Support NeoGAF

[Jubenhimer]

For almost than 25 years, Sony Interactive's PlayStation brand has ammassed an array of iconic gaming icons. From Crash Bandicoot, to Nathan Drake, to Ratchet and Clank, to Kratos, and Joel and Ellie. Plus a line of third party characters heavily associated with the brand like Sora, Dante, and Lara Croft. With such a rich history, you'd think putting them in a crossover would be a no-brainer, but the first attempt had less than stellar results.

PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale was both Sony's answer to Nintendo's wildly popular Super Smash Bros. series, as well as their first foray into the fighting game genre. The game received mixed reviews and controversy from the PlayStation audience. Many felt the game was too similar to Nintendo's offering and the system of using Supers to kill and a divisive roster led to developer Super-Bot Entertainment shutting down due to poor sales.

It's safe to say it was a flop, but the idea of a PlayStation cross-over fighter is one that still has some potential. Here's what it needs to succeed this time though.

1.) Create a different system for KOs - I get that you wanted to differentiate yourself from Smash's Ring out system, but the Super mechanic felt broken and made the game a camp-fest. Just run away for as long as possible, find and opening, and farm your netter like a Cow. Come up with some more original way to get kills instead. Something that's fun, but also feels like a balanced mechanic

2.) Get a better roster - PABR's roster wasn't bad, but it wasn't great either. Some nice choices made it in like Ratchet and Clank and Kratos, but some glaring ommisions like Crash and Spyro, and the baffling decision to choose DmC Dante over the real Dante. Get some better choices this time. Get Crash and Spyro. Get Sora, Lara Croft, Alloy, Joel and Ellie, 2B, Noctis, Big Boss, even Fucking Knack.

3.) Make it tournament friendly - in an age of Twitch streaming and eSports going mainstream, giving your fighter some depth for tournament play is more important than ever. Nintendo learned this with Smash Bros. Wii U and especially Ultimate. If Sony wants their game to succeed in a competitive environment, they need to give their game some depth. A big reason why Smash Bros. Is so popular is because it's easy to pick up and enjoy for those who don't play fighting games, but also has a lot of intracacies and depth for those who take it more seriously. Sony's game needs a similar kind of depth of it want to thrive in the tournament scene.

4.) More stuff to do - A big problem with the original game was the lack of content. There were only 20 characters and a handful of stages, with some basic modes. Cool, but for $60, people want more. Give them more modes, more single player stuff. Keep the game updated with DLC characters and free content. Make it you flagship Service multiplayer game.

I think Sony can do a Smash clone pretty well, but they have to get it right this time.

 

[The Pleasure]

I'll crack my back on this one. But first let me take a refreshing SHOWER.

1. The concept of platform fighters all originate from smash. No matter what you do it will always be considered a Smash clone. Brawlhalla suffers from this despite using completely different mechanics. Would you propose a life meter? Do you want to keep the ring out meter? Or would you want to make the Super mechanic in there but make everyone have combos to ensure that everyone has a sure way to kill once they've dealt appropriate damage? Or perhaps the super should only kill once they get past a certain point like SNK Heroines? But the reason the Super was made was to prevent stealing KOs which Smash has in droves. Nobody sees smash as balanced.

2. The reason they had what they had was at the point in time. If it was a few years earlier or a few years later, the roster would have been completely different. Earlier could have made Spyro, Crash and Dante a lot easier to get. Later could have done the same too after the games burned out. And nobody knew who 2b, Noctis, and Sora was. As popular as Kingdom Hearts is with the shut ins, it doesn't have universal appeal.

