what he said.

Game design is like evolution, thousands of small mutations based upon the works of those before them, you can be disgusted with it, but you still need to deal with it. Original ideas alone do no grow the industry, and with very few exceptions, the majority of 'original ideas' are predicated upon the work and refinement of concepts done before them. This is truth with direct sequels, additions to a genre, and even games that, on the surface, seem completely original still being a response to the stimuli of the environment (look at how Katamary was made for instance).

Too bad, but you should understand that's how things are and you're fooling yourself if you think otherwise. Everything is to some degree iterative, even if it branches into something 'new'. It's more of a balance.

Originally Posted by TDLink

Kamiya is 100% correct. PSABR most certainly IS a rip off of Smash Bros. That doesn't mean it isn't doing some things differently or that it is necessarily a good thing or bad thing. But it absolutely is a rip off..like irrefutably. I do not understand the people in here actually trying to say it isn't.

It's in response to a very narrow minded group of people that try to frame that in a negative light.
gdt
blow in her face and
she'll follow you anywhere
(08-06-2012, 04:23 AM)
gdt's Avatar
Its clearly a rip-off.

Thats not all that big a deal though.
TDLink
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:23 AM)
TDLink's Avatar

Originally Posted by Fancy Corndog

I guess it's just the connotations that bother me about this.


He seems to be implying that there's nothing more to this game than Smash Bros., which isn't the case. He also seems to be taking some kind of 'morality' stance against the game, which I think is really silly because it is different enough to be its own game and it's a game that people want.

It's not like PS All-Stars' purpose is to trick people into buying it instead of Smash Bros. It's meeting a demand, and it's actually doing so in a way that is more creative than I think people initially wanted.

"Rip off" does not imply there is nothing more to something than what it is taking from. It just implies it is blatantly obvious it is taking from something. Saying that does not inherently make something good or bad, just unoriginal.

What you (and some others) are doing are putting words in his mouth and inferring other things than simply what he said.

Originally Posted by Zen

It's in response to a very narrow minded group of people that try to frame that in a negative light.

So because a statement may be construed as negative by some it is best to say it is false...even if it is true. That's stupid logic.
Neat Machine
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:25 AM)
Neat Machine's Avatar

Originally Posted by CrisKre

You think this game is an evolution? Really? I think is a blantant copy with some slight variations, that actually make it worse than smash. Go figure.

And yes, implying this industry grows not through original ideas but by copying others concept is conformism and disgusting to me.

Have you actually played this? I don't want to accuse you of lying just because you don't like the game, but you have some very odd opinions about it compared to everyone else who's played it.

Some other "slight variations" of PS All-Stars are much deeper fighting mechanics including an actual combo system.

That's not to say Smash's mechanics are shit - they're extremely fun - but I think it's definitely something worth calling an evolution.


Originally Posted by TDLink

"Rip off" does not imply there is nothing more to something than what it is taking from.

"Just a ripoff..." does though.
Chuck Norris
Banned
(08-06-2012, 04:26 AM)

Originally Posted by CrisKre

They haven't. I played it. I judged the book by its cover and it's content.

Let's put it this way, Sony wanted a product to celebrate its characters. There are plenty of games that celebrate a large cast of characters drawn from various sources, and fighting games are generally the best way to do it. But really they could have only gone a number of ways, namely a SF style game or more of a party fighter. If they had made it more like a Street Fighter game there wouldn't be droves of people out calling it a rip off. So why is it that only Smash Bros is allowed an untouchable formula? Especially when the only similarities are the way the camera works and having four characters on screen
CrisKre
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:27 AM)
CrisKre's Avatar

Originally Posted by Fancy Corndog

Have you actually played this? I don't want to accuse you of lying just because you don't like the game, but you have some very odd opinions about it compared to everyone else who's played it.

Some other "slight variations" of PS All-Stars are much deeper fighting mechanics including an actual combo system.

