No, it should've. It just should've been done... way better.
PlayStation-All Stars Batle Royale should have been a karting game, not a fighter
- Thread starter Dawg
- Start date
No, it should've. It just should've been done... way better.
Sony didn't really fully pull from its library characters though, not to say they have a ton of characters lying around waiting to be used. Getting nu dante, raiden and big daddy was a mistake before getting the likes of say Dr. Nefarious , Capn Quark, Carmelita Fox or go even further back and put in the rabbit from vib ribbon and Tomba . Why go out and get these 3rd party characters that don't even have anything that makes them scream "playstation" when they haven't even bothered to fully explore their own IP's?
Exactly, me and my little brother tried out the game didn't knock each out within the time limit, so we thought it would pull Smash "sudden death" match nope it just went into extra time and continued to do so until I got bored and let him defeat me.
The game was clearly trying to be Smash Bros but it was a mess as the developers had no idea to why Smash Bros formula works.
You are aware that with the Koopaling that it's either all or none you can't just pick a select few, especially when this was their début in a Mario Kart game.
Nope it should have been more akin to God of War Ascension MP mode Or Power Stone.
It also should have had a bigger budget and a marketing push from Sony
It also didn't deserve all the hate it received, especially from some Nintendo fans. It was quite possibly one of the most pathetic displays when it comes to video games I have seen from fans. Way worse than DmC stuff or games going multiplat situations.
I hope, they do revive it, give it a new look to silence the whiners and go all out. It has so much damn potential
Like I said in another thread given the success of the PS4 this is the best time revive IPs on it
It also should have had a bigger budget and a marketing push from Sony
It also didn't deserve all the hate it received, especially from some Nintendo fans. It was quite possibly one of the most pathetic displays when it comes to video games I have seen from fans. Way worse than DmC stuff or games going multiplat situations.
I hope, they do revive it, give it a new look to silence the whiners and go all out. It has so much damn potential
Like I said in another thread given the success of the PS4 this is the best time revive IPs on it
flatearthpandas
Member
Lol, don't pretend Nintendo doesn't have the roster to fill out Mario Kart. Shyguys were filler to a roster from literally one IP. Smash Bros is a much better comparison and everyone, even non-Nintendo fans, can probably think of characters they'd rather have in there from Nintendo.
ãInaba Residentã
Banned
Pretty much. To make an "All-Star" game, you should have a good amount of IPs that can go together nicely. Look at Smash. A bunch of different characters from different games but they don't look out of place standing next to each other.
PSASBR has characters like Kratos and Nathan Drake fighting characters like Sackboy and Fat Princess. It just doesn't clash well.
The character choices as well as the lack of "soul" are my biggest issues aside from "supers to kill" The whole game is dull and lifeless.
I can see why people would talk about a Smash Bros. ripoff when one mentions PSASBR.
Mario Kart ripoff though... did Mario Kart create karting games? If anything, games like Konami Krazy Racers and Sonic All-Stars racing came up with the idea of a crossover karting game before Mario Kart did it with DLC.
Sony has its fair share of iconic characters on its own but thing is, they all clash together.
It's like they don't even belong to the same developer.
I don't know how to call it but at least Nintendo has a unique style, predefined asthetics, whatever where all their IPs meet a middle ground and they all look great together.
e.g Smash is the first time we see Duck Hunt since it's conception in HD and it doesn't look out of place among the other Nintendo characters.
You can bet you're ass all the characters from Splatoon would look great in Smash
It's like they don't even belong to the same developer.
I don't know how to call it but at least Nintendo has a unique style, predefined asthetics, whatever where all their IPs meet a middle ground and they all look great together.
e.g Smash is the first time we see Duck Hunt since it's conception in HD and it doesn't look out of place among the other Nintendo characters.
You can bet you're ass all the characters from Splatoon would look great in Smash
The easy solution to this would be to only have the current Sony franchises as unlocked characters with the more obscure ones (such as Robbit) being unlocks.
You could also set the thing up like Wipeout does with "Teams" as opposed to indivisual characters. For instance on the character menu you could have
SHADOW OF THE COLOSSUS INC..
represented by Wander
You could even have little commercials for their respected companies, which serve as ads for the re-releases on PlayStation Now.
All Stars is a conflicting title to me. A title along those lines is something I've always wanted, so when it was initially unveiled, I was quite excited. But it soon became apparent that it was lacking a solid creative direction, and that it wasn't really being given the kind of attention that it really needed to be successful. That was all just a feeling at the time though. Now that I know better, it really is incredibly disappointing how this game was handled.