3. So you want the game to be tournament friendly, BUT you also want it to have depth. That's hard to do as tournament friendly can mean the game is easy to play but figured out incredibly quickly or tournament friendly by having the options suited towards tourney play, but the game is still hard. And Nintendo still sees smash as a party game. Don't get it twisted. Smash was never a competitive game meant for competitive play. Even right before the launch Sakurai stated "The philosophy behind them doesn’t go in line with Nintendo’s philosophy in that some of these players are playing for the prize money...it comes to a point where they’re playing the game for the money, and I feel that kind of direction doesn’t coincide with Nintendo’s view of what games should be. " Up front he states that Smash is NOT a fighting game or a tourney game. Its roots are deeply rooted in being a party game. Nintendo has tournaments for it but does NOT use ANY of the Smash hole rules. They still have items, they still allow tourney banned states, they still allow everyone. So even Nintendo doesn't follow the supposed "Tourney Legal" rules as they see their game for what it is. You state how easy Smash is to play but then mention how much depth there is which makes me laugh. It has depth sure, but not to the amount that you think it does. But if you really want to make the tourney scene in smash flourish I recommend a shower and deodorant rule. How the fuck can you recognize frame data and top tier data if the hygiene is bottom tier? Wash that ass, take a hooker shower, soap n water. Take what Hakan said and get ready to shower up. But moving on, Sony would probably realize that the game isn't a fighting game and they're right. If it's going to reach Esports, the game needs to be balanced from the get go where everything is valid and not like Smash where most of the stuff has to be banned to make it tourney viable.

4. I just bought Samurai Shodown for 60. It's not about how much content there is, but how good that content is. I rather have 12 good characters then 60 shit characters with shit mechanics. I always hate this thought of more is better. It might attract a few casuals, but the long term players are about the quality of the content not the amount. The casuals leave fairly quickly too. How can a game live if everyone leaves so quickly? But ideally it should cater towards both, but it's a fine line.

If Sony did try again, I would probably go towards the Power Stone model or a more generalized Brawlhalla like design. If they want to go to the original PSASBR model, they need to refine it immensely.

 

[Jubenhimer]

Smash was never a competitive game meant for competitive play. Even right before the launch Sakurai stated "The philosophy behind them doesn’t go in line with Nintendo’s philosophy in that some of these players are playing for the prize money...it comes to a point where they’re playing the game for the money, and I feel that kind of direction doesn’t coincide with Nintendo’s view of what games should be. " Up front he states that Smash is NOT a fighting game or a tourney game. Its roots are deeply rooted in being a party game. Nintendo has tournaments for it but does NOT use ANY of the Smash hole rules. They still have items, they still allow tourney banned states, they still allow everyone. So even Nintendo doesn't follow the supposed "Tourney Legal" rules as they see their game for what it is.

Smash wasn't envisioned to be a tournament fighter at first. But it was only after the rise in popularity of eSports tournaments with games like Melee that Nintendo and Sakurai changed their tune. All of the changes made to Ultimate were a direct response to the Smash Bros. players. Nintendo runs its little tournaments with non-tourney rule-sets yes. But they also sponsor events like EVO and CEO which run Smash Bros. along with other fighting games. As to Sakurai's comment, I'm pretty sure he's referring to the prize pools, which Nintendo doesn't tend to donate to, even with Splatoon. They value the player's enjoyment of the game rather than them trying to win prize money from it. At least that's what I interpret.

Like it or not, Smash Bros. is a fighting game. Sakurai never said it wasn't one, he said he views it as more than a Fighting game. He designed Smash in a way where it can be played in a variety of ways instead of just a strict way to to play. He actually doesn't hate competitive Smash believe it or not, he just hates it when people only see it as a competitive fighter. Nintendo has been actively supporting the competitive scene for quite a while now, so they're not against the idea either.

Sony would probably realize that the game isn't a fighting game and they're right. If it's going to reach Esports, the game needs to be balanced from the get go where everything is valid and not like Smash where most of the stuff has to be banned to make it tourney viable.

That's kind of the point with Smash Bros. There's no right or wrong way to play it. It was designed with flexibility in mind. Items help make things fun for the novice players, but they ability to turn them off is there for when you want a more focused match. Sure items and stage hazards are too random to be taken seriously in a competitive match, but the ability to disable them is the reason why Smash keeps poping up at Fighting game tournaments. If Sakurai really hated high-level Smash, he wouldn't have implemented that feature.

 

[Fbh]

As someone who actually liked the original:

- Better production values: The original was ugly and pretty much looked like a game that had been made for the Vita and just slightly enhanced on PS3. It also had some of the uglies menus I've ever seen. Combined with the lack of content it just screamed "low budget rushjob".

