• Register
  • TOS
  • Privacy
  • @NeoGAF
  • Like

TDLink
Member
(08-06-2012, 03:33 AM)
TDLink's Avatar

Originally Posted by Fancy Corndog

"Just a ripoff..." does though.

Perhaps. It largely indicates though that he hasn't dug deeper into the game's mechanics to find the differences and has judged it based on what it inherently looks like...which is Smash Bros. There really isn't anything wrong with that assessment. If there is something the average person compares your product to inherently just by looking at it you have a problem and need to market it better (unless that is your goal of course in order to increase your sales).

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 not kid ourselves, the similarities don't stop at the amount of characters and the camera. They could have picked other formulas than just SF or Smash also. They could have alternatively changed up the smash formula in a very visible way (like how about teams and/or tag-ins ala MvC?).
CrisKre
Member
(08-06-2012, 03:34 AM)
CrisKre's Avatar

Originally Posted by upJTboogie

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.

I did multiple times.
RockTurtle
Member
(08-06-2012, 03:37 AM)
RockTurtle's Avatar
he could have simply said "it doesn't look interesting to me".

and i would agree. BUT I LOVE ALL THE DU-RA-MA! given some people can't understand his twitter persona!
NoirVisage
Banned
(08-06-2012, 03:37 AM)

Originally Posted by Laughing Banana

"Inspired" is such a popular word of euphemism.

redundant statement is redundant.
Noi
Member
(08-06-2012, 03:38 AM)
Noi's Avatar

Originally Posted by CrisKre

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.

...The same way PSBR has it's super system, while SSB has a very different Ringout KO system?
lunchwithyuzo
Banned
(08-06-2012, 03:40 AM)

Originally Posted by KevinCow

Did people freak out this much the first time a game copied Street Fighter's special move inputs?

Capcom actually sued Data East for their SF2 clone (Fighter's History).

I doubt Nintendo gives a shit about this game, though they've also sued over clones before (Emblem Saga).
TDLink
Member
(08-06-2012, 03:40 AM)
TDLink's Avatar

Originally Posted by TheBaronOfNA

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.

That really means nothing. Catering a game to the EVO/pro FGC crowd in the first place is not a good recipe for success. They aren't all that large and really primarily stick to only a few games...most of which are new iterations in decade+ old franchises. They also generally have the opinion that Smash Bros. is not worthy of their time. Without agreeing or disagreeing with that, I don't think putting "one of their own" (clockwork) on the PSABR team as a community manager (ie, he really puts in little in terms of input to the development) is actually going to pull the wool over most of their eyes and suddenly have them accept this game with open arms when they have been highly against Smash Bros forever. Especially when some of the key differentiators from that other game are actually more away from what they like (for example, how PSABR handles damage/life and kills).
Riposte
Member
(08-06-2012, 03:40 AM)
Riposte's Avatar
Kamiya is very amusing, but I don't take his gaming opinion very seriously lol. Game developers rarely have the experience and time to give game criticism and Kamiya seems like an extreme example of that ("nothing"). In any case, he is hilarious in at least his conduct alone.

The problem with calling something a rip off is that the term is best used for counterfeit goods (as it relates to theft). Even if you are using the word in a hyperbolic manner, it doesn't really apply. There are distinctly creative differences to be found in All-Stars. Stuff more important than "They both use characters based on characters from a multitude of games!" (is that seriously where we are at with videogame criticism? lol)

For example one of the most important differences between Super Smash Bros and other fighting games is how opponents are defeated. If we borrow the warped logic at play, this is why SSB is not a rip-off. All-Stars is entirely different in that aspect, immediately separating it from both Street Fighter/King of Fighters/Mortal Kombat/Guilty Gear/etc etc etc and Super Smash Bros. Because of this, people play All-Stars differently than Super Smash Bros (which at the end of the day is what matters most). I think you see this most of all in free-for-all battles.

