QisTopTier
XisBannedTier
Please never touch a single multiplayer game as a designer ever. Thank you.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Playstation All Stars Battle Royale Discussion thread [Up: Leakfest #11]
- Thread starter ReaperXL7
- Start date
- Status
Please never touch a single multiplayer game as a designer ever. Thank you.
A Pretty Panda
fuckin' called it, man
WHAT?
Also, the way the super meter works looks similar the the CN smash-like game. When you hit guys little gems came out and if you collected enough to build up meter you could do a super.
Thank you for bringing this up, I was waiting for someone to. The more competitive players do tend to play without items, including Smash Balls, since Final Smashes tend to be "I win" or "I kill you." With what we know of PASBR and the fact that the super moves are the ONLY way to get points, that's where my concern is.
Wins shouldn't be distributed at random. And skilled players should definitely win more games on average. However designing a game that is reliant on skill, without variance, is destined for failure unless the intended demographic is competitive players.
Welp, with that kind of mentality I guess it's no wonder smash community is considered a joke in the fgc and exposed as such. Glad you're not designing the game.
Im happy you aren't developing this game or any game. This is just.............
QisTopTier
XisBannedTier
You are sounding pretty derp here. It doesnt matter what the game is designed as. Putting a more skilled player in a pool of lesser skilled players will always come out with the skilled player on top. If this isn't true then the game is just simply random as fuck and there is no skill factor period. There is no way to measure if you are getting better. There will never be any advanced tricks and so on.
YOU CAN NOT USE SMASH AS AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT YOU ARE SAYING. That game is one of the worst fucking offenders of skill mattering over lala fun timez anyone can win*
That's basically the bottom line. The super KO mechanic is something that differentiates the game from SSB. I'll reserve judgment until I get my hands on it, but it doesn't sound bad at all. I bet when SSB first came out, the idea of victories only through ringouts sounded horrible for a fighting game too.
They are not "designing a game reliant on skill".
In the interviews they clearly state that it is deliberately made as approachable as possible, only with the added depth that the competitive scene has come to expect of these games.
Let's not directly assume the worst, shall we?
ViewtifulJC
Banned
Protip: If a game can't be decided by who is a superior player, then it's not a good game, but a random one. Playing a game competitively or smarter or more efficiently should be an indicator of something and should denoted by wins....period. You're acting like the entry barrier of this game is going to be high as fuck.
QisTopTier
XisBannedTier
It's the next Guilty Gear
Lets just be honest now, and i think you will agree Hero, not everyone can be a winner, not everyone can be in the first place. And at the end of the day, to me the process of playing a game like this with my buds, is where i get my enjoyment, and it wont matter if i am the one winning or loosing, and again, that just adds to more heated sportsmanship of sorts, of trying to improve, does not matter how deep or shallow the game mechanics are. A varying degree of skill is always the factor that will play out on the outcome. I don't really see your issues about the skill involved in this game. That isn't everything.
eh, I thought Brawl was a bit of a downgrade from Melee, but still a fantastic game.
Seriously. The Smash Ball was a joke. How can anyone say that mechanic is a proper way to balance out a fighting game?! :lol
darkpaladinmfc
Member
I was quite optimistic, but the battle system has me super worried. Killing only with super moves seems terrible to me. Surely if you can only KO with supers and you have no health bar, then all supers must be a OHK, with the only difference between the 'level' being how many people you can hit at once and how easy it is to hit with it. I can see this being particularly troublesome for 1v1 and will mean if you land a bunch of combos, not get hit once, miss your super then you're both exactly even. Having some members of the fighting game community on the team does help alleviate my fears, but I have to see more and maybe play the game before I can decide whether this mechanic is awful or not.
. Melee has dumb randomness in it.
Obviously competitive players don't use it
. Melee has dumb randomness in it.Somehow I think Street Fighter and all the major fighting games out there are doing JUST FINE with casual folks...
TimeEffect
Member
Love what I'm seeing, would much rather see PlayStation do a bunch of Nintendo games than shooters: Where's my Sackboy Kart Racing series, my Sackboy 3D Platformer Land, my PlayStation Party?
This is a much better concept that focuses on flat-out fun than unoriginal boring "serious" games this gen has taken over.
Question: How do you DIE in this game? I hope there are tons of options including a classic health setting, ring outs, lives, ability to change damage values, and tons of weapons to pick up and use.
