-
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.
Hideki Kamiya on PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale: "It's just a ripoff."
- Thread starter Forever
- Start date
- Status
1. Ok
2. Rip-offs truly suck indeed, even if done right.
3. Have you played the beta? According to people who played both the beta and Smash, the two games are very different. The system, the fundamentals are all different. The only similarity is that both games are mash-ups. Are mash-up games now an exclusive genre by Nintendo?
NES/Arcade:
SMB
Zelda
Metroid
Kid Icarus
Kirby
Punch-Out
Donkey Kong
Mother/Earthbound
Yoshi
___Wars
Fire Emblem
Snes:
F-Zero
Starfox
Pilotwings
Mario Kart
Gameboy:
Wario
Pokemon
Mole Mania
Picross
N64:
Paper Mario
Doshin The Giant
Sin and Punishment
Custom Robo
Wave Race
1080
Animal Crossing
Smash Bros.
Game Cube:
Pikmin
Eternal Darkness
Chibi Robo
Odama
GBA:
Golden Sun
Drill Dozer
Starfy
WarioWare
Rhythm Heaven
Wii:
Wii____
Endless Ocean
Xenoblade
Disaster
Art Style ___
DS:
Nintendogs
Brain Training
Fossil Fighters
Tomadachi Collection
I think I'm missing smaller or some Japan only releases.
corporate cheerleader
Member
Sony should buy Wave Race off Nintendo, it's not like they're doing anything with it. 
I wouldn't say the fundamentals are that different. Basically, you beat the crap out of each other on a 2D plane. I don't think there's enough differences to deserve my time, I don't see any new gameplay mechanic, you won't do anything new, it's just the rules that are a bit different. Plus I don't like this genre anyway
Well there are different gameplay mechanics, but that's a poor choice of words on your part. I understand what you mean.
I would really disagree with this. There's a tremendous amount of creativity and skill that has to be employed to translate the characters and to make a good game. They're tweaking a balancing aspects of the game completely differently than Smash Brothers! It's their game as they want to make it. How is all stars any different than another strong entry in the FPS genre? Really?
Look at what happened with MOBA, that was brought into the mainstream by DoTa. When the first few games in the genre came out, people gnashed their teeth that they were just rip offs, but as more MOBA games are coming out people care less and less and their perspective becomes healthier, as does the health of the genre (until it peaks and becomes saturated and streamlined) because more and more people take a stab at perfecting or enhancing the formula that a studio started.
People only hold the Smash/Kart genres in such reverence and decry 'copies' because the genre is so small and dominated by Nintendo. Can you imagine if other genres were held to this absurd standard as some people whom are affronted by All Stars wish it could be? We'd have a grand total of one game in each genre right now, one interpretation. All Stars is an entry in the genre that Smash brothers started, and it is heavily inspired by it, and it's a rip off just like almost every other game in a genre is a rip off.
But so what? On conceptual it's a rip off, but just calling it a straight up rip off is so reductive and petty and misses the point.
Very true (so does every company)! But I think you also need to give Sony a little slack here. The key to making a successful long term IP is two things:
1) Quality
2) Persistent
This is easiest when you have a template that is relatively simple and doesn't require a lot of narrative. Sony games tend to focus much more on narrative, which has allowed their studios to go in many different directions each generation (because the story gets worn out after so many years on whatever they were doing before).
There are trade offs to both approaches, and personally I think that a balanced approach is best.
Sure Sony could make their own Mario, but no other company besides Nintendo has been able to build up their IPs for so long and from such an impressionable era. Sony's answer to Mario is basically Sackboy, and if they keep making LPB games and keep investing in Sackboy, than they can start to build a long long term IP like Nintendo has.
Though just because they do not have this, does not mean that making a brawler with characters that are p[popular within the generation has no merit.
I would really disagree with this. There's a tremendous amount of creativity and skill that has to be employed to translate the characters and to make a good game. They're tweaking a balancing aspects of the game completely differently than Smash Brothers! It's their game as they want to make it. How is all stars any different than another strong entry in the FPS genre? Really?
