Why DID PSASBR fail?

  • 64 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for LegatoSkyheart
#1 Posted by LegatoSkyheart (29569 posts) -

The Question has already been answered.

and it's obvious. It wasn't made by Nintendo.

But that's not what this topic is about, This Topic is "WHY did Playstation All Stars Battle Royale Failed."

Just look at Playstation All Stars, the Before and After. It was pretty well hyped amongst some gamers, seeing the first few Teaser trailers, that strange tv add with random video game characters cheering for a random game player, or whatever. It was pretty good stuff. Then the game came along and it looked pretty incredible, You had Dante, A Big daddy, freakin' Sack boy all fighting with Kratos, Sly Cooper, Jak & Daxter, and Nathan Drake, it's was great! Had some really neat memorable characters from Sony's Roster from recent years, the Stages were nice, had some nods to other Sony games too, and the game wasn't a total clone of Smash Brothers even though the button placement was pretty much the same, except the game wasn't about knocking the other player off the stage rather than K.O.ing them with a Super that had about 3 stages and got stronger the longer you fought.

I thought the game was neat, about time Nintendo got some competition. Not to mention this game was also on the Vita and both versions were compatible with each other, meaning one person could be playing on a Vita and the other on a PS3. That's freakin' Nifty.

So again, "WHY did Playstation All Stars Battle Royal fail?"

and we're back to the answer. It wasn't made by Nintendo.

Look at this year's EVO, look at the E3 Invitational, Best Buy Lines for Smash Fest,....

You did not see this level of Hype for PASBR. Even though back then there were a vocal few who DID want Sony to make a Smash Bros. of their own. And they did, but ultimately they failed.

And the reason is because There is NOTHING in Sony's Library that could ever match to the levels of Nintendo's IPs. You can keep talking about how you played so many hours of Twisted Metal, You could keep saying that Jak & Daxter are such a better team than Mario and Luigi. You could say Uncharted is a way better Action Adventure than both Metroid and Zelda.

And you can be right. BUT Looking at the way Nintendo Handles their IPs, and keeps them relevant over the years and maintaining an Audience that does things way over and beyond what many would deem impossible or even impractical.

Just load up some of Little Big Planet's levels surely you'll find ONE if not TWO or maybe even THREE Nintendo Themed Levels anywhere on that world, You'll Game Developers like The Creator of God of War citing that they want to make a God of War "Zelda".

It's no wonder that Playstation All Stars Failed. Even though that game had an All Star Cast, from Sony's Beginnings to Today's time, Nothing they had could ever match Nintendo's Roster of Super Smash Bros.

And We said Nintendo was irrelevant. No wonder you want them to go 3rd Party.

Avatar image for jsmoke03
#2 Edited by jsmoke03 (13696 posts) -

honestly, no ring outs made this game mediocre. these types of games need ring outs

Avatar image for PonchoTaco
#3 Posted by PonchoTaco (3182 posts) -

I found it lackluster and clunky.

Avatar image for ladyblue
#4 Posted by LadyBlue (4943 posts) -

Poor roster, & winning mechanic was terrible.

Avatar image for MonsieurX
#5 Posted by MonsieurX (36738 posts) -

Cheap copy.

Avatar image for Heil68
#6 Edited by Heil68 (57699 posts) -

It was a knockoff of a popular game that it could never measure up to.

Avatar image for DJ-Lafleur
#7 Posted by DJ-Lafleur (35516 posts) -

haven't played it, but the two most common complaints I hear are

1. character roster was disappointing

2. the special move system it had where you could only get points by killing with specials was not very good.

Avatar image for LegatoSkyheart
#8 Posted by LegatoSkyheart (29569 posts) -

Well I guess you can say my big wall of text could be summed up as "The Roster sucked."

Avatar image for foxhound_fox
#9 Posted by foxhound_fox (96690 posts) -

The main two reasons were likely that it wasn't marketed enough (or correctly) and cows don't buy games.