Do Supers work like GameBreakers in NBA Street Vol where you can choose to stack the Super or use it (thus restarting the grind)?
What's the point of the game? To achieve a level 3 super? (that wouldn't make sense...)
This is a much better concept that focuses on flat-out fun than unoriginal boring "serious" games this gen has taken over.
Question: How do you DIE in this game? I hope there are tons of options including a classic health setting, ring outs, lives, ability to change damage values, and tons of weapons to pick up and use.
Do Supers work like GameBreakers in NBA Street Vol where you can choose to stack the Super or use it (thus restarting the grind)?
What's the point of the game? To achieve a level 3 super? (that wouldn't make sense...)
lol that game would blow his mind.
WHAT IS WITH THAT DOGGIE'S HAIR
MiniBossBattle
Member
Ed Ma is working on the game? Believe GAF believe.
QisTopTier
XisBannedTier
hmm.
Each button on the ground = 12 attacks
each button in the air = 12 attacks
then the 3 supers
Acquiescence
Member
Christ, we're just going in circles here.
You have the gall to accuse me of ignoring your arguments and then miss what I stated several pages back already...
BR won't sell as much as SSB, BUT...
And Sony also has those meaningful well-known franchises, plenty of them, just none that match Mario or Pokemon in terms of sales. What I'm saying for the umpteenth time is that it doesn't matter. The measure of BR's success isn't that it beats SSBB in sales but that it returns a profit and creates awareness for all the franchises that appear in the game while enabling a new generation to discover the more obscure ones. Right now, God of War, Uncharted and LittleBigPlanet, Jak & Daxter and Rachet & Clank have created more than enough recognition to ably sell a game like BR. Who gives a shit if Sony doesn't have their own Mario, that's irrelevant and a pointless comparison to make.
I don't like the opinions that are repeated over and over again and then just as easily dismissed and proven wrong. Battle Royale doesn't have a character approaching the level of awareness that Mario does... doesn't matter. Simple as that.
HyperBitHero
Member
Doesn't the Wii only have like 2 buttons? Surely this game will make use of the PS3's control scheme, to make a more interesting experience.
I see what his point is, it just seems worded oddly.
Basically, stuff like final smashes in brawl are unbalanced as hell. Some characters are insanely good(Super Sonic), some suck horribly(Peach), and there's the element of actually hitting/breaking the ball that naturally makes it easier for super mobile characters to snatch. For casual play, that doesn't matter too much. People go crazy when the orb appears and it's fun to see who breaks it. For competitive play it sucks and needs to be disabled.
SSB has a lot of randomness with the items. You may get lucky and a hammer will fall right where you are. You may get unlucky and attack right when a bomb falls, killing yourself. For competitive play, ALL of these elements are taken out so there is no randomness and the better player wins.
His point is that with PSASBR(lol), the supers are the underlying score mechanic. Meaning, if a character has an incredibly easy to land super that gets kills, they're going to win a lot. If a character has really bad/extremely hard to land in comparison ones, they won't win much. If a level 1 super for a specific character is killing everyone, it won't be very fun for casual OR competitive play, since it can't be disabled when it's the only way to score.
However, there may be a lot of customization and match types allowing you to disable them, but that isn't something shown yet. The stuff about supers is obviously speculation, and it could be a great idea in theory, but it can easily be messed up. So I'm not saying it's good/bad here, too early for it.
Except Smash Bros was never designed to be a competitive fighter.
Oh, you're the guy that thought I never played God of War because I compared Kratos' spinning slash to Link's up+B attack. Did you ever manage to reply to my picture I posted for you?
First of all, relax, I didn't kick your puppy. Secondly, Smash Bros was a game designed to appeal to a wide audience. It was never intended as a competitive fighting game like Street Fighter or Virtua Fighter. One such reason that fighting games were practically dead for a long stretch time was because they lost popularity and I will argue that the majority of that has to do with the fact that they became increasingly more and more complex to appeal only to the most technically proficient, competitive players out there. People at large stop having fun with a game if they consistently lose because if the only factor in if you win or lose is your skill versus someone else's skill they take it to heart. From the first Smash Bros game and on Sakurai purposefully put in random, outside variables that would randomize the game to an extent. Items, stage hazards, tripping, etc. So yes, on average a more skilled player should win moreso than a less skilled player but through these factors it is possible for the less skilled player to win sometimes instead of never and they will continue to play.