Look at what happened with MOBA, that was brought into the mainstream by DoTa. When the first few games in the genre came out, people gnashed their teeth that they were just rip offs, but as more MOBA games are coming out people care less and less and their perspective becomes healthier, as does the health of the genre (until it peaks and becomes saturated and streamlined) because more and more people take a stab at perfecting or enhancing the formula that a studio started.
People only hold the Smash/Kart genres in such reverence and decry 'copies' because the genre is so small and dominated by Nintendo. Can you imagine if other genres were held to this absurd standard as some people whom are affronted by All Stars wish it could be? We'd have a grand total of one game in each genre right now, one interpretation. All Stars is an entry in the genre that Smash brothers started, and it is heavily inspired by it, and it's a rip off just like almost every other game in a genre is a rip off.
But so what? On conceptual it's a rip off, but just calling it a straight up rip off is so reductive and petty and misses the point.
Very true (so does every company)! But I think you also need to give Sony a little slack here. The key to making a successful long term IP is two things:
1) Quality
2) Persistent
This is easiest when you have a template that is relatively simple and doesn't require a lot of narrative. Sony games tend to focus much more on narrative, which has allowed their studios to go in many different directions each generation (because the story gets worn out after so many years on whatever they were doing before).
There are trade offs to both approaches, and personally I think that a balanced approach is best.
Sure Sony could make their own Mario, but no other company besides Nintendo has been able to build up their IPs for so long and from such an impressionable era. Sony's answer to Mario is basically Sackboy, and if they keep making LPB games and keep investing in Sackboy, than they can start to build a long long term IP like Nintendo has.
Though just because they do not have this, does not mean that making a brawler with characters that are p[popular within the generation has no merit.
boiled goose
good with gravy
of course it is a conceptual ripoff. i think calling it just a ripoff is not really accurate.
it just seems like a bigger ripoff than other games because there are very few smash clones.
it just seems like a bigger ripoff than other games because there are very few smash clones.
Canis lupus
Member
I wouldn't say the fundamentals are that different. Basically, you beat the crap out of each other on a 2D plane. I don't think there's enough differences to deserve my time, I don't see any new gameplay mechanic, you won't do anything new, it's just the rules that are a bit different. Plus I don't like this genre anyway
Then you really can't say that one is ripping off the other.The ring out mechanic is completely different from the super kill mechanic. The strategies are entirely different. If there are any who played both the beta and Smash say that it is a rip-off then I will be interested to hear his points.
Just because they both involve beating the crap out of opponents mean that one is a rip-off. By this logic, Guilty Gear Isuka is also a rip-off of Smash. Blazblue is a rip-off of Street Fighter etc...
How is that stagnation? They released over 20 new IPs from the GC/GBA days to now.
Now, which among those are considered "icons"? Aren't they all from the pre-N64 gens? How many gens and games have those franchises appeared in?
AkimbO_Arcana
Banned
No, he/she is just missing tons of games.
I wouldn't say the fundamentals are that different. Basically, you beat the crap out of each other on a 2D plane. I don't think there's enough differences to deserve my time, I don't see any new gameplay mechanic, you won't do anything new, it's just the rules that are a bit different. Plus I don't like this genre anyway
You just described every single 2D fighter, beat em up and even some 2D action games and RPGs. It's hard to take someone seriously when they oversimplify something to such a ridiculous degree.
If I said that Mario platformers were all the same because you run, jump on enemies, grab the occasional token collectibles and save the princess at the end, you and others would be quick to correct me on that and explain why each game is different from the rest. I don't see what the difference is with this.
corporate cheerleader
Member
Read back, he wasn't serious.
I think this is called moving the goal posts but, Wii__, Nintendogs, Animal Crossing, Pokemon and Pikmin are iconic. They've appeared in 3 to 1 generations depending on the title.
Wario Ware and the Big Brain stuff are close to iconic.
The problem I have with ASBR is not the fact it's taking heavy inspiration from Smash Brothers, it's the fact it looks like a very bad game. The scoring and the battles from videos look incredibly boring and the characters (although not many have been announced) haven't really been varied that much.
Hypereides
Member
Seems like this has some folks come crawling out of their caves.
Had a feeling that tweet would be used to unnecessarily stir the pot.
You cant, and shouldnt, take Kamiya seriously.