Avatar image for applefan1991
#10 Posted by applefan1991 (3388 posts) -

1. Sony doesn't yet have the character roster of Nintendo.

2. The game was clunky and not nearly as polished as Smash Bros.

Avatar image for ladyblue
#11 Edited by LadyBlue (4943 posts) -

@LegatoSkyheart said:

Well I guess you can say my big wall of text could be summed up as "The Roster sucked."

Biggest issue was the winning mechanic. It completely ruined the game for me..

Avatar image for OhSnapitz
#12 Posted by OhSnapitz (19260 posts) -

@ladyblue said:

Poor roster, & winning mechanic was terrible.

^ This..

If you're going to copy Smash.. copy the entire game.. not a few elements. And how the bloody hell can you have a Playstation "Allstars" without Crash Bandicoot? That made it an automatic fail.

Avatar image for bbkkristian
#13 Edited by bbkkristian (14971 posts) -

It's battle system is what lead to its demise. It was also clunky and characters were poorly balanced. I actually liked the roster (especially with the DLC characters), but it failed to capture the essence of what makes smash brothers great.

Elaborating, You're rewarded instantly by launching the opponent or raising their percentage in smash bros. In PSASBR, you are rewarded by filling up the meter. But executing the Super Move at the wrong time means you wasted much of your time and have to start from scratch again. That is what made it inferior to smash bros. Compared to smash if you miss a move when the opponents' percentage is high, you just have to get the hit on them, it doesn't matter when you get the hit.

Avatar image for jsmoke03
#14 Posted by jsmoke03 (13696 posts) -

@OhSnapitz said:

@ladyblue said:

Poor roster, & winning mechanic was terrible.

^ This..

If you're going to copy Smash.. copy the entire game.. not a few elements. And how the bloody hell can you have a Playstation "Allstars" without Crash Bandicoot? That made it an automatic fail.

blame activision for not including ratchet or spyro.

Avatar image for mems_1224
#15 Edited by mems_1224 (56914 posts) -

Sony doesnt have memorable characters

Avatar image for zassimick
#16 Edited by zassimick (10378 posts) -

The combat never felt satisfying nor did it feel right. Dante of DmC was one of my favorite characters to use as he was the only one that felt natural. Every other character felt like there was a delay or something. Couple that in with the poor balance between characters and you had a poor game.

But most importantly, it was the lack of ring-outs. I hate to lay fault on just one thing being the reason why I didn't enjoy the game, especially when the game was already heavily criticized by gamers for being too similar to Smash Bros already, but focusing on having specials as the only way to get a point was ridiculous and made the game more of a chore than fun.

Oh, and everything seemed to blend together visually that made it difficult to distinguish characters from each other, the environment, and items. Really poor visual design.

I did still enjoy my time with it and have it loaded up on my Vita in case I ever get the urge to play.

Avatar image for Blabadon
#17 Posted by Blabadon (33030 posts) -

Their idea of balance was to make each character overpowered in their own way, excluding some that were entirely dogshit.

The supers were alright, but looking back beyond level one or two they were silly. That's where the imbalance really shows - some characters could get like five kills with level threes and others one or two.

Not to mention the single player sucked. Like it blew. The art images were nice but botched the characters' designs and were a poor replacement for cutscenes. Not only that but the game's tutorial was the only way to learn the combos that probably shouldn't have existed in the first place.

Avatar image for OhSnapitz
#18 Posted by OhSnapitz (19260 posts) -

@jsmoke03 said:

@OhSnapitz said:

@ladyblue said:

Poor roster, & winning mechanic was terrible.

^ This..

If you're going to copy Smash.. copy the entire game.. not a few elements. And how the bloody hell can you have a Playstation "Allstars" without Crash Bandicoot? That made it an automatic fail.

blame activision for not including ratchet or spyro.

Yea.. I forgot about Spyro too.

Sony should've paid activation or something.. it's not like they're doing anything with the IP.

Avatar image for DrRockso87
#19 Posted by DrRockso87 (2631 posts) -

- winning mechanic was confusing to people that were used to ring-outs

- barebones content (where are all the challenge stages like in Smash Bros? Platforms? Events? Home run bat simulator? Target course? Smash Bros 64 had more content!!)

