TheBaronOfNA
Banned
Platform fans are bipolar, no surprise there.
I like Kamiya's but I just happen to disagree with him and his Twitter persona?
Platform fans are bipolar, no surprise there.
Oh I completely agree. In glorious fantasy land everything would be new and fun (we can still have sequels of course), without having a dozen franchises that are essentially the same with minor tweaks in a given genre. Trying new things is how new genres and subgenres come to exist in the first place.
I wouldn't use those examples, they are far to specific one way or the other. Although, that video someone posted up there trying to demonstrated the differences did try to use specifics like that (without using those so as to not hurt their point) and that to me is laughable. Being able to grab a ledge in one game and not grab a ledge in the other doesn't really make that large of a difference at a glance. (I'm well aware that on a technical level this is a big deal for pro players but casual players...the core purchaser for either game...doesn't/won't notice, or care).
I swear I didn't change it a few minutes ago because you praised it. Weird coincidence.I fucking love your avatar. FLCL is the best.
So you think he's creative, but you don't understand how as a developer he has a problem with another developer being ripped off by another company?I like Kamiya's but I just happen to disagree with him and his Twitter persona?
I can't believe all the posts that tweet generated, all of this just because he shared his opinion about the game?
How about this:
I've been gaming since 1985 on Nintendo systems. I cut my teeth on the NES. I loved the SNES and I loved the Sega Genesis. Both equally, and with crazy fanboyism.
I was turned on to PlayStation in high school, when it released in 1995, and I was 16 years old.
I didn't play Smash Bros until Melee hit on the Gamecube, because I never owned an N64. The N64 and the Wii are the only Nintendo home consoles I never owned. After playing the Wii U at E3, I'm actually kind of sold on it, and will pick one up eventually. Since I just dropped $300 on a Vita earlier this year, I probably won't buy the Wii U during it's launch period, but I WILL buy one, and probably when the new Smash comes out, if not before.
You can be a fan of PlayStation AND Nintendo. Your comment was really silly, and makes no sense. The same argument can be said about the Smash games, and it wouldn't make it any less silly.
This game, like Smash Bros, is a fan service game. It's GOING to excite the fans of PlayStation, like Smash excites the fans of Nintendo. Why is that so hard for some people to accept. PlayStation has fans. Many of which have been gaming on PlayStation platforms for over 17 years, in the same way that I've been gaming on Nintendo platforms for 27 years.
If you aren't a Nintendo or PlayStation fan, I can't really see how you'd be terribly excited about either Smash OR PBR outside of maybe being intrigued by the combat systems in both games, and even then, you'd have to be some level of fighting game fan to even bother going that far.
Say it with me: Fan Service. This game...is...fan...service. Just like Smash Bros is fan service. Marvel vs Capcom is ALSO fan service. Most cross over fighters are.
You, as a consumer, may not have a problem with it. He, as a developer, feels strongly about it.So what if it's a rip off
/my two cents
How about this:
I've been gaming since 1985 on Nintendo systems. I cut my teeth on the NES. I loved the SNES and I loved the Sega Genesis. Both equally, and with crazy fanboyism.
I was turned on to PlayStation in high school, when it released in 1995, and I was 16 years old.
I didn't play Smash Bros until Melee hit on the Gamecube, because I never owned an N64. The N64 and the Wii are the only Nintendo home consoles I never owned. After playing the Wii U at E3, I'm actually kind of sold on it, and will pick one up eventually. Since I just dropped $300 on a Vita earlier this year, I probably won't buy the Wii U during it's launch period, but I WILL buy one, and probably when the new Smash comes out, if not before.
You can be a fan of PlayStation AND Nintendo. Your comment was really silly, and makes no sense. The same argument can be said about the Smash games, and it wouldn't make it any less silly.
This game, like Smash Bros, is a fan service game. It's GOING to excite the fans of PlayStation, like Smash excites the fans of Nintendo. Why is that so hard for some people to accept. PlayStation has fans. Many of which have been gaming on PlayStation platforms for over 17 years, in the same way that I've been gaming on Nintendo platforms for 27 years.