That aside, there just isn't a lot of consistency being put into this. PSASBR is without a doubt based on SSB, however it is by no means egregious and generic (assuming you paid attention to it, which Kamiya didn't and I imagine many don't). I've noticed that if you "rip-off" what others have already "ripped-off" you are less likely to be called out on it and you have to steal a lot more for that to happen (to the point of having to steal the exact aesthetics as well). I'm talking about the games which followed Super Mario Bros, Street Fighter II, and Doom. Yes, there are UI similarities (lol, oh my god!) between SSB and PSASBR, but shall we bring up the life-bar? The super meter? Let's not, because it is totally stupid to begin with. Looking at the games that have followed after a few landmark titles(which if you look hard enough didn't just magic themselves into existence, but were actually based heavily on previous "innovative" games, e.g. all three games I listed before), you should see how utterly dumb and fruitless the obsession people have about crediting "innovations" is.

Anyway, that's my drop of reason into this thread. GAF can now go back to the perpetual cycle of bullshit on this matter. (I thought I left /v/.)
TheBaronOfNA
Banned
(08-06-2012, 03:41 AM)

Originally Posted by TDLink

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

He throw morality in the Mix. Is hard feel that he is trying to get a neutral vibe for this statement.

Maybe is the language barrier but if that was the case is better try to explain it more clearly than being a badass in twitter.

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.

Wah?... Is truth but we take issue with the negative opinion about it.
Teknoman
Little Big NeoContra
(08-06-2012, 03:41 AM)
Teknoman's Avatar
I still wish Playstation all-stars played to their character's 3D strengths, and just went with a Power Stone/ Anarchy Reigns style 3D arena fighter.
goomba
Banned
(08-06-2012, 03:41 AM)
Of course its a ripoff. I see absolutely nothing debatable about that phrase.

Didnt stop crash team racing from being a great game.
Chuck Norris
Member
(08-06-2012, 03:42 AM)
Chuck Norris's Avatar

Originally Posted by TDLink



Let's not kid ourselves, the similarities don't stop at the amount of characters and the camera. They could have picked other formulas than just SF or Smash also. They could have alternatively changed up the smash formula in a very visible way (like how about teams and/or tag-ins ala MvC?).

mechanically it feels quite different, although the jumping has its similarities

Tagging would just be irritating in a game like this

Honestly they have changed it up, in fact they have made some radical changes to fighting games in general by abandoning the typical health bar and avoiding the ring outs that Smash Bros is known for. The supers system is very original and I'm enjoying it a lot
KevinCow
Banned
(08-06-2012, 03:42 AM)
KevinCow'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.

I was talking about the gaming industry in general, not just this game.

A gaming industry that did not copy each other and evolve and refine its ideas is a gaming industry where Super Mario Bros. is the only platformer, Wolfenstein 3D is the only FPS, Tetris is the only puzzle game, and Street Fighter is the only fighting game. Does that really sound like a great, healthy industry to you? Do you realize how far all of these genres have advanced since these games because of people borrowing and refining ideas?

Take the FPS, for instance. Because developers copied each other and developed the genre over time, we've wound up with many great experiences that, while they were built on the foundation of Wolf 3D and Doom, wound up very different from each other. Halo, Call of Duty, Half-Life, Bioshock, Metroid Prime, Portal - it would be stupid to write these off as creatively bankrupt Doom clones and miss out on a lot of excellent games.

It's entirely unreasonable to expect every game ever made to be a completely new and original concept. Most concepts are not perfect the first time they come out. Most concepts are broad enough that they can be approached in several different ways to feel like very different experiences.


All-Stars is very much a Smash clone. That's why I like it. I like Smash. So finally getting another game like Smash that's made by a competent developer is quite swell. And they've done enough to differentiate it from Smash, taking a lot of cues from more traditional fighters, that I think it feels like a different enough experience to justify its existence beyond just being Sony Smash Bros.
CrisKre
Member
(08-06-2012, 03:43 AM)
CrisKre's Avatar

Originally Posted by Noi

...The same way PSBR has it's super system, while SSB has a very different Ringout KO system?

No. not at all. use your brain.
Last edited by CrisKre; 08-06-2012 at 03:47 AM.
Toki767
Member
(08-06-2012, 03:45 AM)
Toki767's Avatar
The Shonen Jump DS game was a ripoff idea-wise too but that didn't stop it from being great.