- Better Roster: This is the hardest one as it's not entirely up to Sony. But if you are making a game that celebrates the history of PlayStation you need to have characters like Crash, Spyro, Cloud, Snake (or big boss), etc.
Sony couldn't get the license for many of the older characters and it sucked. Even the third party stuff they did get felt like companies just advertising their current games, which is why it had Donte and Raiden from Rising

-Better single player content: a better single player/story mode and just overall more game modes. The original was barebones as hell

 

[Jubenhimer]

- Better production values: The original was ugly and pretty much looked like a game that had been made for the Vita and just slightly enhanced on PS3. It also had some of the uglies menus I've ever seen. Combined with the lack of content it just screamed "low budget rushjob".

If you were to tell me the original was a PS2 game, I probably would've believed you. Seriously, that did not look like a PS3 game at all.

 

[Northeastmonk]

Wasn’t Seth Killian part of the team that made the first All Stars after leaving Capcom? If that didn’t fix it I don’t know what will. There’s a ton of quality to the franchise’s under Sony’s umbrella, but I also think it’s difficult to bring them all together under one roof and expect it to be this huge engaging game. Everyone has an opinion about their lineup and it’s much more diverse than say Nintendo’s. You can’t just include everyone and believe they could actually exist in this multi-dimensional world.

I tend to think of my experience with speaking to some non-PS gamers about PlayStation. They acknowledge the games that stick out the most in today’s media, but when they get to the part where they ignore past IP’s. It becomes super easy to confuse them with them things they aren't familiar with and games that make up for whatever they think is wrong with the PS brand. IMO the issue was the same with the PS Classic. Sony only acknowledges certain aspects of their brand and what’s acceptable/chosen won’t exactly draw in tons of people. It’s much more spread out. In my opinion they should try to make the characters and the world flow together seamlessly like Smash does.

 

[The Pleasure]

Smash still isn't envisioned as a tournament fighter. Granted it has more acceptance now, but it still isn't a fighting game. You're getting it twisted that acceptance means it's a fighting game. It isn't. And Ultimate was the collaboration more of casuals then tourney players. I don't see Nintendo using top tier players to mold their game in balance. But at least their balance isn't as bad as Melees where you get a choice of like two characters in the upper crust of the Smash "NO SHOWER" Gods. And you're wrong. Nintendo accepts CEO and EVO. They don't sponsor them. They don't add shit to the pot. Even with more people playing, they also make the least amount of money for playing Smash. ZeRo said you can make more money working at McDonalds than playing any smash game.

You're also proving my point. For a game to be a proper fighting game it has to be done within the rules of the base game. You can't do that with Smash unless you completely modify everything including the stages, no items, no Final Smash and so on and so on. That's innate in the game and deviating from it to make it competitive means you're removing the in game package to make it competitive. Brawlhalla incorporated all this and makes it into the game competitively. If you want to make it competitive, it has to take this all into account into the base package, not with modifying everything.

Smash always pops up as a side game in FGC tournaments. But what I love is when Smashhole bastards complain that FGC players don't treat them with respect but you don't see us going to their gatherings and forcing them to play by our rules. Honestly they need to keep out and stay with their own shit. They aren't appreciative of anything and the Smash community itself is full of shit. Jebailey bent over for those bastards and they still complained. But the internal politics of the community would be the problem and not the game itself. That and the fact that I can't breathe in their gatherings is one reason why I never go to smash organized events. No respect.

 

[Jubenhimer]

Smash still isn't envisioned as a tournament fighter. Granted it has more acceptance now, but it still isn't a fighting game. You're getting it twisted that acceptance means it's a fighting game. It isn't. And Ultimate was the collaboration more of casuals then tourney players. I don't see Nintendo using top tier players to mold their game in balance. But at least their balance isn't as bad as Melees where you get a choice of like two characters in the upper crust of the Smash "NO SHOWER" Gods. And you're wrong. Nintendo accepts CEO and EVO. They don't sponsor them. They don't add shit to the pot. Even with more people playing, they also make the least amount of money for playing Smash. ZeRo said you can make more money working at McDonalds than playing any smash game.