If you aren't a Nintendo or PlayStation fan, I can't really see how you'd be terribly excited about either Smash OR PBR outside of maybe being intrigued by the combat systems in both games, and even then, you'd have to be some level of fighting game fan to even bother going that far.
Say it with me: Fan Service. This game...is...fan...service. Just like Smash Bros is fan service. Marvel vs Capcom is ALSO fan service. Most cross over fighters are.
You, as a consumer, may not have a problem with it. He, as a developer, feels strongly about it.
So you think he's creative, but you don't understand how as a developer he has a problem with another developer being ripped off by another company?
I don't get it.
Fan service games are awesome. The problem is they made a fan service game that LOOKS LIKE A CARBON COPY of their competitions fan service game. I'd love it if they had built a fan service game that lived by it's own merits, since I really like some of playstations properties. This is not that game.How about this:
I've been gaming since 1985 on Nintendo systems. I cut my teeth on the NES. I loved the SNES and I loved the Sega Genesis. Both equally, and with crazy fanboyism.
I was turned on to PlayStation in high school, when it released in 1995, and I was 16 years old.
I didn't play Smash Bros until Melee hit on the Gamecube, because I never owned an N64. The N64 and the Wii are the only Nintendo home consoles I never owned. After playing the Wii U at E3, I'm actually kind of sold on it, and will pick one up eventually. Since I just dropped $300 on a Vita earlier this year, I probably won't buy the Wii U during it's launch period, but I WILL buy one, and probably when the new Smash comes out, if not before.
You can be a fan of PlayStation AND Nintendo. Your comment was really silly, and makes no sense. The same argument can be said about the Smash games, and it wouldn't make it any less silly.
This game, like Smash Bros, is a fan service game. It's GOING to excite the fans of PlayStation, like Smash excites the fans of Nintendo. Why is that so hard for some people to accept. PlayStation has fans. Many of which have been gaming on PlayStation platforms for over 17 years, in the same way that I've been gaming on Nintendo platforms for 27 years.
If you aren't a Nintendo or PlayStation fan, I can't really see how you'd be terribly excited about either Smash OR PBR outside of maybe being intrigued by the combat systems in both games, and even then, you'd have to be some level of fighting game fan to even bother going that far.
Say it with me: Fan Service. This game...is...fan...service. Just like Smash Bros is fan service. Marvel vs Capcom is ALSO fan service. Most cross over fighters are.
Nobody was saying anything about you.I like Kamiya's but I just happen to disagree with him and his Twitter persona?
They have. Don't judge a book by its coverFan service games are awesome. The problem is they made a fan service game that LOOKS LIKE A CARBON COPY of their competitions fan service game. I'd love it if they had built a fan service game that lived by it's own merits, since I really like some of playstations properties. This is not that game.
And yes, I thought the clear street fighter rip offs of the nineties where embarrassing too. Some games back then where much worse offenders than others.
By god, it's not. This industry grows through gameplay innovation. That's what it should strive for, not your conformist view, which I personally find pretty disgusting.Because that is how the industry has grown?
And he "ripped off" Zelda?
Because he and Sony will not be the last ones to Rip Nintendo and other developers?
Nobody was saying anything about you.
Nodody.
They haven't. I played it. I judged the book by its cover and it's content.They have. Don't judge a book by its cover
And yet, the competition pushed Capcom to do an even better job with future versions of their fighters. Some of them even introduced good new ideas that Capcom themselves adopted. The many Street Fighter 2 ripoffs helped legitimize fighting games as a genre. While many of these ripoffs were complete garbage, they had an overall positive effect on the genre and gaming in general.
So again, I ask: why are these kinds of ripoffs so morally objectionable?
Okay, here's the thing. I'm going to try and defend/explain Kamiya's comments.
He calls PSAS a "rip-off"; he hasn't played the game. He calls it amoral; "rip-offs" are commonly accepted in this industry as a part of iteration.
Except, that's not really what he's talking about. To use the Okami example that a lot of people have been tossing around, proclaiming it a rip-off of Zelda... well, there's a big difference here. Okami is admittedly a Zelda clone, but it has new ideas of its own. And, indeed, PSAS has a few new ideas too. It's derivative, sure, but not in a bad way.