The right people were not in charge of this, and it's a perfect example of the kind of title SCE was wasting money with during the PS3 generation. It's not the only one of its kind, but it's alarming to me that someone actually decided to greenlight this project, but then leave it to pretty much die. From a lack of support, to a pathetic budget, to the wrong creative direction, to a poor foundation, terrible marketing, to just not caring and pushing it out there so that it would get out of the way. It's one of those cases of throwing shit at the wall and seeing what sticks. There were many instances of this last generation, and this was one of them.
It's shocking to me that it managed to push over a million copies considering how much it was mismanaged. Those copies are all thanks to core fans, and those who were going to buy this game regardless.
The focus of this game should have been to create a great game. That comes first. It's not about relying on "starpower" because even if that's there, if the game is lacking, it's not going to end well. This was the first problem. The core design was a huge problem because they went to great lengths imitating something else, only to introduce something that complicated their messaging at the end of it all. The second problem was the marketing and management team not respecting the fanbase. The core audience to be focused on initially were the Playstation fans. Take care of them first. Create a good game, and don't frustrate this core audience, because these million or so fans are going to be your foundation. Then great word of mouth, a great game, and solid marketing will help take you further. The rest you can focus on later. The game needs a solid foundation initially, and a focused vision. You need to establish a fanbase. Just because millions of people know who Sackboy or Kratos or Drake are, doesn't mean they're going to buy a fighting game for them. Those franchises sell for their own reasons, and you have an uphill battle to climb to establish a strong foundation, and appeal to a larger audience outside of die hard fans.
Instead, on top of a shaky foundation, decisions were made to include characters like Dante, Big Daddy, and even Raiden, all of which generated a backlash and made a tough job even tougher. If the support is that lacking that no one capable is really going to push to get the third party characters fans would really want, don't do the asinine move and get what people will consider leftovers. In addition to that, the terrible presentation, lack of polish, and lack of general content. I could write a lot more, but it just irritates me. I hate stupidity, especially with something that I feel is an easy sell for the most part. This was such a terrible way to do this project, because the right people who could make that difference from high up simply didn't care enough.
There'll be another crossover. It'll be done right this time.
The right people were not in charge of this, and it's a perfect example of the kind of title SCE was wasting money with during the PS3 generation. It's not the only one of its kind, but it's alarming to me that someone actually decided to greenlight this project, but then leave it to pretty much die. From a lack of support, to a pathetic budget, to the wrong creative direction, to a poor foundation, terrible marketing, to just not caring and pushing it out there so that it would get out of the way. It's one of those cases of throwing shit at the wall and seeing what sticks. There were many instances of this last generation, and this was one of them.
It's shocking to me that it managed to push over a million copies considering how much it was mismanaged. Those copies are all thanks to core fans, and those who were going to buy this game regardless.
The focus of this game should have been to create a great game. That comes first. It's not about relying on "starpower" because even if that's there, if the game is lacking, it's not going to end well. This was the first problem. The core design was a huge problem because they went to great lengths imitating something else, only to introduce something that complicated their messaging at the end of it all. The second problem was the marketing and management team not respecting the fanbase. The core audience to be focused on initially were the Playstation fans. Take care of them first. Create a good game, and don't frustrate this core audience, because these million or so fans are going to be your foundation. Then great word of mouth, a great game, and solid marketing will help take you further. The rest you can focus on later. The game needs a solid foundation initially, and a focused vision. You need to establish a fanbase. Just because millions of people know who Sackboy or Kratos or Drake are, doesn't mean they're going to buy a fighting game for them. Those franchises sell for their own reasons, and you have an uphill battle to climb to establish a strong foundation, and appeal to a larger audience outside of die hard fans.
Instead, on top of a shaky foundation, decisions were made to include characters like Dante, Big Daddy, and even Raiden, all of which generated a backlash and made a tough job even tougher. If the support is that lacking that no one capable is really going to push to get the third party characters fans would really want, don't do the asinine move and get what people will consider leftovers. In addition to that, the terrible presentation, lack of polish, and lack of general content. I could write a lot more, but it just irritates me. I hate stupidity, especially with something that I feel is an easy sell for the most part. This was such a terrible way to do this project, because the right people who could make that difference from high up simply didn't care enough.