For Playstation fans (read: not fanboys) who have been waiting a long time for this game to be made, it doesnt look boring.
Had a feeling that tweet would be used to unnecessarily stir the pot.
You cant, and shouldnt, take Kamiya seriously.
For Playstation fans (read: not fanboys) who have been waiting a long time for this game to be made, it doesnt look boring.
Pokemon yes, which was from the GB era (pre-N64). The rest no way IMO. Some are on their way but not yet. I don't thinkt he mainstream would recognize Pikmin and Animal Crossing. Nintendogs maybe, but for me it's on the "not yet" category.
Yeah just noticed aftert catching up with the posts.
Monocle
Member
Haha, that's the Kamiya I love.
PS All-Stars' primary influence is very plain. If Kamiya is against borrowing from others games on principle, I won't say he wrong. His drive to innovate surely has something to do with the consistent brilliance of his projects. But even though Kamiya's design philosophy has in his own case been a recipe for one genre defining classic after another, I personally wouldn't dismiss a game just because it's heavily influenced by other titles.
To me there's a sharp division between a ripoff and an elaboration. Games lift concepts and mechanics from one another all the time. To call a game a ripoff is to say that it mimics at least one superior game without adding anything of value. (I think Dante's Inferno is a bad imitation of God of War. I know some will disagree.) An elaboration might borrow just as heavily, yet it also does something more. For example, Okami is a radical outgrowth of Zelda's basic conventions. Another game that looks to be much more than the sum of its parts is Darksiders 2. It's like a remix of gaming's greatest hits: Prince of Persia, Devil May Cry 4, God of War, Zelda, World of Warcraft. The developers clearly didn't trouble themselves to disguise the gameplay they borrowed from these titles, and they didn't have to. If DS2 is anything like DS1, we can expect a masterful weave of diverse mechanics given unity by a distinctive art style and clever design tweaks. Ideally, every piece will fit into a scheme that displays it influences while standing on its own as a coherent whole.
Games that borrow from other games aren't bad for that reason alone. A certain amount of cross-pollination should be encouraged, unless we want to say that developers should never use a great idea they didn't come up with by themselves. Borrowing is a problem when it's done for the wrong reasons, or executed poorly, or both. Trying to steal a slice of a better game's popularity? Bad reason. Sloppily copy-and-paste a feature from a well designed game into your own without bothering to modify it in an interesting way, or to at least make sure it integrates cleanly with your other features? Poor execution. I'm sure you can think of more than enough examples.
PS All-Stars' primary influence is very plain. If Kamiya is against borrowing from others games on principle, I won't say he wrong. His drive to innovate surely has something to do with the consistent brilliance of his projects. But even though Kamiya's design philosophy has in his own case been a recipe for one genre defining classic after another, I personally wouldn't dismiss a game just because it's heavily influenced by other titles.
To me there's a sharp division between a ripoff and an elaboration. Games lift concepts and mechanics from one another all the time. To call a game a ripoff is to say that it mimics at least one superior game without adding anything of value. (I think Dante's Inferno is a bad imitation of God of War. I know some will disagree.) An elaboration might borrow just as heavily, yet it also does something more. For example, Okami is a radical outgrowth of Zelda's basic conventions. Another game that looks to be much more than the sum of its parts is Darksiders 2. It's like a remix of gaming's greatest hits: Prince of Persia, Devil May Cry 4, God of War, Zelda, World of Warcraft. The developers clearly didn't trouble themselves to disguise the gameplay they borrowed from these titles, and they didn't have to. If DS2 is anything like DS1, we can expect a masterful weave of diverse mechanics given unity by a distinctive art style and clever design tweaks. Ideally, every piece will fit into a scheme that displays it influences while standing on its own as a coherent whole.
Games that borrow from other games aren't bad for that reason alone. A certain amount of cross-pollination should be encouraged, unless we want to say that developers should never use a great idea they didn't come up with by themselves. Borrowing is a problem when it's done for the wrong reasons, or executed poorly, or both. Trying to steal a slice of a better game's popularity? Bad reason. Sloppily copy-and-paste a feature from a well designed game into your own without bothering to modify it in an interesting way, or to at least make sure it integrates cleanly with your other features? Poor execution. I'm sure you can think of more than enough examples.