The problem is best summarized here:
What Sony is doing is attempting to leech off of SSB's popularity and give people the impression that it's the same game, but on PS3. In fact, everything about the game from the way it was revealed to this youtube video evidences the likely scenario that Sony pitched this game to be a SSB clone. That was probably their goal from the start, and above all else, they seem to want people to think it's Sony Smash Bros. This is how they're selling it.
Okami may have been similar to Zelda in key ways, but they didn't rely on Zelda to sell the game. The fact that Kamiya is so easily able to jump to the conclusion that PSAS is identical to SSB is indicative of the fact that this is what Sony wants us to believe.
I respect what Superbot is doing. They're adapting a game design which they love, putting a spin on it, and making it their own. Of course, how would anyone else know that? If Sony wanted to emphasize PSAS's differences from SSB they would have. Instead we're forced to play the game for ourselves merely to see that it isn't a carbon copy.
That's why Kamiya doesn't have much respect for Sony in all of this. Rather than try to make a pretty cool game that stands on its own merits (which it probably does), they're trying to make an SSB clone which happens to be a cool game in spite of that.
By god, it's not. This industry grows through gameplay innovation.
That's what it should strive for, not your conformist view, which I personally find pretty disgusting.
Again, I already answered this, but I'd you imply that okami is a Zelda rip off on the same level that all stars is a smash rip off you are delusional or trying to push your own fan boyish agenda.
I already replied why it is not. Use your brain. Jeez.
This game, like Smash Bros, is a fan service game. It's GOING to excite the fans of PlayStation, like Smash excites the fans of Nintendo. Why is that so hard for some people to accept. PlayStation has fans. Many of which have been gaming on PlayStation platforms for over 17 years, in the same way that I've been gaming on Nintendo platforms for 27 years.
If you aren't a Nintendo or PlayStation fan, I can't really see how you'd be terribly excited about either Smash OR PBR outside of maybe being intrigued by the combat systems in both games, and even then, you'd have to be some level of fighting game fan to even bother going that far.
Say it with me: Fan Service. This game...is...fan...service. Just like Smash Bros is fan service. Marvel vs Capcom is ALSO fan service. Most cross over fighters are.
cmon guys you're better than this. don't let your feelings take you over.
people keep blabbering that it plays different or whatever doesn't really get the point of kamiya's tweet. it's a ripoff, plain and simple. how did you guys think this was proposed to sony executives in the first place? it was greenlit because of the success that smash attained and sony knew that. that's what kamiya was pointing out, that they are ripping off just to make easy money. sure they can improve it and change some aspects of it because that's the beauty of ripping off. so don't defend it with "it's different" statements, it's not. when the game was in the planning process, it's not. they are looking at smash and thinking how they could make a game like that.
just like what kamiya said, "use your brain."
By god, it's not. This industry grows through gameplay innovation. That's what it should strive for, not your conformist view, which I personally find pretty disgusting.
Again, I already answered this, but I'd you imply that okami is a Zelda rip off on the same level that all stars is a smash rip off you are delusional or trying to push your own fan boyish agenda. I already replied why it is not. Use your brain. Jeez.
Generally inspired by other games or developers
Borrow, inspiring or Ripping Off are not exactly terms for conformism.
Fanboy Agenda?
its as much as a rip off as Tekken was to VF
Wonder how many people have sat their typing 'Use your brain' with a smug look on their face, as though they're in on some kind of exclusive joke in this thread
You think this game is an evolution? Really? I think is a blantant copy with some slight variations, that actually make it worse than smash. Go figure.His conformist view, which you find pretty disgusting?
...The fuck?
But on the part of this quote that actually makes sense, the industry grows equally through innovation and evolution. We wouldn't be where we are today without new ideas, but we also wouldn't be where we are today without people refining and building on old ideas.
Having played both, Okami is far more of a Zelda ripoff than All-Stars is a Smash ripoff.