I understand that and which is why I remain skeptical of the implementation of the system where the primary method of getting AP balls is how much better you are than your opponent.
Thank you, at least one person gets it. I didn't even say it was a bad mechanic, just that I am skeptical of how it will turn out.
darkpaladinmfc
Member
I wish I could stress how completely irrelevant this is. StarCraft was never designed to be an ESPORT.
2 Buttons? WTF.
He was answering someone that said 'All', not 'Most'.
And yes, there is no fun to a multiplayer game that has no random element and the best player always wins. It's no fun for anyone. The win is 100% certain for the best player and the loss is 100% certain for the worse player. Obviously the best player should win most of the time. It seems odd to me that this thread is full of people pouring hype on a game that rips off a Nintendo franchise, yet are simultaneously against one of the main features of most Nintendo multiplayer titles.
Even competitive games like Street Fighter have random elements. Or is guessing the right wake up attack pure skill now? Also, it has the ultra attacks. That game for babies now is it?
Yeah, I'm a little worried about the battle system as well. I mean, I realize that, like KevinCow explained earlier, that it's basically the reverse of Smash Bros, but I'm not at all convinced at this point that it will work out really well.
It almost seems like if the only way to KO opponents in Smash was with Smash Balls, which I actually got kind of frustrated with in Brawl. I'm hoping it's more balanced here and ends up working out well.
QisTopTier
XisBannedTier
You could read or watch videos?
Square = light
Triangle = heavy
Circle = specials
x= jump
L3 = grab
L1 = dodge/block
R1= pick up items
R2= super
HyperBitHero
Member
Of course he'll be in it. They have Radec, and other much more obscure characters.
Razgriz-Specter
Member
So Snake's level 3(if in)
controlling a gekko maybe?
controlling a gekko maybe?
James Sawyer Ford
Gold Member
Accessibility did.
But I like the direction they are going with here. It looks like it offers accessibly while also having substantially more depth.
That's a killer combination to have, imho.
And the super attacks just make things even more interesting. A lot of people are dismissing it, saying it can be overpowering when a player gets to the third power level. But the way I see it is that it adds more interesting choices and isn't as clear cut as some make it. A string of level 1 powered attacks may be more powerful if timed right than a single level 3 attack. It's also a risk/reward scenario. Do you take the conservative play and go for the level 1 attacks, or do you save up and try and risk it for the sure fire killer level 3 attack (which will undoubtedly take a long time to accrue).
I really am loving all the details of the game now that I'm more aware of how it plays.
The animation and physics look fantastic to boot.
If you're playing Smash Bros with anything other than a Gamecube controller you're doing it wrong.
darkpaladinmfc
Member
Yes it is a skill actually... The more skilled player shouldn't win 100% of the time. But the person who PLAYED BETTER should win 99.9% of the time.
I think it'd be really awesome if he like when in front of the screen like that Killzone dude and started shooting people up with a grenade launcher or something.
That seems like an awful lot of aerial attacks. I believe I heard/read that the diagonals factor into the attack inputs, so here are my guesses:
Light
Square
Up + Square
Down + Square
Side + Square
Up Diagonal + Square
Down Diagonal + Square
Medium
Triangle
Up + Triangle
Down + Triangle
Side + Triangle
Up Diagonal + Triangle
Down Diagonal + Triangle
Hard
Circle
Up + Circle
Down + Circle
Side + Circle
Up Diagonal + Circle
Down Diagonal + Circle
Air
Air Square
Air Direction + Square
Air Triangle
Air Direction + Triangle
Air Circle
Air Direction + Circle
Supers
R2 (Level 1)
R2 (Level 2)
R2 (Level 3)
EDIT: I forgot about grabs. Hmm...
Well no shit, if it was designed to be a competitive fighter, it would be a competitive fighter. Randomness doesn't make a game better from even a casual gameplay standpoint. If someone is better than you at something and the game doesn't reward good gameplay than the core of the game is indicative of nothing which means the game has no integrity.
Razgriz-Specter
Member
Going to be hard to top.
QisTopTier
XisBannedTier
Fighting games died because arcades died. If there was online play back in the day like we have now, there would of never been a "resurgence" Why blow all that cash in the arcades for a few games when you could go home and play more games for a single cost.
Once again smash is a bad example.
A Pretty Panda
fuckin' called it, man
I hope Jack Tretton is the final boss
- Status