PS3 Playstation All-Stars Battle Royale

Remove this Banner Ad

Anybody who expected this game to get perfect scores and a huge meta is off their rocker. There are far too many people out there who hate the game merely for existing at all. They aren't even the audience for it.

Superbot knew this, that's why they gave us a whole month of multi beta to sink our teeth into it and decide for ourselves. Seeing the game as a potential purchase, I took full advantage of this and sunk 20+ hours into the beta, so I knew the gameplay was good and enjoyable. I've never given a s**t about reviews, I judge for myself.

The game does have flaws (as outlined in my previous posts) but holy s**t 2v2 is amazing.

HBK619 can back me up. We played for about 1-2 hours in the beta and the last match was ****ing amazing. Overtime, double overtime... victory clenched in the last 4 seconds. Was so pumped I couldn't sleep afterwards.

I'm the type of gamer who researches well beforehand, then buys 4-6 games a year but plays the absolute s**t out of them. So anyone who wants some sweet, sweet 2v2 you know where to go. I can carry you at the start before you get good, unless I'm Sir Dan. Then batten down the hatches.
 
Face_Plain said:
Anybody who expected this game to get perfect scores and a huge meta is off their rocker. There are far too many people out there who hate the game merely for existing at all. They aren't even the audience for it.

Superbot knew this, that's why they gave us a whole month of multi beta to sink our teeth into it and decide for ourselves. Seeing the game as a potential purchase, I took full advantage of this and sunk 20+ hours into the beta, so I knew the gameplay was good and enjoyable. I've never given a s**t about reviews, I judge for myself.

The game does have flaws (as outlined in my previous posts) but holy s**t 2v2 is amazing.

HBK619 can back me up. We played for about 1-2 hours in the beta and the last match was ****ing amazing. Overtime, double overtime... victory clenched in the last 4 seconds. Was so pumped I couldn't sleep afterwards.

I'm the type of gamer who researches well beforehand, then buys 4-6 games a year but plays the absolute s**t out of them. So anyone who wants some sweet, sweet 2v2 you know where to go. I can carry you at the start before you get good, unless I'm Sir Dan. Then batten down the hatches.
Click to expand...
You're claiming the Professional Critics are going to give less than perfect scores because they hated it for existing? Think you ought to take the Sony Glasses off.

and let me remind you that the User Score for the game is currently bigger than the Metascore.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I'm liking it so far, if you go solely by gameplay videos and reviews then you have a right to be underwhelmed, play it a bit though and you'll find it's actually quite enjoyable.

The cross play thing is amazing here by the way, if I can't be stuffed going downstairs and enduring the ~3 minutes it would take me to get into a game I can just fire up my Vita and play essentially the exact same thing in my room. It's great and I'm looking forward to more games having this.
 
http://au.ign.com/games/playstation-all-stars-battle-royale/ps3-123511

8.0 out of 10, seems about right from what i played in the beta, hopefully pick this up sometime this week or weekend

as opposed to

http://au.gamespot.com/playstation-...ation-all-stars-battle-royale-review-6400362/

6.5 with bad points including - pixelated menu screen - complex fighting system makes for a steep learning curve and - some stills and voice overs do not make a compelling character narrative. What a professional critique of the game :rolleyes:

Anyone that buys games based on so called "professional critics" is doing it wrong, especially if they can give CoD games constant 8-9 out of 10 regardless of how similar it is to previous instalments. Face_Plain made his purchase on personal experience, not checking for scores and then blindly bashing it.

Sony haters gonna hate
 
Premiers04 said:
http://au.ign.com/games/playstation-all-stars-battle-royale/ps3-123511

8.0 out of 10, seems about right from what i played in the beta, hopefully pick this up sometime this week or weekend

as opposed to

http://au.gamespot.com/playstation-...ation-all-stars-battle-royale-review-6400362/

6.5 with bad points including - pixelated menu screen - complex fighting system makes for a steep learning curve and - some stills and voice overs do not make a compelling character narrative. What a professional critique of the game :rolleyes:

Anyone that buys games based on so called "professional critics" is doing it wrong, especially if they can give CoD games constant 8-9 out of 10 regardless of how similar it is to previous instalments. Face_Plain made his purchase on personal experience, not checking for scores and then blindly bashing it.