Also, didn't everyone basically compare his P-100 game to Pikmin?
Riposte
Member
(08-06-2012, 03:46 AM)
Riposte's Avatar

Originally Posted by KevinCow

A gaming industry that did not copy each other and evolve and refine its ideas is a gaming industry where Super Mario Bros. is the only platformer, Wolfenstein 3D is the only FPS, Tetris is the only puzzle game, and Street Fighter is the only fighting game. Does that really sound like a great, healthy industry to you? Do you realize how far all of these genres have advanced since these games because of people borrowing and refining ideas?

I was just talking about this, but it actually goes much deeper. It is more like Super Mario Bros would be a 1-screen platformer and Street Fighter wouldn't be a fighting game with super-moves. We like to the write special things about certain games in history, but nothing exists in a vacuum.
CrisKre
Member
(08-06-2012, 03:46 AM)
CrisKre's Avatar

Originally Posted by KevinCow

I was talking about the gaming industry in general, not just this game.

A gaming industry that did not copy each other and evolve and refine its ideas is a gaming industry where Super Mario Bros. is the only platformer, Wolfenstein 3D is the only FPS, Tetris is the only puzzle game, and Street Fighter is the only fighting game. Does that really sound like a great, healthy industry to you? Do you realize how far all of these genres have advanced since these games because of people borrowing and refining ideas?

Take the FPS, for instance. Because developers copied each other and developed the genre over time, we've wound up with many great experiences that, while they were built on the foundation of Wolf 3D and Doom, wound up very different from each other. Halo, Call of Duty, Half-Life, Bioshock, Metroid Prime, Portal - it would be stupid to write these off as creatively bankrupt Doom clones and miss out on a lot of excellent games.

It's entirely unreasonable to expect every game ever made to be a completely new and original concept. Most concepts are not perfect the first time they come out. Most concepts are broad enough that they can be approached in several different ways to feel like very different experiences.


All-Stars is very much a Smash clone. That's why I like it. I like Smash. So finally getting another game like Smash that's made by a competent developer is quite swell. And they've done enough to differentiate it from Smash, taking a lot of cues from more traditional fighters, that I think it feels like a different enough experience to justify its existence beyond just being Sony Smash Bros.

I appreciat the games with core concepts grounded in a creative idea. There are really lots and lots of games that do this. All Stars is not one of them. Trying to imply that this particular game is fundamentally equal in creative grownding as All Stars is quite frankly retarded. You can twist reasoning as much as you want, not all games in a genre are blantant rip offs such as this game is.
Chuck Norris
Member
(08-06-2012, 03:46 AM)
Chuck Norris's Avatar

Originally Posted by Teknoman

I still wish Playstation all-stars played to their character's 3D strengths, and just went with a Power Stone/ Anarchy Reigns style 3D arena fighter.

Sony santa Monica are making a power stone style game with GoW Ascension. Would be kind of silly for the same company to be making such similar games
PhoReal
Member
(08-06-2012, 03:47 AM)
PhoReal's Avatar

Originally Posted by Toki767

Also, didn't everyone basically compare his P-100 game to Pikmin?

Yes and it is a terrible comparison.
CrisKre
Member
(08-06-2012, 03:48 AM)
CrisKre's Avatar

Originally Posted by Chuck Norris

Sony santa Monica are making a power stone style game with GoW Ascension. Would be kind of silly for the same company to be making such similar games

Im sure thats the reason this game plays like it does. Not because they wanted to copy Smash Bros.



...really?
Noi
Member
(08-06-2012, 03:48 AM)
Noi's Avatar

Originally Posted by CrisKre

No. not at all. use your rain.

But Rain isn't in either game! :(

Not gonna go on some long explanation of why I disagree on it being a rip-off, but my definition of the word is more in line with what Riposte said.

The problem with calling something a rip off is that the term is best used for counterfeit goods (as it relates to theft).