That's not to say Smash's mechanics are shit - they're extremely fun - but I think it's definitely something worth calling an evolution.

I have. Have you? I found smash brothers to be much more satisfying. So an evolution this game is not, to me. It has better online it seems tough.
Uno Venova
Banned
(08-06-2012, 04:29 AM)
Uno Venova's Avatar

Originally Posted by CrisKre

I have. Have you? I found smash brothers to be much more satisfying. So an evolution this game is not, to me. It has better online it seems tough.

You always seem to have one liners about these games but don't actually explain why you feel the way you do about the gameplay.
ThoughtsOfSpeaking
Banned
(08-06-2012, 04:29 AM)
ThoughtsOfSpeaking's Avatar

Originally Posted by Lindsay

A terrible evolution! I mean I still gotta give Bayonetta a "fair" try but from me super easy mode playthrough I hated it. Yet I love DMC super easy playthroughs -_-?

If your playing either DMC or bayonetta on "super easy mode" you are doing it VERY VERY VERY wrong.
TheBaronOfNA
Banned
(08-06-2012, 04:30 AM)

Originally Posted by Zeer0id



What Sony is doing is attempting to leech off of SSB's popularity and give people the impression that it's the same game, but on PS3. In fact, everything about the game from the way it was revealed to this youtube video evidences the likely scenario that Sony pitched this game to be a SSB clone. That was probably their goal from the start, and above all else, they seem to want people to think it's Sony Smash Bros. This is how they're selling it.

Except that it was shown in EVO, and they will be the last people to confuse this game as Smash Bros.

The soccer mom will probably think that is Smash Bros but there is an actual attempt to appeal to a more sophisticated community.

Okami may have been similar to Zelda in key ways, but they didn't rely on Zelda to sell the game. The fact that Kamiya is so easily able to jump to the conclusion that PSAS is identical to SSB is indicative of the fact that this is what Sony wants us to believe.

Sure that Okami doesn't look as Zelda, but as you play you say: "This part is totally inspired by Zelda". Many people has said that Allstars is kind different in its core to Smash Bros, inspired but fundamentally different.

Aesthetics and superficial concepts are different things to "core gameplay", Kamiya should know better than that.

Instead we're forced to play the game for ourselves merely to see that it isn't a carbon copy.

Forced?

That's why Kamiya doesn't have much respect for Sony in all of this. Rather than try to make a pretty cool game that stands on its own merits (which it probably does), they're trying to make an SSB clone which happens to be a cool game in spite of that.

And that is bad because? Why Kamiya can not respect that?
CrisKre
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:32 AM)
CrisKre's Avatar

Originally Posted by Chuck Norris

Let's put it this way, Sony wanted a product to celebrate its characters. There are plenty of games that celebrate a large cast of characters drawn from various sources, and fighting games are generally the best way to do it. But really they could have only gone a number of ways, namely a SF style game or more of a party fighter. If they had made it more like a Street Fighter game there wouldn't be droves of people out calling it a rip off. So why is it that only Smash Bros is allowed an untouchable formula? Especially when the only similarities are the way the camera works and having four characters on screen

Let's put it this way. There are many fighters with varying types of mechanics and gameplay. The genre has grown extensively in the twenty something years it's been relevant. There would be multiple ways to approach it. Smash bros. had only a few other games that ripped off its contents. It's not a genre IMO. People have been stating it is, I don't buy it. And moreover, there are many, many things they cold have done with a fanservice game that could make for a new and creative concept. They didn't.
Neat Machine
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:33 AM)
Neat Machine's Avatar

Originally Posted by CrisKre

I have. Have you? I found smash brothers to be much more satisfying. So an evolution this game is not, to me. It has better online it seems tough.

Deep fighting mechanics from some very notable people in the FGC is almost certainly an evolution to me.

I enjoy Smash more than I'm enjoying this beta, but for a beta it is extremely enjoyable and I expect the final game to hold its own very well- especially for the first entry.

Thread Tools