Sony haters gonna hate
Click to expand...
The bolded part is a horseshit criticism (if they really did criticize it for that, I can't be bothered checking), but the other two are valid points, especially the latter.

and I'm not avoiding purchase just because of the mixed reviews, there are plenty of reasons:

1. It's hugely inferior game to it's Nintendo Counterpart, Super Smash Bros Brawl, a game which I already have.
2. None of the characters appeal to me.
3. Very lousy Single-Player options.
4. The only way to kill another character is with a super (this is the killer).
5. No custom characters.
6. Lack of depth in the gameplay.
 
GrandBlue said:
The bolded part is a horseshit criticism (if they really did criticize it for that, I can't be bothered checking), but the other two are valid points, especially the latter.

and I'm not avoiding purchase just because of the mixed reviews, there are plenty of reasons:

1. It's hugely inferior game to it's Nintendo Counterpart, Super Smash Bros Brawl, a game which I already have.
2. None of the characters appeal to me.
3. Very lousy Single-Player options.
4. The only way to kill another character is with a super (this is the killer).
5. No custom characters.
6. Lack of depth in the gameplay.
Click to expand...
Very surprised you're not getting it after your overwhelming support for the game. However, remember this line:
GrandBlue said:
Ok, but let's be honest. If they was no competition between this game and Smash Bros at all, I think they would have incorporated a little bit of originality into the gameplay rather than just go for the direct rip.
Click to expand...
Yet the actual originality they put in the gameplay - supers to kill. Is the 'killer' reason for not buying it?

And your 6th reason makes little sense after you quoted the review saying that the game's fighting system is complex.

Let's just be honest, you weren't going to buy the game anyway.
 
HBK619 said:
Very surprised you're not getting it after your overwhelming support for the game. However, remember this line:Yet the actual originality they put in the gameplay - supers to kill. Is the 'killer' reason for not buying it?

And your 6th reason makes little sense after you quoted the review saying that the game's fighting system is complex.

Let's just be honest, you weren't going to buy the game anyway.
Click to expand...
Just because they add an ridiculous gameplay mechanic doesn't make it a completely original game. Anyone who isn't a hardcore sony fanboy like yourself can tell it's still a clear ripoff of Smash Bros.

As for the bolded part I quoted, I was highlighting the fact that it was a horseshit way to criticize a game. Of course it's going to have a steep learning curve, but that's hardly a negative aspect. As for the game's actual depth, considering supers are the only way to kill other players, I'm afraid this is a battle you can't win. Just another area where Smash Bros is clearly superior.

Perhaps I should look at the bright side though. If there's one thing All-Stars did right that Smash Bros didn't, it was not including that stupid prat-falling that was present in Brawl. That was almost as stupid as having supers being the only way to kill your opponent.
 
GrandBlue said:
Just because they add an ridiculous gameplay mechanic doesn't make it a completely original game. Anyone who isn't a hardcore sony fanboy like yourself can tell it's still a clear ripoff of Smash Bros.

As for the bolded part I quoted, I was highlighting the fact that it was a horseshit way to criticize a game. Of course it's going to have a steep learning curve, but that's hardly a negative aspect. As for the game's actual depth, considering supers are the only way to kill other players, I'm afraid this is a battle you can't win. Just another area where Smash Bros is clearly superior.

Perhaps I should look at the bright side though. If there's one thing All-Stars did right that Smash Bros didn't, it was not including that stupid prat-falling that was present in Brawl. That was almost as stupid as having supers being the only way to kill your opponent.
Click to expand...
...what? Where did I say it wasn't ripping on Smash Bros (SuperBot have said numerous times about the Smash Bros influences)? Do you comprehend the words that were written?

You said (paraphrasing) that instead of going the full rip, there should be originality. Yet the originality they DO have is what kills the game for you. That makes no sense. Same with the gameplay depth, the way in which you use the supers and when have massive implications on the result of the match

In reality anyway no matter what Superbot did there would be claims of a rip off in one way or another as let's face it, there's not a huge amount of room to move in the 2D fighter world anyway. I think the best way to look at it would be to take away the Smash Bros. goggles and look at it as it's own game. Because it is and CLEARLY the supers aspect makes it so since that's what 'kills' it. Right? Basically it's too Smash Bros. but not enough Smash Bros...but if it was, it'd be too much of a rip off...
 