Which isn't the case here.
TheBaronOfNA
Banned
(08-06-2012, 03:49 AM)

Originally Posted by TDLink

That really means nothing. Catering a game to the EVO/pro FGC crowd in the first place is not a good recipe for success. They aren't all that large and really primarily stick to only a few games...most of which are new iterations in decade+ old franchises. They also generally have the opinion that Smash Bros. is not worthy of their time. Without agreeing or disagreeing with that, I don't think putting "one of their own" (clockwork) on the PSABR team as a community manager (ie, he really puts in little in terms of input to the development) is actually going to pull the wool over most of their eyes and suddenly have them accept this game with open arms when they have been highly against Smash Bros forever. Especially when some of the key differentiators from that other game are actually more away from what they like (for example, how PSABR handles damage/life and kills).


So they actually try to carter another audience and is just not a simple Smash Clone to confused Soccer Moms.
CrisKre
Member
(08-06-2012, 03:49 AM)
CrisKre's Avatar

Originally Posted by Noi

But Rain isn't in either game! :(

Not gonna go on some long explanation of why I disagree on it being a rip-off, but my definition of the word is more in line with what Riposte said.



Which isn't the case here.

Isn't it? I'd sue. lol.
TheBaronOfNA
Banned
(08-06-2012, 03:50 AM)

Originally Posted by CrisKre

I appreciat the games with core concepts grounded in a creative idea. There are really lots and lots of games that do this. All Stars is not one of them. Trying to imply that this particular game is fundamentally equal in creative grownding as All Stars is quite frankly retarded. You can twist reasoning as much as you want, not all games in a genre are blantant rip offs such as this game is.

You are giving a lot of one liners but not many examples
KevinCow
Banned
(08-06-2012, 03:50 AM)
KevinCow's Avatar

Originally Posted by CrisKre

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.

smash style games aren't a genre because there have only been a few games that copied it, and they were pretty much all crap

street fighter style games are a genre because there have been a bunch of games that have ripped it off

if lots of games had ripped off smash, then smash style games would be considered a genre just like street fighter style games

you're saying that it's less morally objectionable to copy street fighter because more games have already copied street fighter, while it's very morally objectionable to copy smash because not many games have copies smash

your entire argument defeats itself

how do you not see that

especially since the entire basis of your argument is creative bankruptcy

isn't it more creatively bankrupt to copy something that's had a couple hundred different games than something that's only had like half a dozen games?
Kurod
Banned
(08-06-2012, 03:53 AM)
Kurod's Avatar

Originally Posted by CrisKre

Isn't it? I'd sue. lol.

As a Nintendo fan does it literally make you sick?
TDLink
Member
(08-06-2012, 03:53 AM)
TDLink's Avatar

Originally Posted by TheBaronOfNA

He throw morality in the Mix. Is hard feel that he is trying to get a neutral vibe for this statement.

Maybe is the language barrier but if that was the case is better try to explain it more clearly than being a badass in twitter.



Wah?... Is truth but we take issue with the negative opinion about it.

Oh, he definitely isn't being neutral about it. Just calling it a rip off in general isn't wrong and that others in this topic who may be agreeing with him in that sense aren't also necesarilly agreeing with the negative connotation. Honestly the fact that this whole topic can sprout so ferociously from 4 words that one person says is pretty laughable and ridiculous. But it is what it is.

Originally Posted by Chuck Norris

mechanically it feels quite different, although the jumping has its similarities

Tagging would just be irritating in a game like this

Honestly they have changed it up, in fact they have made some radical changes to fighting games in general by abandoning the typical health bar and avoiding the ring outs that Smash Bros is known for. The supers system is very original and I'm enjoying it a lot

It was just one example. The point is there are plenty of ways they could have more visibly differentiated it. The way to defeat someone may in the end by different but watching the game play the two games look pretty much the same.

Originally Posted by Toki767

The Shonen Jump DS game was a ripoff idea-wise too but that didn't stop it from being great.

Also, didn't everyone basically compare his P-100 game to Pikmin?

The Shonen Jump game actually made an effort to be different and innovate though in an obvious and apparent way. The entire thing was stylized to a comic book. You actually had to break the page in order to "ring someone out". You also had to setup your "deck" like a comic page in the bottom screen, which allowed you to have multiple characters you could switch in and out as well as call assists. Really it was a quite different and fun evolution on the Smash Bros. formula...much moreso than PSABR is. In that sense it is a really good example.
Chuck Norris
Member
(08-06-2012, 03:53 AM)
Chuck Norris's Avatar

Originally Posted by CrisKre

Im sure thats the reason this game plays like it does. Not because they wanted to copy Smash Bros.