Pikmin isn't iconic.
corporate cheerleader
Member
Not many people. So? We never claimed that it has nothing but super popular icons. What's your point?
It could use some more visual flash to look more exciting to the spectator, but it's a lot of fun when you're actually playing it.
As for variety, the six beta characters have some of the most varied playstyles I've seen in a fighting game. It's not just fast characters vs. strong characters. You have to approach every single character completely differently. I've gotten pretty good with Sweet Tooth, but I get my ass handed to me when I try anyone else because my strategies with him don't transfer over to other characters at all.
Canis lupus
Member
I was talking for the consoles. It felt like the userbase was seeking out for the older IPs from NES-N64 era.
True she isn't popular at all. I think it's great there are characters like that. Just like Smash has great but unpopular characters like Ness and Fire Emblem characters.
IIRC, Pokemon launched around the same time as N64 in Japan and long after the N64 everywhere else.
my point is that no one will care about this because these sony characters don't have the same appeal as nintendo characters.
corporate cheerleader
Member
Hypereides
Member
Classy, so classy.
Shes not a very high profile character, but she has a kinda recognizable look. The game adds the concept of getting introduced to new, unfamiliar or unknown characters in the Playstation universe some people may not know of.
The same thing can be said about Super Smash Bros. and the Nintendo universe.
Ok then. My "pre-N64" mention was referring to the release of the consoles, not the games. Going with that, Pokemon is still a pre-N64 IP
Once you play it, you'll realize, "WOW THE GAMES REALLY ARE DIFFERENT".
corporate cheerleader
Member
The hit effects will be redone.
Fat Princess is like Captain Falcon or Mr. Game & Watch.
No, you don't look at her and say, "Yes, Fat Princess, that is an iconic character who must be in this game!"
But when you play the game and see her in action, she's so unique and ridiculous that you start to love her as an All-Stars character, regardless of where she came from.
No, you don't look at her and say, "Yes, Fat Princess, that is an iconic character who must be in this game!"
But when you play the game and see her in action, she's so unique and ridiculous that you start to love her as an All-Stars character, regardless of where she came from.
I really didn't want to do this but:
Pit
Captain Olimar
Captain Falcon
Ice Climbers
Ness
Lucas
Falco
Wolf
Ike
Marth
Mr Game and Watch
ROB
Meta Knight
DeDeDe
Can you honestly say that all of these characters are instantly recognizable and have more appeal than a single Sony character? I could very well say that unless you've been a Nintendo fan since the NES, it'd be very likely that you didn't know Pit or the Ice Climbers existed at all.
I appreciate that all of those characters are in Brawl because I know/remember them. I also appreciate that Fat princess is in PSASBR. It's the same thing.
Yeah, that's fine. I don't have a problem with people not liking the game, it's just a pet peeve of mine when something is oversimplified like that.
Chuck Norris
Banned
Yeah because Fat Princess is the highest profile Sony character
Interesting...since you value uniqueness so much in each and every game you play surely you would've played some sequels,yes?Though all stars is a sony cash in on the formula made popular by smash,i don't think anyone should doubt that,basically superbot was created by sony just to ape the wildly successful smash formula,all stars could've been unique but it just had to have that family friendly nature etc. for sony
Absolutely
thehypocrite
Member
Good for Kamiya to share his opinion with us. I disagree, as all games look to other games, events, life, for inspiration. Everything is a rip off at some level.
After reading all this, I get the feeling like hes a bit of an asshole. A talented asshole.
Also, I think some people care too much for his opinion, or atleast use it as an excuse to shit on a game.
Personally, I'm looking forward to PSABR, sure it copies Smash. I'm not seeing how something copying something else makes it invalid.
If nobody ever copied(not copied everything, like what some App store games do) other ideas in games, we wouldnt have some amazing games.
Also, I think some people care too much for his opinion, or atleast use it as an excuse to shit on a game.
Personally, I'm looking forward to PSABR, sure it copies Smash. I'm not seeing how something copying something else makes it invalid.
If nobody ever copied(not copied everything, like what some App store games do) other ideas in games, we wouldnt have some amazing games.
Typhoon_Ex
Member
So many games copy other games whitout being irrelevant.
- Status