HBK619 said:
...what? Where did I say it wasn't ripping on Smash Bros (SuperBot have said numerous times about the Smash Bros influences)? Do you comprehend the words that were written?

You said (paraphrasing) that instead of going the full rip, there should be originality. Yet the originality they DO have is what kills the game for you. That makes no sense. Same with the gameplay depth, the way in which you use the supers and when have massive implications on the result of the match

In reality anyway no matter what Superbot did there would be claims of a rip off in one way or another as let's face it, there's not a huge amount of room to move in the 2D fighter world anyway. I think the best way to look at it would be to take away the Smash Bros. goggles and look at it as it's own game. Because it is and CLEARLY the supers aspect makes it so since that's what 'kills' it. Right? Basically it's too Smash Bros. but not enough Smash Bros...but if it was, it'd be too much of a rip off...
Click to expand...
If it makes you happy, I'll praise the developers for trying to be original, but being original doesn't equate to being good. It's like the Prat-Falling in Brawl; no other fighting games have it, but it's still a load of s**t and kills the game in a way.

As for the last paragraph, that illustrates you know little when it comes to fighting games. If the developers wanted to make a 2D Fighting Game with a mash-up of PS3 Characters, there are so many directions they could've gone in, but in the end, they took a lot of Smash Bros' defining traits and added a few silly twists to appease the casuals.

Marvel vs Capcom, Dissidia: Final Fantasy and Persona 4: Arena are examples of fighting game mash-ups that are both original in their own way, and damn good to boot. All-Stars is in a league below them.
 
GrandBlue said:
You're claiming the Professional Critics are going to give less than perfect scores because they hated it for existing? Think you ought to take the Sony Glasses off.

and let me remind you that the User Score for the game is currently bigger than the Metascore.
Click to expand...

I'm saying the game has copped plenty of heat for even existing by Nintendrones (Exhibit A: You in this thread) and that negative association has put a bit of a cloud over the title. That sure as hell won't help a game. If you think something like that won't have any influence at all on any reviews, then lulz. These are the same people who hand out perfect scores like candy to big budget titles who supply them with "special editions" and swag bags, whose publishers pay for advertising space on their websites, not to mention the reliance on reviews to draw traffic to their website in the first place. My point: All Stars was never going to get the drop your pants, stroke the shaft treatment many other titles get.

The whole focus on metacritic in the videogame industry is terrible. Because of reviewers handing out undeserved high scores so often, and over such a prolonged period of time, in the current climate a 6-7/10 is seen as bad. Reviewers have large scales but don't even bother using them most of the time. This is why when it comes to reviews, the videogame industry lacks any credibility. That is one of the many reasons why I don't give a **** about reviews. Anybody who uses them to justify something being good or bad, especially above personal experience, detailed thoughts/impressions, etc is a fool.

A 75 sans hyper inflation scale is probably spot on for All Stars IMO. I'd give it 3.5 or 4/5. But when you factor in all the super inflated high scores handed out like candy, it looks s**t. Dragon's Dogma is sitting on 78 and that was a great game IMO. Once again seen as mediocre due to inflated other scores.

So yeah.. I didn't originally mean this post to end up as a meta rant, but this would have come up somewhere else so at least I got it out of my system. Now I can just quote this when it comes up again ( and it will). By all means use reviews as a tool to research games you are interested in, but use it as one of MANY tools. Most importantly, use your own mind. Play the game yourself if there is a demo/beta. If you just post review scores to judge a game you're bringing nothing to the table IMO.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Oh, and I wanted this separate from the meta rant.

PSbros... ignore GrandBlue if he posts mindless s**t. It has become quite apparent that he is unable to be objective when discussing this game. His love for Smash Bros/Nintendo has blinded him. That is where the line from fan to fanboy is crossed*. All he has done, since day 1, is s**t on the game no matter what.

Let's look at some of his pathetic criticisms:

-s**t roster. This from someone who doesn't even know who Sweet Tooth is. Quite clearly is not the audience for this.