Actually, some competitive Smash Bros. players are part of Ultimate's QA team. If you follow competitive Smash, you would know that many of Ultimate's gameplay changes were things requested by the competitive players. And yes, Nintendo DOES sponsor tournaments. Their logo appears with the other sponsors at most major tournaments running Smash. Just because they don't contribute to the prize pool much doesn't mean they don't put money into the event.

 

[Jubenhimer]

You're also proving my point. For a game to be a proper fighting game it has to be done within the rules of the base game. You can't do that with Smash unless you completely modify everything including the stages, no items, no Final Smash and so on and so on. That's innate in the game and deviating from it to make it competitive means you're removing the in game package to make it competitive. Brawlhalla incorporated all this and makes it into the game competitively. If you want to make it competitive, it has to take this all into account into the base package, not with modifying everything.

And my point is that Smash was designed to be played in a variety of ways. It's not strictly a competitive game, nor is it only a party game. It's both, and you can choose to play either casually, seriously, or anywhere in between. It's different from other fighters yes, but that doesn't mean it isn't a fighting game, nor does it mean it can't be taken seriously

Smash always pops up as a side game in FGC tournaments. But what I love is when Smashhole bastards complain that FGC players don't treat them with respect but you don't see us going to their gatherings and forcing them to play by our rules. Honestly they need to keep out and stay with their own shit. They aren't appreciative of anything and the Smash community itself is full of shit. Jebailey bent over for those bastards and they still complained. But the internal politics of the community would be the problem and not the game itself. That and the fact that I can't breathe in their gatherings is one reason why I never go to smash organized events. No respect.

Smash is part of EVO's main lineup each year, and even this year.

It's joining the likes of Street Fighter and Mortal Kombat. It's not just some side event at EVO, it's a main event title.

 

[The Pleasure]

Actually, some competitive Smash Bros. players are part of Ultimate's QA team. If you follow competitive Smash, you would know that many of Ultimate's gameplay changes were things requested by the competitive players. And yes, Nintendo DOES sponsor tournaments. Their logo appears with the other sponsors at most major tournaments running Smash. Just because they don't contribute to the prize pool much doesn't mean they don't put money into the event.

So, Nintendo paid people nothing to test and balance their game? Are they doing the tournament plan with their employment? And I will be blunt that I don't follow Smash like I used to. That ended way back when. Looking at what the community turned into? Nah I bounced from that fucking train wreck. Those bastards smell like ass, people shitting their pants in top eight, people shitting in the pool, that mustard gas of Odor Triforce. I believe the youth call this yeeting the fuck out.

And Nintendo sponsors the events by allowing their logo to be used? Wow Nintendo you are so generous with not contributing to the prize pool. Even SNK puts money in the pot and they used to have like NO MONEY. Nintendo is either fucking cheap or incredibly greedy. Either way with how much money Smash makes Nintendo they need to stop being such cheapasses and kick in some of that pot money so I don't hear about Hungrybox bitching about how there's no money.

Speaking of Hungrybox, how the fuck do you sneak a rotting crab into a tournament without anyone smelling that rank shit? Rotting Seafood smells like fucking shit and the fact that nobody noticed it shows that the hygiene must have been lacking. Much like Nintendo's funding of their big events. HEYO.

And Mr. Wizard is on record saying he doesn't like Smash but saying it brings him money. What does that say about the community? And remember that time when Melee got kicked out and the Smash virgins were complaining about Samurai Shodown being a nobody? That Melee was legacy? Nah bruh. But McRibs will always get that money for his obsession.

 

[Jubenhimer]

So, Nintendo paid people nothing to test and balance their game? Are they doing the tournament plan with their employment? And I will be blunt that I don't follow Smash like I used to. That ended way back when. Looking at what the community turned into? Nah I bounced from that fucking train wreck. Those bastards smell like ass, people shitting their pants in top eight, people shitting in the pool, that mustard gas of Odor Triforce. I believe the youth call this yeeting the fuck out.