- character roaster was mediocre (where is Crash? Spyro? Cloud? Snake? Para Croft? Wanderer? Ico? Dart? Abe? Classic Dante? Resident Evil characters? At least as DLC! And no, not Zeus and Isaac Hayes; they were laughable picks)

- final boss was awful (does anyone even know/remember who Polygon man or whatever is? I don't. Also, the battle was uninspired and boring)

- campaign is barebones and too easy (cutscenes look cheap, stories are thrown together, nothing to mix up the gameplay, etc.

Overall, it just felt like a very amateur Smash Bros clone that had great potential in the right hands but unfortunately was mishandled pretty poorly.

Avatar image for Shewgenja
#20 Posted by Shewgenja (18967 posts) -

The roster was meh

No ring-outs

Presentation was campy and blatantly rip-offish

Winning a match was just astronomically stupid

Avatar image for Gue1
#21 Edited by Gue1 (12171 posts) -

if you ask any person of the fgc they will tell you that the game was more of a fighting game than smash will ever be, but its mechanics weren't very fun.

On the other hand, smash was turned into a fighting game by force. Smash players play the game in a way that was never intended by nintendo thus the reason of why brawl turned out the way it did.

Another things is that the fgc hates these kind of games, meanwhile the smash demographic already has their smash. The people that asked for Sony's version of Smash were loud but in reality they were in the minority. The same thing happened with Twister Metal. A bunch of people asking for a new one for years and when Jaffe finally makes one for the PS3 it was a major flop. Then people ask why we have so many shooters....

Avatar image for always_explicit
#22 Posted by always_explicit (3379 posts) -

No Crash and No Spyro so, no purchase from me.

Il buy a PS4 the day after a next gen crash or spyro releases and scores 8/10 or above.

Avatar image for nethernova
#23 Posted by nethernova (5460 posts) -

Obviously because of that idiotic abbreviation.

Avatar image for Ghost120x
#24 Edited by Ghost120x (5229 posts) -

Bad mechanics

Bad roster

Lack of content

Poor presentation values

Shitty music

What did it for me is lack of content. Smash bros brawl had a long single player mode as well as everyone's classic mode, they had all stars mode, event mode, a level editor and tons of customization options for multiplayer. The trophy collection is really cool and allows you to learn about many games including games never released in USA.

Avatar image for finalfantasy94
#25 Posted by finalfantasy94 (27389 posts) -

The presentation was lacking. The menus were pretty boring and the music wasint as good as smash. Balance was a problem mainly with the specials. I dont think the win mechanic was wrong or anything in fact I like it a little more then smash. Its just some level 3's were instant kills and I feel it shouldint be that way. It just should be a higher chance of hitting someone but not covering the whole dam screen without a way to dodge it. I was actually fine with the roster. remember you cant get some characters cause legal issues.

Avatar image for finalfantasy94
#26 Posted by finalfantasy94 (27389 posts) -

@DrRockso87 said:

- final boss was awful (does anyone even know/remember who Polygon man or whatever is? I don't. Also, the battle was uninspired and boring)

Yea cause a giant hand was better? The only reason it got popular was cause smash kept using it. Also at least the final boss in this game made sense.

Avatar image for Kaze_no_Mirai
#27 Posted by Kaze_no_Mirai (11763 posts) -

as other have said, having to win by using specials was pretty dumb. I found the game to be fun at the beginning but it quickly grew stale. The menus were absolutely plain. It felt very cheap.

Avatar image for Kaze_no_Mirai
#28 Posted by Kaze_no_Mirai (11763 posts) -

@finalfantasy94 said:

@DrRockso87 said:

- final boss was awful (does anyone even know/remember who Polygon man or whatever is? I don't. Also, the battle was uninspired and boring)

Yea cause a giant hand was better? The only reason it got popular was cause smash kept using it. Also at least the final boss in this game made sense.

I'm pretty sure that was because the characters in the Smash series are supposed to be toys and the hand is what brought them to life, or something like that.

Avatar image for parkurtommo
#29 Edited by parkurtommo (28295 posts) -

Not enough memorable characters, also the majority of ps3 and vita owners are just like 360 owners in the sense that multiplats are their main priority, where as a lot of exclusives were not even part of their interests. So the related characters had absolutely no value.