There'll be another crossover. It'll be done right this time.
flatearthpandas
Member
I see what you're saying and I've seen a lot of arguments against even Smash Bros. starting it's genre. That's cool. I don't care whether a Nintendo invents anything or not. But it's about emulating success. For a simplistic example, is Lucky Number Slevin a Snatch copycat or a Lock Stock copycat? Or something more obscure? It's a Snatch copycat, most likely.
flatearthpandas
Member
What kind of insider is Verendus, exactly?
Wreck-It Ralph
Member
『Inaba Resident』;134834188 said:
I never understood why people bring this up. In the list of issues with PABR, this doesn't even place in the top 50. Kratos fighting Sackboy looks fine.
CMojicaAce
Member
Wasn't Naughty Dog supposed to be in charge of developing the game? Or was that just a rumor...
As for the OP, I sort of agree. Personally, I think "Playstation All-Stars" should be a franchise with different genres. Maybe one year could be "Playstation All-Stars Karting" and another year could be the sequel to original All-Stars. Of course, this is assuming the games will be handled right this time.
As for the OP, I sort of agree. Personally, I think "Playstation All-Stars" should be a franchise with different genres. Maybe one year could be "Playstation All-Stars Karting" and another year could be the sequel to original All-Stars. Of course, this is assuming the games will be handled right this time.
Technically, LittleBigKarting was. You can have Sackboy to look like most of their first party characters (Jak, Daxter, Ratchet, Clank, Patapon, Journey, etc.) and guests from Disney, Marvel, Street Fighter, Metal Gear, Final Fantasy...
You can create your own tracks too. Was really nice.
Nah, I know what you mean. Heck, it could have been both genres. Who knows. PS All Stars was not the success they wished at first, but the game then made it to over a million units. After discou ts and sales, so there is interest. They'll probably revisit it at so.e point, pribably like Killer Instinct. As a "free to play" game, and you buying characters and stuff by separate.
As a racer, they could get Naughty Dog make something. They did both Crash Team Racing and Jak X. So they do know their stuff.
You can create your own tracks too. Was really nice.
Nah, I know what you mean. Heck, it could have been both genres. Who knows. PS All Stars was not the success they wished at first, but the game then made it to over a million units. After discou ts and sales, so there is interest. They'll probably revisit it at so.e point, pribably like Killer Instinct. As a "free to play" game, and you buying characters and stuff by separate.
As a racer, they could get Naughty Dog make something. They did both Crash Team Racing and Jak X. So they do know their stuff.
crossover....? gad dang it Verendus don't give me hope man
it's gonna be SF vs Playstation isn't it? 0_0
Jason Frost
Member
Snake should be driving a Triumph bike with Raiden as a co-pilot in this picture.
Cow Goes Moo
Member
will it have kuro and toro ?
『Inaba Resident』;134834188 said:
I think this argument is nil. This is all about art style and art direction; Smash has characters that are radically different from one another, from cartoon creatures of wide range in sizes to realistically proportioned human characters, all of which come from games with distinct art styles and tones. But they made it worked because they put in the effort with art direction.
There is no reason whatsoever for Kratos, Drake, Sackboy, and Fat Princess should clash when in the same screen unless they pretty much took the game models from their original games and pasted it in the game.
Superbot knew this, which is why they intended to do this:
But like everything with this game, the wrong thing happened.
Always thought it might have made more sense as like an arena shooter.
I mean enough of their franchise kind of center around guns, would have been a cool mash-up
Or a 3D Brawler.
Smash worked for Nintendo because most of their characters started in 2D so it made sense when they kept it 2D
Where most of Sony's were 3D characters
I mean enough of their franchise kind of center around guns, would have been a cool mash-up
Or a 3D Brawler.
Smash worked for Nintendo because most of their characters started in 2D so it made sense when they kept it 2D
Where most of Sony's were 3D characters
Do you mind explaining what makes you think the game was 90% Smash? Not being sarcastic, I legitimately want to know what makes you think this.
In FFA's and casual play this is true. But level 3's become a lot less practical in 1v1's and the focus becomes more on doing reads, oki set ups and, for some characters, combos into supers. The game definitely doesn't revolve around level 3 supers only.
SatoAilDarko
Member
A karting game would be easier as you could include a ton of characters as you don't have to create a unique moveset for each one. The issue is trying to create thematic kart for all the characters. I mean the Infamous ones don't seem to lend to one easily.
The problem with another Smash-like fighting game is that the roster is a huge part of it. Sony doesn't have the rights to characters like Cloud, Lana Croft, Crash Bandicoot and Spyro.