I'll admit the Smash Community can be toxic a times, especially the hardcore Melee fans. But there are some genuinely great people in the community. Also, if pro players were on the QA team, then yes they were likely paid for their work.

And Nintendo sponsors the events by allowing their logo to be used? Wow Nintendo you are so generous with not contributing to the prize pool. Even SNK puts money in the pot and they used to have like NO MONEY. Nintendo is either fucking cheap or incredibly greedy. Either way with how much money Smash makes Nintendo they need to stop being such cheapasses and kick in some of that pot money so I don't hear about Hungrybox bitching about how there's no money.

Sponsoring an event like that means you pour money into helping the Organizers pay for Equipment, copies of the game, and such. And like Sakurai said, Nintendo doesn't like contributing to the prize pool too much because playing just for cash isn't what they're about, at least according to him. Are there still things Nintendo can and should do? Yes, but its not like they don't care about competitive Smash, or haven't done anything to help the community. It's way better than the Brawl days, when they actively tried to disacociate themselves from it at every turn.

 

[LMJ]

PASBR was a good game with a few huge flaws..

1. The character roster suffered due to Sony having little pull last gen...

No Crash, Spyro or even Cloud (hell, smash got him and the big N never had seen a FF7 release) studios wouldn't give Sony rights to use iconic characters, but chose to advertise current or upcoming characters instead... No people like classic Dante and Snake, we got douche DMC Dante and Raiden...


2. The super mechanic was faulty...fun but faulty...

Let's be dead honest here, no way this game WASN'T going to be compared to Smash, and if that's the case then commit and make the game super customizable, let us choose between classic or super or timed etc...

Don't shy from the comparison, embrace it and learn from your competitors.
and speaking of embrace...

3. Take pride in your legacy, one thing Smash does soooooo well is that it LOVES its characters history, it's a love affair from the music to the cameos to the informative logs

The PS Classic was the same way, almost as if Sony was ashamed of their past...

Allstars was also incredibly lazy and amateurish in many areas, the menus, extras etc were completely embarrassing, novice level which was a real shame as thanks to Killian the actual fighting was fantastic in the game...



If you want to fix these issues the game would be so much stronger for it...

Make the damn game swim with PS nostalgia, let us unlock regional covers, music and old commercials make it Playstation centric!

 

[Heimdall_Xtreme]

Have Kat From Gravity rush is more than enough for give a awesome game.

 

[Rhaisa]

Just clone the Smash Fighting System 1:1.
No experiments, no Ap, no super moves to win, no shit.

However, what are the chances that Nintendo port Smash Bros to Playstation?

 

[FranXico]

 

[sublimit]

Make it fully 3D.

And either get the rights for all the 3rd party characters that are closely related to Playstation (like Spyro,Crash, Cloud and Lara Croft for example) or don't bother doing it at all.

 

[Werewolf Jones]

It has more appeal now I'd say just don't throw random advertisements into your fucking game unless they are Sony exclusive.

Aloy, TLOU2 Ellie/Joel, Bloodborne Hunter, Atreus from God of War 2018, That dude from Days Gone, Norman Reedus from Death Stranding, Knack, Cloud from FF VII, the kid from The Last Guardian who can summon Trico. Fuck you could even throw someone from The Order 1886.

It just needs to visually blend together better like how Smash manages to do it. Sony Smash Bros was afraid to alter characters like Nathan Drake and give him a visual style matching Sly Cooper so it just ended up looking like Who Framed Roger Rabbit when they stood next to each other.

Gameplay changes need to be made to a bit but I never actually played the game so I can't comment on that.

 

[The Pleasure]

I'll admit the Smash Community can be toxic a times, especially the hardcore Melee fans. But there are some genuinely great people in the community. Also, if pro players were on the QA team, then yes they were likely paid for their work.



Sponsoring an event like that means you pour money into helping the Organizers pay for Equipment, copies of the game, and such. And like Sakurai said, Nintendo doesn't like contributing to the prize pool too much because playing just for cash isn't what they're about, at least according to him. Are there still things Nintendo can and should do? Yes, but its not like they don't care about competitive Smash, or haven't done anything to help the community. It's way better than the Brawl days, when they actively tried to disacociate themselves from it at every turn.