-No gameplay depth. He hasn't even played it. At best, he's played a couple rounds of FFA. The game is highly strategic and deep in 2v2 and 1v1. Chaining your combos, super bar management, setting up for the super, etc. I have a really good Parappa as a psnbro and our 1v1's are almost like a game of chess.

-Super only kills sucks. Once again, has he even played this? Once you put time into it you see how the super system DOES work. I went from hating it (pre playing) to believing it was adequate to "I get it".

-No custom characters. In a mascot brawler? How dare they.

He isn't the target audience for this game, has never had any intention of buying it, and yet still religiously checks in to this thread to spew his weekly mindless diatribe. It's pathetic. Just ignore him.

*To the inevitable rebuttal of "no you're just a sony fanboy". I admit I am a Sony fan (see target audience for this game) but no fanboy. I've already stated the difference. This thread is full of my objective analysis of the game. Impressions based upon hours of actual playtime with the game, complete with pros and cons. Meanwhile GrandBlue's contribution: "Supers suck, roster sucks. Lol I told you that stuff sucks." Set on repeat. Based on how much playtime? None?

He's either a Nintendo fanboy, or he walked in on his missus using a dualshock set to vibrate and has never been the same since. Either way, don't feed the troll.
 
Face_Plain said:
I'm saying the game has copped plenty of heat for even existing by Nintendrones (Exhibit A: You in this thread) and that negative association has put a bit of a cloud over the title. That sure as hell won't help a game. If you think something like that won't have any influence at all on any reviews, then lulz. These are the same people who hand out perfect scores like candy to big budget titles who supply them with "special editions" and swag bags, whose publishers pay for advertising space on their websites, not to mention the reliance on reviews to draw traffic to their website in the first place. My point: All Stars was never going to get the drop your pants, stroke the shaft treatment many other titles get.

The whole focus on metacritic in the videogame industry is terrible. Because of reviewers handing out undeserved high scores so often, and over such a prolonged period of time, in the current climate a 6-7/10 is seen as bad. Reviewers have large scales but don't even bother using them most of the time. This is why when it comes to reviews, the videogame industry lacks any credibility. That is one of the many reasons why I don't give a **** about reviews. Anybody who uses them to justify something being good or bad, especially above personal experience, detailed thoughts/impressions, etc is a fool.

A 75 sans hyper inflation scale is probably spot on for All Stars IMO. I'd give it 3.5 or 4/5. But when you factor in all the super inflated high scores handed out like candy, it looks s**t. Dragon's Dogma is sitting on 78 and that was a great game IMO. Once again seen as mediocre due to inflated other scores.

So yeah.. I didn't originally mean this post to end up as a meta rant, but this would have come up somewhere else so at least I got it out of my system. Now I can just quote this when it comes up again ( and it will). By all means use reviews as a tool to research games you are interested in, but use it as one of MANY tools. Most importantly, use your own mind. Play the game yourself if there is a demo/beta. If you just post review scores to judge a game you're bringing nothing to the table IMO.
Click to expand...
Face_Plain said:
Oh, and I wanted this separate from the meta rant.

PSbros... ignore GrandBlue if he posts mindless s**t. It has become quite apparent that he is unable to be objective when discussing this game. His love for Smash Bros/Nintendo has blinded him. That is where the line from fan to fanboy is crossed*. All he has done, since day 1, is s**t on the game no matter what.

Let's look at some of his pathetic criticisms:

-s**t roster. This from someone who doesn't even know who Sweet Tooth is. Quite clearly is not the audience for this.

-No gameplay depth. He hasn't even played it. At best, he's played a couple rounds of FFA. The game is highly strategic and deep in 2v2 and 1v1. Chaining your combos, super bar management, setting up for the super, etc. I have a really good Parappa as a psnbro and our 1v1's are almost like a game of chess.

-Super only kills sucks. Once again, has he even played this? Once you put time into it you see how the super system DOES work. I went from hating it (pre playing) to believing it was adequate to "I get it".

-No custom characters. In a mascot brawler? How dare they.