Also I feel Sony re a wouldn't spend the money if they could get them. In general Sony wouldn't invest as much in the game as Smash as it wouldn't sell well enough to justify a high investment.
A better idea is making an arena fighter like Power Stone or a traditional fighting game. Get away from the Smash comparisons and position it as a sort of lower-budget experiment.
That's also why karting works as well.
The problem with another Smash-like fighting game is that the roster is a huge part of it. Sony doesn't have the rights to characters like Cloud, Lana Croft, Crash Bandicoot and Spyro.
Also I feel Sony re a wouldn't spend the money if they could get them. In general Sony wouldn't invest as much in the game as Smash as it wouldn't sell well enough to justify a high investment.
A better idea is making an arena fighter like Power Stone or a traditional fighting game. Get away from the Smash comparisons and position it as a sort of lower-budget experiment.
That's also why karting works as well.
I think this for three reasons.
First reason? If you showed casual video of this game to someone who was aware of Smash Bros, they'd call it a Smash clone based on the overwhelming similarities: It's a 2D, side-scrolling 4-player brawler with an emphasis on thematic stages with hazards, which is fueled by iconic characters from Sony's history. In terms of presentation, it couldn't rip off Smash Bros more without calling itself "Sony Bash Brahs".
Second reason? The gameplay itself. Even moving beyond the surface-level presentation of the game, much of the individual character interaction is based around light combos which trap an opponent in place and heavier attacks which control where they are on the field of battle. If you stuck a random snatch of Smash Bros gameplay without a ringout next to a random snatch of PSABR gameplay without a Special finish, people unfamiliar with each game would be hard-pressed to point out the difference. While the end-goal of the moment-to-moment gameplay is very different between the two, the actual moment-to-moment gameplay is practically identical.
Third reason? The items. PSABR makes a point of including usable items in their 2D, 4-player, side-scrolling brawler which every character can use which affords the player an advantage over traditional combos and moves.
I'm calling the game a 90% Smash clone because outside of the method by which scoring is determined, the games are functionally identical. The only difference is that the dev team fucked up a core part of the game's design and made 90% of the moment-to-moment gameplay completely and totally irrelevant to the actual outcome of a match, which is where PSABR completely and totally falters.
It's a terrible game because of the design choices they made in the other 10% of their planning. If they'd just made a 100% Smash clone with Sony characters, it actually could have been a fun game.
IncandescentPrecept
Banned
People who hate on the finishing move-only kills are hard-pressed to find a reason why it is bad.
Karting, you mean the genre Sony tried to go heavily into TWICE last generation and failed miserably both times?
Also you could take the Nintendo cast from Brawl/SSB 4 directly and the game would still suck. Their super to score points system just isn't any fun at all, especially not for casual fans.
Also you could take the Nintendo cast from Brawl/SSB 4 directly and the game would still suck. Their super to score points system just isn't any fun at all, especially not for casual fans.
I've got plenty!
- It renders the majority of moment-to-moment gameplay irrelevant
- It eliminates the entire concept of pacing from battles
- It centers the core gameplay around a single mechanic instead of several working in conjunction
- There's a wild imbalance in the utility of Specials for finishing moves (Kratos Level 1 Finish, OMG)
- Because finishers can be dodged, it basically renders a match between evenly skilled players a game of "Who messes up their timing once!?"
- It eliminates emergent strategy because there's only one way to win
Want me to go on?
Because I can go on. I could write a paragraph about every single one of those points above.
Finishing moves for the way the game was made was a moronic decision.
Judging by how both Modnation Racers and LBP Karting turned out I'm going to say no, it shouldn't have been a karting game. That concept art in the OP is pretty sweet though.
I gotta believe!
I gotta believe!
TimeEffect
Member
Nah. The fighter was fun. It just needs to be built on by a developer with better pedigree, and earn its way to the big characters like Crash And Spyro. Nintendo has earned that right.
Keeping the kart racing games contained in the game world is better, like in Crash.
LBP had a good theme too, but it was not a good game.
Keeping the kart racing games contained in the game world is better, like in Crash.
LBP had a good theme too, but it was not a good game.
ModNation was gr8 ;~;
DICKS AHOY
Banned
There's a shit ton of cool PSASBR material I've seen floating around on artist's blogs which never made it into the final game. Real damn shame.I think this argument is nil. This is all about art style and art direction; Smash has characters that are radically different from one another, from cartoon creatures of wide range in sizes to realistically proportioned human characters, all of which come from games with distinct art styles and tones. But they made it worked because they put in the effort with art direction.