Toxic I can sort of understand. But that fucking horrid stench? I'd rather delouse them bastards. Here, let me lay out that smell of DEW.

Leffen Talking about OdorTriForce

Smasher shit his pants during the set

Do you know what the truth is? When you say that shit stinks you say it smells like SMASH. The term is getting used so often that every FGC player is saying that a venue smells like SMASH if it ain't fresh.




And Nintendo not kicking in any money? That's just Nintendo saying they don't see paying for Smash as worth anything. And they're right. They sell millions of it. But they're cheap as hell for not supporting their communities. Nintendo is smart but their fans are stupid. BTW Didn't HungryBox quit his job as an engineer to play Melee competitively for almost no money? Then bitched about the fact that Nintendo isn't putting any money in the pot? But still, Nintendo is cheap as hell when they are one of the few companies that can easily make a Smash league and make it big with one hell of a pot bonus.

 

[VertigoOA]

I’d rather not see them copy smash. Not the biggest fan of smash.

Everyone keeps asking for powerstone. So give them a rip off. It’s different than smash.

Also, Sony still doesn’t have a standout cast of characters. Kratos, maybe Ratchet ... everything else is forgettable and generic. Then again, ALL the third party characters in smash would make more sense in a Sony crossover ... since those games aren’t on Nintendo consoles.

A weapons-based, casual friendly arena fighter could work. Then you could at least put some shooter elements to bring in some scrub like Drake I guess.

They should leave it dead.

The PS4 doesn’t need to fill a gap in the Fighter genre. It has that genre covered for fans of it better than any other platform Since the dreamcast. The purpose of this game would be similar to them investing in a kart racer.

 

[Inanilmaz]

Also, Sony still doesn’t have a standout cast of characters. Kratos, maybe Ratchet ... everything else is forgettable and generic. Then again, ALL the third party characters in smash would make more sense in a Sony crossover ... since those games aren’t on Nintendo consoles.

Kiryu and Majima is enough to be better than the cast of smash
(Plus this maybe: Kenshiro and Spiderman)

 

[SLoWMoTIoN]

All stars failed since it had a weak lineup
Barely anybody to chose compared to their competitor
It was a far more casual game than even the original smash
The only way to beat somebody was by doing a special from what I remember
It just wasn't fun

 

[Ryu_Joestar]

1) They need to differ from Smash as much as possible.

2) Sony needs to believe in the project.

The major problem with the poor selling of PSAS was the ''smash clone'' label that has gained from the announcement onward (together with the lack of advertising/marketing).

3)More third party characters that have ties with PlayStation brand

The first party side of the roster was almost good in the end (with some forgettable and useless characters), but the only third party characters that actualy had sense on the first game were Heihachi and Raiden (even if it was product placement but whatever), they missed out many characters that has actual ties with PlayStation history, like Crash, Spyro, Snake (or Big Boss since Snake is in Smash Bros.) , Lara Croft, original Dante, Rayman, and even Kazuma Kiryu (that deserve to be in a game like that more than fucking Isaac Clarke)

 

[KOMANI]

It needs to rip off Power Stone and not Smash. Playstation was a console to bring in 3D gaming to the mainstream, and you celebrate this by making a 3D arena fighter as opposed to a 2D plane fighter that’s been done to death.

 

[mayhemking]

They should make a 3d brawler like Powerstone.

 

[I Love Rock 'n' Roll]

They can make it like : Fighting Vipers/Fighters Megamix, Sauvage Reign/Kizuma Encounter, King of fighters 2003, Justice League, Power Stone or even Street Fighter X Tekken.

 

[killatopak]

Battle Royale


lol

 

[RokkanStoned]

I actually liked PSASBR a lot. I would love to see a sequel.

On your points:

1) I actually didn't mind it as much, but it definitely didn't work with how unbalanced supers were. I think a simple solution is variety, meaning offering both customization in terms of what rules you want it to work by. So choosing between the super-KOs, normal health based system or whatever other possible systems, would be a great solution for me. More options and customization. Heck it had "Battle Royale" in the name, it could offer a stage where the stage gets "smaller and smaller" thanks to a damaging zone.