Avatar image for nini200
#30 Edited by nini200 (11484 posts) -

@OhSnapitz said:

@ladyblue said:

Poor roster, & winning mechanic was terrible.

^ This..

If you're going to copy Smash.. copy the entire game.. not a few elements. And how the bloody hell can you have a Playstation "Allstars" without Crash Bandicoot? That made it an automatic fail.

Loading Video...

My guess is because he started out as Sony's mascot as in the commercial above but then he became a traitor and put his games on the same company's system that he was ragging on and we know Sony doesn't like that. Just look at Kevin Butler when he did the tire commercial that had Mario Kart in it.

Crash Committed treason against Sony just like Spyro.

Avatar image for finalfantasy94
#31 Posted by finalfantasy94 (27389 posts) -

@Kaze_no_Mirai said:

@finalfantasy94 said:

@DrRockso87 said:

- final boss was awful (does anyone even know/remember who Polygon man or whatever is? I don't. Also, the battle was uninspired and boring)

Yea cause a giant hand was better? The only reason it got popular was cause smash kept using it. Also at least the final boss in this game made sense.

I'm pretty sure that was because the characters in the Smash series are supposed to be toys and the hand is what brought them to life, or something like that.

I get that but it doesint represent nintendos history or anything. Its just a hand.

Avatar image for 93BlackHawk93
#32 Posted by 93BlackHawk93 (8424 posts) -

@finalfantasy94 said:

@DrRockso87 said:

- final boss was awful (does anyone even know/remember who Polygon man or whatever is? I don't. Also, the battle was uninspired and boring)

Yea cause a giant hand was better? The only reason it got popular was cause smash kept using it. Also at least the final boss in this game made sense.

There's Tabuu in SSB too.

Avatar image for Kaze_no_Mirai
#33 Posted by Kaze_no_Mirai (11763 posts) -

@finalfantasy94 said:

@Kaze_no_Mirai said:

@finalfantasy94 said:

@DrRockso87 said:

- final boss was awful (does anyone even know/remember who Polygon man or whatever is? I don't. Also, the battle was uninspired and boring)

Yea cause a giant hand was better? The only reason it got popular was cause smash kept using it. Also at least the final boss in this game made sense.

I'm pretty sure that was because the characters in the Smash series are supposed to be toys and the hand is what brought them to life, or something like that.

I get that but it doesint represent nintendos history or anything. Its just a hand.

Fair enough :P

Avatar image for charizard1605
#34 Posted by charizard1605 (82622 posts) -

There were multiple reasons:

  • The winning mechanic, while very intriguing, should not have been the only way to win a game; even Smash supports multiple winning mechanics. Keeping the focus only on Supers was a terrible idea, and basically led to a very frustrating, non exciting style of gameplay that killed the momentum of each match in game.
  • The roster was absolutely terrible. Sony secured so many bullshit characters, like new Dante, or Big Daddy, or Raiden (?), but where were the characters actually associated with PlayStation? A lot has been said about there not being any Crash Bandicoot or Spyro the Dragon, but where was Cloud? Why was there no Chris Redfield? Where was Solid Snake, if he can show up in Brawl, a game celebrating Nintendo, with which he has had little to do, why couldn't he be in a PlayStation brawler, with PlayStation having been his home for the last twenty years? Sony simply did not spend the right kind of money to secure the content that would have made PlayStation All Stars an instant success.
  • It lacked the polish and content of Smash Bros. Smash Bros. is staggeringly well made, and it has an insane amount of content. You can play it practically forever (or, at least, for the 6-8 years it takes for a new one to come out). All Stars felt so barebones by comparison.
  • Sony didn't actually market the game well. Yes, you and I and other forum goers knew about it, which is great, but the general public, the ones who go frothing at the mouth and line up for days outside Gamestop to be the first ones to get their hands on the new Smash Bros., doesn't even know the damn thing existed. Once again, Sony refused to spend the money necessary to make it successful.
  • On that note, the name was terrible. Super Smash Bros. rolls of the tongue, and it's easy to shorten (Smash, Smash Brothers). What the hell are you supposed to do with PlayStation All Stars Battle Royale? That's nine freaking syllables.

