Playstation All-Stars at the front line of the clone wars

Super Smash Bros. Melee and specifically Brawl are such generous, enthusiastic, and ongoing donnybrooking arenas that you’d think imitating them would be a great way to make a game. Who wouldn’t want more of that?

So Playstation All-Stars: Battle Royale starts the comparison early. As soon as you boot it up, an announcer enthusiastically bellows the name of the game in the exact same voice that introduces a Super Smash Bros. The only difference is that he’s saying different words. That sense of familiarity, the forced imitation, the shamelessness of the homage, never lets up. Neither does the sense that you aren’t playing a Super Smash Bros.

After the jump, the sincerest form of imitation

The constant parallels to Super Smash Bros. eventually undermine Playstation All-Stars, which has nowhere near the generosity, enthusiasm, or longevity of a Super Smash Bros.

Let’s start with the cast of characters. As much as I either don’t know or couldn’t care less about most of Nintendo’s catalog, there’s enough wacky gameplay diversity in a Super Smash Bros. to win over the most jaded Mario hater. I might disdain that weird little plumber and his entourage of monkeys and mushrooms, but I’m a sucker for the irony of Princess Peach plucking turnip shields from the ground and fatally whacking Solid Snake with her parasol.

But All-Stars has so few notable characters, with limited appeal and even more limited gameplay creativity. Just look at the image of the cast up there. It’s busy, sure. But does anyone draw your eye? Kratos, Infamous guy, and Nathan Drake all look like the same dude in different costumes. Jak, Ratchet, and Sly are pretty much variations on the formula of indeterminate feisty cartoon mammals. Sackboy is designed as a nonentity awaiting a costume. And Fat Princess? Princess Peach with an eating problem. Remember the character from Heavenly Sword? Me either. A playable Big Daddy is pretty awesome, although it’s wishful thinking on Sony’s part to consider Bioshock a Playstation star.

Of course, the gameplay is what matters — let’s pretend we all believe that for the sake of the rest of this review — and here again, you’re pretty much playing a Super Smash Bros. clone minus Nintendo’s unhinged Japanese creativity and minus the fundamentals of the Super Smash gameplay. This isn’t obvious at first. Each all-star has a manageable handful of moves, some of which are admittedly cute, most of which presumably fit into a sense of meaningful fighting game balance, and almost all of which wear out their welcomes after a couple of matches.

Why isn’t this the case with Super Smash Bros., a game that also has a small handful of moves for each character (and a colorful manual that documents most of the characters)? What’s going on in Nintendo’s game that’s missing in Sony’s game, and why does it matter so much?

This is going to get a bit into the weeds, so bear with me. It’s important. To win a point in Super Smash Bros., you “ring out” your opponent. Doing this usually involves banging on him long enough to build up his knockout vulnerability, expressed as a percentage. Once this is sufficiently high, you can deliver knock-out punches to send him flying far enough that he can’t get back. Every point is earned from a combination of your attacks, his defenses, and the particulars of where and how the world ends on a given stage. In other words, it’s a careful combination of character powers and level design.

For whatever reason, Playstation All-Stars decided the one thing it wouldn’t copy from Super Smash Bros. is this “ring out” mechanic. Instead, you earn points by using supermoves to score instant kills. To pull off a supermove, you have to build up supermove juice, which is comparable to the combo charges in a Capcom game. Supermove juice can stack up to level three, and each level allows a different kind of attack, easily triggered with a single button press. When you use your supermove, you drain all your juice. Even if you whiff.

This fundamental gameplay change introduces several twists unique to All-Stars. First, it puts the focus on you instead of your opponent. It’s not about whether you’ve weakened your opponent. You’re not watching him. Instead, you’re farming him to build up your own characters. You’re mostly watching your own supermove juice reservoir. It’s the difference between a game where you pay attention to yourself and a game where pay attention to your target.

Second, it minimizes the importance of the level design and therefore where you’re fighting. Since scoring in Super Smash Bros. is always a ring-out, the ring itself is always a critical part of a match. The edge of the ring is arguably as important a hazard as your opponent. But in All-Stars, the ring is little more than a set of platforms with fancy effects in the background.