2) It's a mascot brawler, so I can see how it be viewed as lackluster, I still didn't mind as much. I played Sir Daniel as my main and Sackboy as my secondary, last time I checked.

3) I don't think this needs to be said, considering the times, that they would aim for something like that. Depends whether it would succeed, considering it's supposed to be a mascot fighting game, and be really accessible for a casual player as well. Trying to satisfy two crowds can end up satisfying neither.

4) I agree that they need to do more, as the original was very barebones. I still loved it and don't regret my day one purchase. I honestly liked parts of the game more than Smash.



Also, surprised that Sony hasn't made a Mascot Battle Royale game, before Nintendo has the chance.

 

[Heimdall_Xtreme]

This marvelous Girl!!

For me is a instant buy if Kat is in the game... if not honestly im not interesting.

 

[MiyazakiHatesKojima]

I'll crack my back on this one. But first let me take a refreshing SHOWER.

1. The concept of platform fighters all originate from smash. No matter what you do it will always be considered a Smash clone. Brawlhalla suffers from this despite using completely different mechanics. Would you propose a life meter? Do you want to keep the ring out meter? Or would you want to make the Super mechanic in there but make everyone have combos to ensure that everyone has a sure way to kill once they've dealt appropriate damage? Or perhaps the super should only kill once they get past a certain point like SNK Heroines? But the reason the Super was made was to prevent stealing KOs which Smash has in droves. Nobody sees smash as balanced.

2. The reason they had what they had was at the point in time. If it was a few years earlier or a few years later, the roster would have been completely different. Earlier could have made Spyro, Crash and Dante a lot easier to get. Later could have done the same too after the games burned out. And nobody knew who 2b, Noctis, and Sora was. As popular as Kingdom Hearts is with the shut ins, it doesn't have universal appeal.

3. So you want the game to be tournament friendly, BUT you also want it to have depth. That's hard to do as tournament friendly can mean the game is easy to play but figured out incredibly quickly or tournament friendly by having the options suited towards tourney play, but the game is still hard. And Nintendo still sees smash as a party game. Don't get it twisted. Smash was never a competitive game meant for competitive play. Even right before the launch Sakurai stated "The philosophy behind them doesn’t go in line with Nintendo’s philosophy in that some of these players are playing for the prize money...it comes to a point where they’re playing the game for the money, and I feel that kind of direction doesn’t coincide with Nintendo’s view of what games should be. " Up front he states that Smash is NOT a fighting game or a tourney game. Its roots are deeply rooted in being a party game. Nintendo has tournaments for it but does NOT use ANY of the Smash hole rules. They still have items, they still allow tourney banned states, they still allow everyone. So even Nintendo doesn't follow the supposed "Tourney Legal" rules as they see their game for what it is. You state how easy Smash is to play but then mention how much depth there is which makes me laugh. It has depth sure, but not to the amount that you think it does. But if you really want to make the tourney scene in smash flourish I recommend a shower and deodorant rule. How the fuck can you recognize frame data and top tier data if the hygiene is bottom tier? Wash that ass, take a hooker shower, soap n water. Take what Hakan said and get ready to shower up. But moving on, Sony would probably realize that the game isn't a fighting game and they're right. If it's going to reach Esports, the game needs to be balanced from the get go where everything is valid and not like Smash where most of the stuff has to be banned to make it tourney viable.

4. I just bought Samurai Shodown for 60. It's not about how much content there is, but how good that content is. I rather have 12 good characters then 60 shit characters with shit mechanics. I always hate this thought of more is better. It might attract a few casuals, but the long term players are about the quality of the content not the amount. The casuals leave fairly quickly too. How can a game live if everyone leaves so quickly? But ideally it should cater towards both, but it's a fine line.

If Sony did try again, I would probably go towards the Power Stone model or a more generalized Brawlhalla like design. If they want to go to the original PSASBR model, they need to refine it immensely.