The thing is, I want Sony to try again. I want them to revisit the concept, since I actually greatly enjoyed PSASBR. I also remember that the original Smash wasn't particularly great either, it was Melee that made the series what it is today. But unfortunately, PSASBR bombed, and they're too stupid to see it's because they didn't put in enough effort, so we won't get what could potentially have been a great alternative to Smash anymore.

Avatar image for Vatusus
#35 Posted by Vatusus (7860 posts) -

I enjoyed the game a lot. Sure it had its problems but it did NOT deserved all the bashing and low sales it got.

Avatar image for jg4xchamp
#36 Posted by jg4xchamp (61445 posts) -

>Shit game
>didn't do well

Big surprise?

Avatar image for GreySeal9
#37 Posted by GreySeal9 (28247 posts) -

When I actually played it, it wasn't nearly as bad as thought it would be, but the execution of the whole thing was super weird. It lacks the intuitiveness of Smash.

Avatar image for lamprey263
#38 Edited by lamprey263 (34415 posts) -

It didn't have the roster of classic cherished characters like Nintendo had for Super Smash Bros. The idea of Nathan Drake fighting Kratos doesn't have the same appeal to me as Kirby wielding a gigantic mallet and sadistically smacking something cute and cuddly like Jiggly Puff so hard she goes screaming off into the horizon. Nintendo's games have almost always been pretty tame, watching these cute characters pummel the piss out of each other was refreshingly new.

Avatar image for Zidaneski
#39 Posted by Zidaneski (8618 posts) -

I think the roster was pretty good, had a bunch of my favorite characters but the super system I think is what killed it. The game just wasn't very fun the better people got because it became a horrible jump fest online or spam city. However, what the game actually had was online so that was welcomed. I also mained Dante because he was the only character that felt responsive and everyone else controlled horribly slow. The super system might of actually worked out if the game wasn't so slow. 2v2 is still some solid fun though.

Avatar image for misterpmedia
#40 Posted by misterpmedia (6209 posts) -

Pushing passed the obviously knock off, it's pretty underrated. The variety of characters is pretty decent. The only thing I hate is the fact that some level 2 or 3 moves finish the fight instantly.....like... I dunno who came up with that idea cause it sucks BAD. I want to level 3 everyone with Big Daddy and play on.

Pretty decent game for the vita(looks beaut on dat OLED) and it comes free with the PS3 version. Cha-ching.

Avatar image for princeofshapeir
#41 Posted by princeofshapeir (16593 posts) -

@Gue1 said:

if you ask any person of the fgc they will tell you that the game was more of a fighting game than smash will ever be, but its mechanics weren't very fun.

On the other hand, smash was turned into a fighting game by force. Smash players play the game in a way that was never intended by nintendo thus the reason of why brawl turned out the way it did.

Another things is that the fgc hates these kind of games, meanwhile the smash demographic already has their smash. The people that asked for Sony's version of Smash were loud but in reality they were in the minority. The same thing happened with Twister Metal. A bunch of people asking for a new one for years and when Jaffe finally makes one for the PS3 it was a major flop. Then people ask why we have so many shooters....

Name one mechanic in Melee that wasn't intended to be put in the game and used by players.

Avatar image for FlamesOfGrey
#42 Posted by FlamesOfGrey (7511 posts) -

Probably because it tried to copy a game series that already is mediocore.

Avatar image for amazonangry
#43 Posted by AmazonAngry (968 posts) -

Well, it prety much only failed to those who couldn't play it. Those of us who have both, realize that Allstars was a far deeper, skill based fighter and just superior in every way to casual Smash.

Avatar image for Willy105
#44 Posted by Willy105 (24745 posts) -

1. It was a terrible, low-budget boring game.

2. The pure lack of and total disregard for Sony properties was laughable, and mostly an ad for 3rd party games that had little to do with the brand.

It's a game that needed love and polish, which is what Smash Bros. is all about.

Avatar image for Pikminmaniac
#45 Posted by Pikminmaniac (11194 posts) -

@princeofshapeir said:

@Gue1 said:

if you ask any person of the fgc they will tell you that the game was more of a fighting game than smash will ever be, but its mechanics weren't very fun.