He isn't the target audience for this game, has never had any intention of buying it, and yet still religiously checks in to this thread to spew his weekly mindless diatribe. It's pathetic. Just ignore him.

*To the inevitable rebuttal of "no you're just a sony fanboy". I admit I am a Sony fan (see target audience for this game) but no fanboy. I've already stated the difference. This thread is full of my objective analysis of the game. Impressions based upon hours of actual playtime with the game, complete with pros and cons. Meanwhile GrandBlue's contribution: "Supers suck, roster sucks. Lol I told you that stuff sucks." Set on repeat. Based on how much playtime? None?

He's either a Nintendo fanboy, or he walked in on his missus using a dualshock set to vibrate and has never been the same since. Either way, don't feed the troll.
Click to expand...
f574b_ORIG-189a5_ORIG_someonesmad.jpg
 
Jak confirmed for Tier C. Dante confirmed for tier B.

Jak- Hey Jak, who stole all your combos bro? Even combos that require a heap of set up and timing will net you about 40-50ap... aka the same as most characters get from mindlessly mashing square. Jak has the most pathetic meter build in the entire game. However, he has a vast bag of tricks all designed to keep the enemy away. That is Jak's game. He is a keep away character, staying on the outskirts of the fight and landing nuisance hits. He also has tremendous mobility thanks to his hoverboard and flying uppercut. So he's good at avoiding supers but builds like s**t, and his supers are very pedestrian. He only has a handful of moves that will net you any super worth a damn, the rest is for keeping enemies off your arse. Not for beginners. Wouldn't argue with a D+ tier with those supers tbh.

Dante- Solid enough melee fighter but I can't help but feel that he is a poor man's Raiden. Raiden does pretty much everything better. He's more mobile, better combos, better supers, that backstab, can combo into super etc. Just outclasses him. Dante is still very solid with good supers, but he also suffers from being the worst character (not fighter) in the game. Awful costumes, taunts, intros everything. Horrible, annoying douchebag. Wouldn't argue with B+.

Tier S
Raiden
Sly Cooper

Tier A
Kratos

Tier B
Radec
Drake
Dante

Tier C+
Parappa

Tier C
Jak

Tier D
Sir Dan

Going to try Sweet Tooth next. After that I'm open to any requests if wanted.
 
Gotta say, I still chuckle at names like 'Nintendrone' and 'Xbot' and the like... If you're having a go at someone for being a fanboy, you look just a tad silly using immature name calling like that...


I'm primarily a PC gamer, I couldn't give a stuff about Microsoft, Sony or Nintendo. I own the three current gen consoles. I've played a few hours of this game. From my limited experience, it is nothing more than a mediocre clone of SSB. It's impossible to not make the comparisons, and once you start doing that you realise the gulf in polish of both games. I don't really consider myself to be an SSB fan, though I do appreciate it for what it does. If you're really into the Sony characters (which I think they could have done a whole lot better with) there may be some enjoyment to be had in this game. Otherwise you're going to go straight back to SSB as the gameplay is simply superior in that title.


From what I played, I truly feel like this game should have been a PSN title. Paying $60 for a game like this is madness to me, i'd consider it at $20 but even then I'd wait for a sale. Number one reason to grab a PC is to avoid exorbitant prices like that.
 
The singleplayer is very rough, as are the menus etc but the gameplay is very polished IMO. I haven't played a Smash game for years and have no desire to because the characters do nothing for me, so I can't comment on that. But I CAN say as someone who has played with these characters in their own worlds, successfully capturing their movesets, uniqueness etc and making it all fit together has been a tremendous effort. Kratos and Sackboy handle like they've been plucked right out of their own games yet a good Sackboy could kick Kratos' arse. There are definitely some flaws in the game, and some balance issues, but considering the completely different characters they have merged together here they have done a great job. The game is chock full of little touches and nods to the characters history. From how they handle to the taunts, intros etc. Perfectly capturing the vibe of the characters without breaking game balance completely.

The netcode is top notch as well*, and regardless of what you've seen from the initially mindless chaos of timed FFA, there is strategy and depth there once you know the characters and play the better modes. 2v2 stock is IMO the best mode. I can understand people not liking this, but what those people need to understand is that the game is strict fanservice. For example, the game has ****ing Sir Dan in it, that might mean nothing to you but is HUGE for me.