There is no reason whatsoever for Kratos, Drake, Sackboy, and Fat Princess should clash when in the same screen unless they pretty much took the game models from their original games and pasted it in the game.
Superbot knew this, which is why they intended to do this:
But like everything with this game, the wrong thing happened.
None of your points make any sense whatsoever so I don't think you should go on anymore either
1. Moment to moment plays build up the supers. Of course they matter. Timing is king and unless you have a good game plan you are going to wrecked by any decent player.
2. ugh no it adds to the intensity of the battle. I never felt it got in the way of pacing at any given time.
3. Again what the heck does this even mean? So is Smash built around ring outs? Is SF/Tekken built around getting HP of your opponent to 0? Of course they are. It's the final goal and the games are built around it. Unless you are conveninetly ignore use items, doging, enviornment changes etc as mechanics in the game this point makes no sense
4. There were a few that were OP as far as supers go yes. But overall the combat was well balanced across characters. Combo system was very well done as well given the type of game this is.
5. I addressed this before. Without strategy in a PvP you are going to get destroyed against a good player. Depending on the character, the stage and the condition of the other players, strategy was in constant need of adjustment throughout a game.
Heck tell you what I'll tell you what actually went wrong with the game, none of this I don't like the combat system so it must mean it's bad nonsense
1. Art style..big mistake
2. Shouldn't have been 2D. The PS franchises thrive on 3D gaming. Hence this game should have been either like GOW:A MP or PowerStone. Fk mass market appeal checklist approaches
3. Menus were embarrassingly bad. not attractive at all and were ugly
4. Sony not spending money to acquire important characters
5. Cash in why-are-they-even-in-this characters being added..'instead' of the ones that are important. heck they didn't even use their own IPs properly for this.
so I hope Verendus is right and they do it again but be smart about it this time.
Go on, all your arguments dilute to "You can only kill with 1 attack making the other ones useless!" Which is just not true.
There are a lot of problems in the game, but the kill system is not one of them.
Askherserenity
Member
Man, you just made everyone realize that Sony has shit characters. And you're even scraping at the bottom of the barrel there. That's a pretty bad list.
Who the hell wants to play a kart racer as Joel?
Who the hell wants to play a kart racer as Joel?
Theognosis
Member
Link it up with Mario Kart 8 for the kart battle of the ages!
Wander on Agro ATV*
versus
Link on Epona superbike*
* Available on DLC.
Wander on Agro ATV*
versus
Link on Epona superbike*
* Available on DLC.
This....I also do not get...
In what world this
and this
Look nice together? You're used to see them together...that's it. Anyone not knowing this characters would see quite the contrast.
It's not even remotely different than Radec and Sackboy
You make it seem like Joel is a shit character. I think what you're trying to say is that a lot of Sony characters are inappropriate for this type of thing.
....This world?
You know that picture only has one character per IP and has a fraction of their IPs? There's some questionable choices in that picture that were chosen over established old IPs. I don't see how they were "scraping at the bottom of the barrel".
It's exactly because of Smash existing all these years that you're used to see the characters together, and because of the fact that Nintendo pushes the idea that they all belong together...
Design wise?...just no.
PSASBR Tried to do exactly that, and many Sony merchandise now likes to put all their characters together. For a similar effect in people.If more PSASBR games come out, people would get used to see Parappa and Wander together
@B.O.O.M
1.) Moment to moment gameplay in PSASB does NOT matter. While it builds the meter for your Specials, beyond that the good or poor play you exhibit is literally of no consequence. If you get your ass beaten for five minutes in a row, as long as the enemy Special doesn't hit you it's of no consequence. That is BAD game design, because it doesn't punish poor play.
2.) No it doesn't. It hinges the entire battle on playing keep-away from anyone with at least one level of meter in their Special while utterly eliminating any sense of threat from someone without a Special ready to go.
3.) Are you thick or something? Just to use Smash as an example... Even if it's built around the ring-out, the accumulation of damage increasing the knockback of every attack, the constant threat of a ring out, and the especially dangerous directional smashes all combine together to create a solid threat.
In Smash, how you play matters to you and how you manage yourself in the ring. If you suck, you're more likely to get ringed-out. In PSABR, outside of timing, your gameplay has nothing to do with whether you're eliminated or not: In the wrong place at the wrong time? Poof, gone. Get smacked around enough to build up a Level 3 Special for someone but dodge it? LOL, you're just as golden as at the start of the match.