...really?

Where did I say that?
CrisKre
Member
(08-06-2012, 03:54 AM)
CrisKre's Avatar

Originally Posted by KevinCow

smash style games aren't a genre because there have only been a few games that copied it, and they were pretty much all crap

street fighter style games are a genre because there have been a bunch of games that have ripped it off

if lots of games had ripped off smash, then smash style games would be considered a genre just like street fighter style games

you're saying that it's less morally objectionable to copy street fighter because more games have already copied street fighter, while it's very morally objectionable to copy smash because not many games have copies smash

your entire argument defeats itself

how do you not see that

especially since the entire basis of your argument is creative bankruptcy

isn't it more creatively bankrupt to copy something that's had a couple hundred different games than something that's only had like half a dozen games?

No. Im saying there are different levels of "inspiration". This one in particular is a bit too "inspired" in smash to me. Some fighters are too similar. Others have strayed away from the originators and have comendable differences that make them stand on their own.

If this was inspired but didn't look like a carbon copy then the moral objection wouldnt be so pronounced, and then it could be argued more reasonably whether it propelled a style of game forward.
Giant Panda
Member
(08-06-2012, 03:55 AM)
Giant Panda's Avatar

Originally Posted by DeaconKnowledge

Are there people in here seriously arguing that it's not a ripoff, even in concept? Seriously?



lol

The mechanics are different. Apparently all the 2d fighters are rip offs too. Being inspired is completely different. Rip offs are Zynga style stuff.
CrisKre
Member
(08-06-2012, 03:55 AM)
CrisKre's Avatar

Originally Posted by Chuck Norris

Where did I say that?

You seemed to imply that the reason this game didn't play differently is because santa monica was developing a 3d brawler. Which i find most unlikely.
SmithnCo
Member
(08-06-2012, 03:56 AM)
SmithnCo's Avatar

Originally Posted by CrisKre

Isn't it? I'd sue. lol.

Spiritual successor to Blu_LED?
TDLink
Member
(08-06-2012, 03:57 AM)
TDLink's Avatar

Originally Posted by TheBaronOfNA

So they actually try to carter another audience and is just not a simple Smash Clone to confused Soccer Moms.

Sure. Like I stated before though that essentially means nothing. Even if that tiny market segment becomes interested in this game (and it is pretty unlikely they do) it is unlikely it would significantly increase Sony's sales.
CrisKre
Member
(08-06-2012, 03:57 AM)
CrisKre's Avatar

Originally Posted by Giant Panda

The mechanics are different. Apparently all the 2d fighters are rip offs too. Being inspired is completely different. Rip offs are Zynga style stuff.

See? this is why im still discussing here. Please people, its ok, just admit its a rip off. It will be fun, the base game they are copying is plenty fun. But just admit it!
Don'tBeWeird
Member
(08-06-2012, 03:57 AM)
Don'tBeWeird's Avatar

Originally Posted by Riposte

Kamiya is very amusing, but I don't take his gaming opinion very seriously lol. Game developers rarely have the experience and time to give game criticism and Kamiya seems like an extreme example of that ("nothing"). In any case, he is hilarious in at least his conduct alone.

The problem with calling something a rip off is that the term is best used for counterfeit goods (as it relates to theft). Even if you are using the word in a hyperbolic manner, it doesn't really apply. There are distinctly creative differences to be found in All-Stars. Stuff more important than "They both use characters based on characters from a multitude of games!" (is that seriously where we are at with videogame criticism? lol)

For example one of the most important differences between Super Smash Bros and other fighting games is how opponents are defeated. If we borrow the warped logic at play, this is why SSB is not a rip-off. All-Stars is entirely different in that aspect, immediately separating it from both Street Fighter/King of Fighters/Mortal Kombat/Guilty Gear/etc etc etc and Super Smash Bros. Because of this, people play All-Stars differently than Super Smash Bros (which at the end of the day is what matters most). I think you see this most of all in free-for-all battles.