Third, it results in constant frustration when you whiff an attack and lose all your attack juice. Because you will whiff. A lot. It’s part of how fighting games work. On one hand, this provides a deep-seated risk/reward dynamic. But on the other hand, this frequent reset-to-zero doesn’t lend itself to fast-and-furious fighting game gameplay. Imagine a fighting game where every time you miss a combo, your opponent completely regenerates his health. What a horrible way to pace the action. Yet that’s how All-Stars plays.

Fourth, it draws out the matches when you’re trying to reach a certain score. There’s no sense of fighters accruing vulnerability, weakening as they fight, edging constantly closer to a kill. Matches can stall completely. Timed matches will often end in draws.

And finally, unlike the friendly forgiving accessible play of Super Smash Bros., All-Stars caters to the players who know best how to land their supermoves. Jump online and you’ll find a game every bit as punishing as Capcom’s technical fighters. Which is fine for players, but entirely missing the point of what makes Super Smash Bros. so good.

This is the part of the review where the average writer would rightly conclude that Playstation All-Star is a fun multiplayer game with friends. Which it is. I can think of very few fighting games that aren’t fun when I’m sitting around with my friends. Super Smash Bros. Brawl, for instance.

But as a single-player toybox of characters, Sony and otherwise, All-Stars is pleasant enough as you explore the moves and the levels. The production values are competent and even occasionally spectacular (you might not have playable Patapons or Loco Rocos, but rest assured they’ll make an appearance). But without the breadth of content of the latest Super Smash Bros., you’re left with unlockables to drive the single-player game. All-Stars offers outfits, victory animations, and online player tags, all in the context of a pointless leveling system. My Ratchet just dinged level 10. I’ve never been less excited about dinging a level 10. One character down, a whole bunch more to go, and a lot of uninspired gameplay along the way.

1 star
Playstation 3

  • Barac Wiley

    I’m not really a huge fan of Super Smash Brothers, which has always felt kinda shallow and gimmicky to me, but you’re right that two huge sources of appeal for it are the stable of characters and the accessibility of the gameplay. I’m with you on not being enough of a Nintendo fanboy to recognize or get excited about a lot of the characters that make it into Super Smash Brothers games, but Nintendo still has a much lengthier gaming history to draw on, with a number of well loved long term first party franchises and brand identity that Sony simply can’t offer.

  • snowcrash22

    I couldn’t finish half a round at the the ps3 kiosk in the store. Boring.

  • Anonymous

    Yeah, this is game really wasn’t well thought out. Also, if they wanted to make this, they should have let some designer as meticulous as Sakurai, who designs the Smash. Bros. do it. That’s a person who knows how to design games for everyone.

    Off topic, but Tom, do you just not know about Crimson Shroud? I’ve been expecting your next review to be Shroud for a long time. I mean a game that goes back to the old tabletop RPGs for inspiration and uses the 3DS’s 3D to present figurines on a miniature set just like those games and even goes to the trouble of letting you role the dice and mimicking the voice of the dungeon master? I would have thought you would have been all over that.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jason-McMaster/607680289 Jason McMaster

    Wow, I’m pretty curious about Crimson Shroud

  • BLAM!

    In every match outside of 1vs1, you’re definitely paying attention to targets in Smash Brothers. Knowing what target is vulnerable enough to ring out is even more important than not dying. If you don’t take the kill, someone else will.

    And I’m not sure how Smash Brothers is any gentler with casual vs hardcore players. Veteran players will dance rings around newcomers without taking a single hit. SB isn’t any different in the usual skill range of fighting games where:

    intermediate player > button mashing > expert player

  • BLAM!

    There’s also SB having one of the most rigid tier systems I’ve ever seen in a fighting game. A good chunk of the characters are flat out inferior/superior copies of other characters (Ganon / Falcon, Roy / Marth) and pity the player who picks Bowser instead of Marth/Fox/Falco.

  • Ronecvan

    “Wishful thinking that Bioshock is a playstation star?” Might be all the promotional offers that pre-ordering bioshock infinite that wass given to ps3 users. Also snake isn’t a nintendo only character, is he? Oh well, game sucks anyways. I’d side with super smash bros over this.

  • http://twitter.com/broccoman Jeff

    It had a huge change mid-development, where they shifted from a casual focus, to a competitive focus, hiring Seth Killian and one other major name from the FGC (Clockwork I think). You can see some of the split focus in the game.