4.) When Specials are the only moves which matter, some of them being OP is a huge problem.
5.) "Well, if you're good enough it's a good game!" doesn't make shit design choices less shitty. There were a lot of shit design choices with PSABR.
Nice that you didn't address the emergent gameplay thing. Perhaps because you realize there is no emergent gameplay in PSABR because of the shit design choices?
Your "here's what's actually wrong" boils down to "If they'd made it a completely different game, it would have worked!" which speaks volumes about what you think of the game, by the way.
@Fj0823
1) It still renders most moment-to-moment gameplay useless unless you have a finisher primed.
2) Even Smash Bros has pace to it. The finishers being all or nothing means that the action is at a fever pitch or it's boring as hell. There's literally no drama to the game unless someone has a Special ready to go or if they're almost at the point of having one.
3) There's only one way to gain points or gain momentum in a match. That's shit design, period.
4) Compared to other Level 1 Finishers, Kratos has one with some decent range and it comes out pretty quick. He has an advantage compared to Parappa's crap L1 Finisher or Drake's, for example.
5) See point 1 and 3.
6) In Smash, there's a multitude of ways to eliminate an opponent. You can chip damage them to increase the distance they fly with each hit. You can go for a double-death with certain throws. You can edge guard after sending someone near to the edge to further pressure them. There's entire schools of thought on whether pressuring someone for an upsmash, sidesmash, or downsmash is the preferred way to take someone out.
That doesn't even include item utility.
Yet you're claiming that some combos and a maximum of three ways per character to finish off foes provides more emergence gameplay.
Yeah, go ahead and explain that one further. I'll wait.
1.) Moment to moment gameplay in PSASB does NOT matter. While it builds the meter for your Specials, beyond that the good or poor play you exhibit is literally of no consequence. If you get your ass beaten for five minutes in a row, as long as the enemy Special doesn't hit you it's of no consequence. That is BAD game design, because it doesn't punish poor play.
2.) No it doesn't. It hinges the entire battle on playing keep-away from anyone with at least one level of meter in their Special while utterly eliminating any sense of threat from someone without a Special ready to go.
3.) Are you thick or something? Just to use Smash as an example... Even if it's built around the ring-out, the accumulation of damage increasing the knockback of every attack, the constant threat of a ring out, and the especially dangerous directional smashes all combine together to create a solid threat.
In Smash, how you play matters to you and how you manage yourself in the ring. If you suck, you're more likely to get ringed-out. In PSABR, outside of timing, your gameplay has nothing to do with whether you're eliminated or not: In the wrong place at the wrong time? Poof, gone. Get smacked around enough to build up a Level 3 Special for someone but dodge it? LOL, you're just as golden as at the start of the match.
4.) When Specials are the only moves which matter, some of them being OP is a huge problem.
5.) "Well, if you're good enough it's a good game!" doesn't make shit design choices less shitty. There were a lot of shit design choices with PSABR.
Nice that you didn't address the emergent gameplay thing. Perhaps because you realize there is no emergent gameplay in PSABR because of the shit design choices?
Your "here's what's actually wrong" boils down to "If they'd made it a completely different game, it would have worked!" which speaks volumes about what you think of the game, by the way.
@Fj0823
1) It still renders most moment-to-moment gameplay useless unless you have a finisher primed.
2) Even Smash Bros has pace to it. The finishers being all or nothing means that the action is at a fever pitch or it's boring as hell. There's literally no drama to the game unless someone has a Special ready to go or if they're almost at the point of having one.
3) There's only one way to gain points or gain momentum in a match. That's shit design, period.
4) Compared to other Level 1 Finishers, Kratos has one with some decent range and it comes out pretty quick. He has an advantage compared to Parappa's crap L1 Finisher or Drake's, for example.
5) See point 1 and 3.
6) In Smash, there's a multitude of ways to eliminate an opponent. You can chip damage them to increase the distance they fly with each hit. You can go for a double-death with certain throws. You can edge guard after sending someone near to the edge to further pressure them. There's entire schools of thought on whether pressuring someone for an upsmash, sidesmash, or downsmash is the preferred way to take someone out.
That doesn't even include item utility.
Yet you're claiming that some combos and a maximum of three ways per character to finish off foes provides more emergence gameplay.
Yeah, go ahead and explain that one further. I'll wait.
Similar threads
- Poll