That aside, there just isn't a lot of consistency being put into this. PSASBR is without a doubt based on SSB, however it is by no means egregious and generic (assuming you paid attention to it, which Kamiya didn't and I imagine many don't). I've noticed that if you "rip-off" what others have already "ripped-off" you are less likely to be called out on it and you have to steal a lot more for that to happen (to the point of having to steal the exact aesthetics as well). I'm talking about the games which followed Super Mario Bros, Street Fighter II, and Doom. Yes, there are UI similarities (lol, oh my god!) between SSB and PSASBR, but shall we bring up the life-bar? The super meter? Let's not, because it is totally stupid to begin with. Looking at the games that have followed after a few landmark titles(which if you look hard enough didn't just magic themselves into existence, but were actually based heavily on previous "innovative" games, e.g. all three games I listed before), you should see how utterly dumb and fruitless the obsession people have about crediting "innovations" is.

Anyway, that's my drop of reason into this thread. GAF can now go back to the perpetual cycle of bullshit on this matter. (I thought I left /v/.)

I know you're a fan of Smash Bros, or at least have been in the past, but I really appreciate this post, you bring up some very reasonable points.

Now if only CrisKre and some other posters could just grow up a little then we wouldn't have a mess of a thread like we have here.
RockTurtle
Member
(08-06-2012, 03:57 AM)
RockTurtle's Avatar
PSAS is the SNK of party fighting games.
Razgriz-Specter
Member
(08-06-2012, 03:58 AM)
Razgriz-Specter's Avatar
I will laugh if original Dante is in.
CrisKre
Member
(08-06-2012, 03:58 AM)
CrisKre's Avatar

Originally Posted by Kurod

As a Nintendo fan does it literally make you sick?

No. as an artist it certainly does.
Chuck Norris
Member
(08-06-2012, 03:58 AM)
Chuck Norris's Avatar

Originally Posted by TDLink

Oh, he definitely isn't being neutral about it. Just calling it a rip off in general isn't wrong and that others in this topic who may be agreeing with him in that sense aren't also necesarilly agreeing with the negative connotation. Honestly the fact that this whole topic can sprout so ferociously from 4 words that one person says is pretty laughable and ridiculous. But it is what it is.



It was just one example. The point is there are plenty of ways they could have more visibly differentiated it. The way to defeat someone may in the end by different but watching the game play the two games look pretty much the same.



The Shonen Jump game actually made an effort to be different and innovate though in an obvious and apparent way. The entire thing was stylized to a comic book. You actually had to break the page in order to "ring someone out". You also had to setup your "deck" like a comic page in the bottom screen, which allowed you to have multiple characters you could switch in and out as well as call assists. Really it was a quite different and fun evolution on the Smash Bros. formula...much moreso than PSABR is. In that sense it is a really good example.

And watching Street Fighter and Mortal Kombat play would look the same to a laymen

I think the idea was to create a Smash like game in terms of being a mascot fighter. There is more than enough being done to make it it's own thing though. Like many have said, the inspiration is clearly Smash Bros. That doesn't mean they sat there making a 1:1 clone.

In any case I just told you how it is differentiated. Its your choice if you wish to ignore that :)
TheBaronOfNA
Banned
(08-06-2012, 04:00 AM)

Originally Posted by TDLink

Oh, he definitely isn't being neutral about it. Just calling it a rip off in general isn't wrong and that others in this topic who may be agreeing with him in that sense aren't also necesarilly agreeing with the negative connotation. Honestly the fact that this whole topic can sprout so ferociously from 4 words that one person says is pretty laughable and ridiculous. But it is what it is.

Words can both destroy and built.

Like I said way back, is his opinion and I agree with him in the Rip Off part but is annoying calling it in a negative way that casually, specially from a developer

Like I mentioned, not so different from the Phil Fish drama


Originally Posted by TDLink

Sure. Like I stated before though that essentially means nothing. Even if that tiny market segment becomes interested in this game (and it is pretty unlikely they do) it is unlikely it would significantly increase Sony's sales.