On the other hand, smash was turned into a fighting game by force. Smash players play the game in a way that was never intended by nintendo thus the reason of why brawl turned out the way it did.

Another things is that the fgc hates these kind of games, meanwhile the smash demographic already has their smash. The people that asked for Sony's version of Smash were loud but in reality they were in the minority. The same thing happened with Twister Metal. A bunch of people asking for a new one for years and when Jaffe finally makes one for the PS3 it was a major flop. Then people ask why we have so many shooters....

Name one mechanic in Melee that wasn't intended to be put in the game and used by players.

Wave dashing, L-canceling, jump cancel dash grab.

Sakurai has mentioned many times during the development of Brawl that the series was intended as a party game and not a serious fighter and so we got Brawl which slowed things down considerably, removed the above exploits and added tripping.

I'm glad they've been showing serious players of the game love recently with the new game by supporting Evo, putting on their own tournaments and speeding up the game.

Avatar image for Legend002
#46 Posted by Legend002 (13373 posts) -

The characters are mostly realistic but it played like a looney toons cartoon. Just a bad mash up.

Avatar image for princeofshapeir
#47 Edited by princeofshapeir (16593 posts) -

@Pikminmaniac said:

@princeofshapeir said:

@Gue1 said:

if you ask any person of the fgc they will tell you that the game was more of a fighting game than smash will ever be, but its mechanics weren't very fun.

On the other hand, smash was turned into a fighting game by force. Smash players play the game in a way that was never intended by nintendo thus the reason of why brawl turned out the way it did.

Another things is that the fgc hates these kind of games, meanwhile the smash demographic already has their smash. The people that asked for Sony's version of Smash were loud but in reality they were in the minority. The same thing happened with Twister Metal. A bunch of people asking for a new one for years and when Jaffe finally makes one for the PS3 it was a major flop. Then people ask why we have so many shooters....

Name one mechanic in Melee that wasn't intended to be put in the game and used by players.

Wave dashing, L-canceling, jump cancel dash grab.

Sakurai has mentioned many times during the development of Brawl that the series was intended as a party game and not a serious fighter and so we got Brawl which slowed things down considerably, removed the above exploits and added tripping.

I'm glad they've been showing serious players of the game love recently with the new game by supporting Evo, putting on their own tournaments and speeding up the game.

None of those were mechanics were not intended to be put in Melee, though. All of those were removed from the final version of Brawl, but that's a result of Sakurai changing his vision for Smash Bros. between 2001 and 2008.

Wavedashing: http://smashboards.com/threads/dispute-ended-new-sakurai-intervew-wavedashing-was-intentional.162416/

It was noticed during development and kept in the final release of Melee. It's even in the PAL version, which changed many things from the earlier NTSC version (example: Fox's upsmash doesn't KO as easily, Falcon can gentleman a lot easier). Wavedashing isn't a glitch: it's a movement mechanic that occurs as a result of Melee's directional airdodge mechanic and its physics engine.

L-cancelling requires a conscious button press everytime your character's aerial animation lands onto the ground. Not only was l-cancelling in 64 as well, but the official Japanese website for SSB64 listed it as an official mechanic. On an interesting note, an early pre-release version of Brawl actually had l-cancelling in the game, but it obviously didn't make it into the final version. With regards to JC grabs: in 64, there weren't dash grabs but instead only the one standing grab animation. JC grabs in Melee are like 64 grabs in that regard, and they give the player options for their grab game. L-cancelling and JC grabs aren't exploits at all and were advanced techniques Sakurai intended for 64/Melee; wavedashing, too, was intentionally left in the game by Sakurai's development team for the final version of Melee.

Avatar image for santoron
#48 Posted by santoron (8583 posts) -

People wanted and expected it to play just like Smash. It didn't and was promptly ignored.

Avatar image for PsychoLemons
#49 Posted by PsychoLemons (3163 posts) -
  • Lacked charm
  • Clunky gameplay
  • Bad menu
  • Forgettable music
  • Weird character roster
  • Bad single player mode

But I'll give them props for trying though.