*This is a big deal IMO. Plenty of horrible laggy online out there.
 
Face_Plain said:
The singleplayer is very rough, as are the menus etc but the gameplay is very polished IMO. I haven't played a Smash game for years and have no desire to because the characters do nothing for me, so I can't comment on that. But I CAN say as someone who has played with these characters in their own worlds, successfully capturing their movesets, uniqueness etc and making it all fit together has been a tremendous effort. Kratos and Sackboy handle like they've been plucked right out of their own games yet a good Sackboy could kick Kratos' arse. There are definitely some flaws in the game, and some balance issues, but considering the completely different characters they have merged together here they have done a great job. The game is chock full of little touches and nods to the characters history. From how they handle to the taunts, intros etc. Perfectly capturing the vibe of the characters without breaking game balance completely.

The netcode is top notch as well*, and regardless of what you've seen from the initially mindless chaos of timed FFA, there is strategy and depth there once you know the characters and play the better modes. 2v2 stock is IMO the best mode. I can understand people not liking this, but what those people need to understand is that the game is strict fanservice. For example, the game has ****ing Sir Dan in it, that might mean nothing to you but is HUGE for me.

*This is a big deal IMO. Plenty of horrible laggy online out there.
Click to expand...

So just on that, my internet isnt great and sometimes on games like FIFA I get some lag, FPS seem to be ok though. Obviously fighters need quick response and ideally no lag, are you saying it runs pretty well comparable to other games?
 
juss said:
So just on that, my internet isnt great and sometimes on games like FIFA I get some lag, FPS seem to be ok though. Obviously fighters need quick response and ideally no lag, are you saying it runs pretty well comparable to other games?
Click to expand...

I have cable broadband, wired. http://www.speedtest.net/ tells me I have around 20 ping and 20mbps download speed. Not sure how that compares to you. Personally, this is the best online I've experienced.

Occasionally I get a random teleport across the screen from lag hit detection, or something iffy happens, but over 90% of the matches seem to run smoothly for me. No input delay, you're able to counter, dodge, block then attack successfully in their recovery frames, hardly any hit detection issues etc all seamlessly. I think the game automatically matches you with Ausbros which seems to help.

So yeah, very impressive online on my end. Best yet on PS3. You're right that any lag at all would render the game broken but thankfully they nailed it. Games that had s**t online for me include:

-LBP franchise
-Borderlands
-Streets of Rage 2
-Souls franchise

Most shooters (Uncharted, Killzone, Resistance franchises) run pretty well for me, though not as good as All Stars. Capcom seems to have good online as well.

I really hope GOW has online this good, and seeing as Sony Santa Monica helped significantly in the start up of this game hype is high.
 
Really disappointed with the pathetic stat tracking and non functioning belt system. Such a solid foundation here in the core gameplay and capturing the characters accurately, but missing the cream on top.

Patch has been announced to fix some issues online, and nerf Sackboy who has a crazy good level 3 which was easy to get too.
 
matty lloyd the champ said:
Game is ok aside from the fact that you can only KO someone with a special move. Which genius thought that that was a good idea? The percentage system in Smash Brothers Melee shits over this.
Click to expand...
Premiers04 said:
The super being the only way to kill is a bit of a downer, i honestly dont know what they were going for in that regard.
Click to expand...

this is the reason i haven't bought the game, the whole idea of only getting ko's from supers is the most *ed game idea i've ever heard, read about or seen on tv.

just looking at the newly released sales for the game, probably one of the worst selling games of the year. it has completely bombed, i don't know how many more bombas sony can take without going completely **** up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
PS4 Playstation 4
Replies
2
Views
373
BOMBERS 4 LIFE!!!!
BOMBERS 4 LIFE!!!!
Cyber_punk
Multiplat Star Wars: Outlaws
2
Replies
43
Views
1K
Cyber_punk
Cyber_punk
Mesc
Star Citizen
Replies
5
Views
677
Mesc
Mesc
dwwaino
Multiplat Star Wars Jedi: Survivor
5 6 7 8 9
Replies
222
Views
11K
dwwaino
dwwaino

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top