But is not about sales (at least to me) is about intend and why I dislike Kamiya dismissal. They are trying to refine something, is not that different from waht he did in Bayonetta from DMC (even if it is "his"game)
Last edited by TheBaronOfNA; 08-06-2012 at 04:03 AM.
Globox_82
Banned
(08-06-2012, 04:00 AM)
Globox_82's Avatar

Originally Posted by pizzaroll

Kamiya is now just some Japanese dude. Amazing.

To me he is. Stop worshiping others. Celebrity mentality
Chuck Norris
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:00 AM)
Chuck Norris's Avatar

Originally Posted by CrisKre

You seemed to imply that the reason this game didn't play differently is because santa monica was developing a 3d brawler. Which i find most unlikely.

No I said that is the reason they would not have developed it to play like Powerstone, not that it is the reason this game has similarities to Smash. Don't put words in my mouth.
CrisKre
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:00 AM)
CrisKre's Avatar

Originally Posted by Chuck Norris

And watching Street Fighter and Mortal Kombat play would look the same to a laymen

I think the idea was to create a Smash like game in terms of being a mascot fighter. There is more than enough being done to make it it's own thing though. Like many have said, the inspiration is clearly Smash Bros. That doesn't mean they sat there making a 1:1 clone.

In any case I just told you how it is differentiated. Its your choice if you wish to ignore that :)

You can try harder. You really think people may have the same ammount of difficulty diferentiating Mortal Kombat from Street Fighter than All Stars from Smash? No.
CrisKre
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:02 AM)
CrisKre's Avatar

Originally Posted by Chuck Norris

No I said that is the reason they would not have developed it to play like Powerstone, not that it is the reason this game has similarities to Smash. Don't put words in my mouth.

This game has similarities with Smash because it wants to be Smash. You agree?
News Bot
Banned
(08-06-2012, 04:02 AM)
News Bot's Avatar
TDLink
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:03 AM)
TDLink's Avatar

Originally Posted by Chuck Norris

And watching Street Fighter and Mortal Kombat play would look the same to a laymen

I think the idea was to create a Smash like game in terms of being a mascot fighter. There is more than enough being done to make it it's own thing though. Like many have said, the inspiration is clearly Smash Bros. That doesn't mean they sat there making a 1:1 clone.

In any case I just told you how it is differentiated. Its your choice if you wish to ignore that :)

I never said it is a 1:1 clone. That isn't what rip-off implies. It implies that it has that connotation/perception and obvious inspiration...not that it is literally the same thing. I never said it is a 1:1 clone and wouldn't. I don't think others here are saying that either. It is, however, a rip-off. Also, it is much easier to tell SF and MK apart just by looking at them than PSABR and Smash Bros.
Don'tBeWeird
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:04 AM)
Don'tBeWeird's Avatar

Originally Posted by CrisKre

This game has similarities with Smash because it wants to be Smash. You agree?

It obviously has been influenced by Smash Bros, but it does not want to be Smash Brothers. That couldn't be more clearer. What are you even talking about?
Giant Panda
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:05 AM)
Giant Panda's Avatar

Originally Posted by CrisKre

See? this is why im still discussing here. Please people, its ok, just admit its a rip off. It will be fun, the base game they are copying is plenty fun. But just admit it!

What the heck are you trying to do. You seem to lack an understanding of what a ripoff is. Please people, its ok, just admit its inspired!
Risette
A Good Citizen
(08-06-2012, 04:06 AM)
Risette's Avatar

Originally Posted by Globox_82

To me he is. Stop worshiping others. Celebrity mentality

I don't "worship" him, I greatly respect him for his contributions to gaming, such as creating a whole new style of game with DMC or continual quality output and so on.

use your brain
CrisKre
Member
(08-06-2012, 04:06 AM)
CrisKre's Avatar

Originally Posted by Don'tBeWeird

It obviously has been influenced by Smash Bros, but it does not want to be Smash Brothers. That couldn't be more clearer. What are you even talking about?

We disagree. I think it wants to be to Playstation what Smash is to Nintendo. I think thats clear. What are you thinking?

Thread Tools