For the empht time, YES, i have played it. I am aware of the diferences and still I think its a rip off. Less fun at that too.
If you've played it, then I can't see how you can sit there and say the game is a rip off.
As someone who has sunk many, many hours into both SSB and PBR, I can't say, with a straight face, that they are the same in any way outside of the visual aesthetic of them being colorful mascot brawlers.
So, again, tell me, in detail, WHY you think the games are the same.
For example, I'll give you a very detailed rundown of why I think they are different:
1) Visuals. HD graphics aside, PBR doesn't have the uniformity that SSB has. The characters come from a larger, more varied pool of IPs, and so you don't have as much cohesion. That can be construed as a negative, but I personally don't mind it. Kratos, Drake, Big Daddy, PaRappa, Radec, Fat Princess, Sly, Cole, Jak, Heihachi, Toro, etc, are all visually distinct because their games are visually distinct. With Smash, many of Nintendo's prized IPs fall into the "E" for Everyone or "T" for Teen category. Many of the games are bright and colorful, so the characters just mesh better when combined. I don't see this as a negative either.
2) Controls. Smash has always felt floaty to me. I never felt the controls were terribly precise in that regard, but I'm basing this solely off of Melee, as I didn't spend a lot of time with Brawl (only played it for a short while). Despite having issues with the floatiness of the controls, I still love Melee to death, and it is one of my favorite Gamecube games. PBR does not feel floaty to me at all. In any way, shape or form. I've never felt out of control when moving around the map. I feel that both games control well, but I like the less floaty feel of PBR.
3) Gameplay mechanics. This is the big one. This is the one that sets a Half Life apart from a Call of Duty, or a Zelda apart from an Okami (and I love both Zelda and Okami dearly). PBR, at it's core, is a DIFFERENT GAME than Smash. This is an inarguable point, because it's just plain as day that they are not the same when you spend more than a few minutes with it. I don't know how much time you've spent with PBR, but I'm assuming it wasn't much. I get the impression that you touched the stick for a few rounds, then threw it down in disgust, but that's just me being presumptuous. Anyway, the Super system is just one aspect of PBR that is fundamentally different from Smash. In Smash, you can be K.O. by Smash attacks, regular attacks, and Ring Outs. In PBR, you can only be killed by Supers. This changes the game significantly. You can't just whack away at buttons, building up the enemies percentage, then land a lucky hit and send them flying (oversimplification of Smash, sure, but that style of attack is feasible).
In PBR, you have to build up a Super meter, then have the skill to execute that super (in particular, Level 1 supers, which are fairly difficult to execute). Level 2 and 3 supers make getting kills easier, but Level 2 and 3 supers also take more time and skill to build up (especially level 3's, which tend to be something you dedicate half the match to reaching).
Because building Meter is your primary goal, and killing with Supers is your ONLY method to scoring points, it forces you to approach combat very differently than you would in Smash.
In the FFA matches us beta players are involved in, each Kill and Death carries a particular importance. If I kill you twice, I get 4 points. But if you kill me twice, that takes me down to 2 points, and ties you with me, meaning that if either of us score a kill, the game could be ours (I'm ignoring the other 2 fighters for the moment, but I'll get to them shortly). Depending on how much time is left in the match, it then becomes a tense affair between me and you trying to score that kill, while keeping the other person from doing the same. As the clock ticks away, that tension only gets higher. If you land a kill within the 20 second remaining mark, beads of sweat start to dot my head because I now have 20 seconds to keep you from killing me or the other two players again (or at the same time).
So now, I'm trying to build meter as quickly as I can in 20 seconds, while avoiding potential K.Os and score reducing from the other guys.
Then you have to factor in things like successfully executing combos (which help build AP much faster than just mashing on a single attack), while avoiding enemy combos and super set ups. The "fun" comes in, if you find those kinds of shifting dynamics fun. I happen to, as well as many others.
Smash, in my opinion, has a very different focus and meta game than PBR. And I love Smash for that as well.
This is the last post I'm making in this thread, as it's clear what the intent behind this thread was from the beginning, but I just don't like seeing so much misinformation spread throughout. The fanboys are out in full force in this thread, and all it's doing is making me depressed.
As someone who grew up on Nintendo, Sega, and Sony, I don't quite get the animosity and antagonism when fun games are to be had. PBR is fun. Smash is fun. This makes me happy. I'm sorry you can't get over your raging hatred boner for Sony to see that this game, while being inspired in many ways by Smash, is carving it's own path in the same genre, and is actually doing it very well.
I was worried, when I heard about this game, that it just wouldn't be fun. PlayStation fandom aside, if the games aren't fun, then I'm just not interested. Fortunately, my worries were unfounded.
You can enjoy Smash more than PBR all you like. That's fine, but don't sit there and try to argue that it's a blatant rip off when the game play fundamentals are right there for anyone with an interest to examine and determine the truth for themselves.
EDIT: Also, it would be great if you would go into detail as to what gameplay mechanics (not just aesthetic touches), that make you so adamant that this is a "rip off."