Kamiya is 100% correct. PSABR most certainly IS a rip off of Smash Bros. That doesn't mean it isn't doing some things differently or that it is necessarily a good thing or bad thing. But it absolutely is a rip off..like irrefutably. I do not understand the people in here actually trying to say it isn't.
I guess it's just the connotations that bother me about this.
He seems to be implying that there's nothing more to this game than Smash Bros., which isn't the case. He also seems to be taking some kind of 'morality' stance against the game, which I think is really silly because it is different enough to be its own game and it's a game that people want.
It's not like PS All-Stars' purpose is to trick people into buying it instead of Smash Bros. It's meeting a demand, and it's actually doing so in a way that is more creative than I think people initially wanted.
It's in response to a very narrow minded group of people that try to frame that in a negative light.
Have you actually played this? I don't want to accuse you of lying just because you don't like the game, but you have some very odd opinions about it compared to everyone else who's played it.You think this game is an evolution? Really? I think is a blantant copy with some slight variations, that actually make it worse than smash. Go figure.
And yes, implying this industry grows not through original ideas but by copying others concept is conformism and disgusting to me.
"Just a ripoff..." does though."Rip off" does not imply there is nothing more to something than what it is taking from.
Let's put it this way, Sony wanted a product to celebrate its characters. There are plenty of games that celebrate a large cast of characters drawn from various sources, and fighting games are generally the best way to do it. But really they could have only gone a number of ways, namely a SF style game or more of a party fighter. If they had made it more like a Street Fighter game there wouldn't be droves of people out calling it a rip off. So why is it that only Smash Bros is allowed an untouchable formula? Especially when the only similarities are the way the camera works and having four characters on screenThey haven't. I played it. I judged the book by its cover and it's content.
I have. Have you? I found smash brothers to be much more satisfying. So an evolution this game is not, to me. It has better online it seems tough.Have you actually played this? I don't want to accuse you of lying just because you don't like the game, but you have some very odd opinions about it compared to everyone else who's played it.
Some other "slight variations" of PS All-Stars are much deeper fighting mechanics including an actual combo system.
That's not to say Smash's mechanics are shit - they're extremely fun - but I think it's definitely something worth calling an evolution.
You always seem to have one liners about these games but don't actually explain why you feel the way you do about the gameplay.I have. Have you? I found smash brothers to be much more satisfying. So an evolution this game is not, to me. It has better online it seems tough.
A terrible evolution! I mean I still gotta give Bayonetta a "fair" try but from me super easy mode playthrough I hated it. Yet I love DMC super easy playthroughs -_-?
What Sony is doing is attempting to leech off of SSB's popularity and give people the impression that it's the same game, but on PS3. In fact, everything about the game from the way it was revealed to this youtube video evidences the likely scenario that Sony pitched this game to be a SSB clone. That was probably their goal from the start, and above all else, they seem to want people to think it's Sony Smash Bros. This is how they're selling it.
Okami may have been similar to Zelda in key ways, but they didn't rely on Zelda to sell the game. The fact that Kamiya is so easily able to jump to the conclusion that PSAS is identical to SSB is indicative of the fact that this is what Sony wants us to believe.
Instead we're forced to play the game for ourselves merely to see that it isn't a carbon copy.
That's why Kamiya doesn't have much respect for Sony in all of this. Rather than try to make a pretty cool game that stands on its own merits (which it probably does), they're trying to make an SSB clone which happens to be a cool game in spite of that.
Let's put it this way, Sony wanted a product to celebrate its characters. There are plenty of games that celebrate a large cast of characters drawn from various sources, and fighting games are generally the best way to do it. But really they could have only gone a number of ways, namely a SF style game or more of a party fighter. If they had made it more like a Street Fighter game there wouldn't be droves of people out calling it a rip off. So why is it that only Smash Bros is allowed an untouchable formula? Especially when the only similarities are the way the camera works and having four characters on screen
Deep fighting mechanics from some very notable people in the FGC is almost certainly an evolution to me.I have. Have you? I found smash brothers to be much more satisfying. So an evolution this game is not, to me. It has better online it seems tough.