    That said, this game will have the Sony moneyhat behind it, so it will be featured heavily at tournaments, and the FG crowd hates everything about Smash, so the reception for this will be polarized one way or the other.

    There’s a patch planned for next year with some big changes.

  • wisdomchild

    I’ve been playing Crimson Shroud the past few days, and have been having a blast with it.

  • tomchick

    Blam, I’d say that Super Smash Bros. is more accessible to newcomers because it’s easier to get a kill. You can just whale away — button mashing — and you’ll eventually get a kill. But you can’t get a kill in Playstation All-Stars until you master the specifics of your supermove.

    Veteran players will still dance rings around newcomers in both games, of course. But in terms of introducing it to friends in the living room, Super Smash Bros. is way more accessible. I know this from experience. :)

  • tomchick

    (I’ve been playing a bit of Crimson Shroud, but I’m not quite sure what to make of it yet. It’s certainly, uh, different.)

  • MyBodyIsReady

    “And finally, unlike the friendly forgiving accessible play of Super Smash Bros., All-Stars caters to the players who know best how to land their supermoves. Jump online and you’ll find a game every bit as punishing as Capcom’s technical fighters. Which is fine for players, but entirely missing the point of what makes Super Smash Bros. so good.”

    Dude, what? This is how all fighters should be. The players with the most skill who has the combo’s down should win. All-stars is all in the timing anyway, so you can rack up an epic combo, and then miss anyway.

    Anyway, I could say a lot of thing’s about this review that are BS. But I’m sure you’ll hear it all from other people anyway. All I’ll say is that All-stars deserves better than this, and it really isn’t a 1 star game.

  • HarryMasonHerpDerp

    Wow one star?
    I played the beta for this game and had hours of fun with it.
    Will be getting the full game for christmas and look forward to it despite most of the critics hating the game. Most of the negativity seems to be that it’s not smash bro’s but still hating the game because it’s obviously taken inspiration from the series. Also people don’t like the fact that underneath the party presentation it’s a solid fighter where people with skill win over people who mash buttons.
    You can tell how much hard work the developers put into this game, especially keeping true to the characters and their own franchises and making a solid fighter. It’s a shame that critics such as yourself would squander that by giving this game one star resulting in the meta critic to slide down to mixed reviews in turn putting people off buying the game.

  • Barac Wiley

    With respect, not everyone that plays fighters is in it to master every nuance of gameplay and timing for some sort of epic battle of wits and skill. Some of us just like taking wacky characters and beating on each other with them. I’d never argue that there shouldn’t be fighting games that reward the serious player, but all the same, there’s room for there to be games where you can accomplish cool and exciting things while being a buttonmashing spaz like me.

  • MyBodyIsReady

    Lol I agree, I feel all-stars has you covered with both. Like I said with the combo’s, you can build up a huge combo but then miss with your super. So in that sense noobs and button bashers can still win in all stars :P

  • plsburydoughboy

    This is the reason Smash Bros has been doing gangbusters since 2008, still with a wide lead over Street Fighter IV and every other fighting game out there. Sorry, hardcore fighting fan, you are the one who did not get it.

  • MyBodyIsReady

    I dont know what gangbusters is, but sure, whatever.

  • http://twitter.com/WarpRattler Evaccaneer DOOM

    First off, criticizing a fighting game’s lack of a single-player campaign is
    like docking points in a rhythm game review because you don’t like the
    character designs.

    Second, judging from the fact that you mentioned “Super Smash Bros.” fifteen times in your review, you seem to have made up your mind about it being a Smash Bros. clone before even starting the game, which is a really poor misconception. It draws cues from Smash Bros., yes, but it’s a *very* different game, and a solid entry into the free-for-all arena fighter genre (which offered some very fun games long before SSB was made) on its own terms.

  • Tom Chick can suck my

    Tom Chick you really need to stop with this bull. Why don’t you just have a thumbs up/thumbs down rating system instead of a number scale? It’s obvious you rate games by “0-2 stars, game I don’t like and 3-5 stars, game I do like.”

  • tomchick

    I’m pretty sure I wrote several words about how this game is different from Super Smash Bros. Maybe they didn’t show up on your monitor. Have you tried hitting F5?

    As for criticizing a fighting game for its single-player mode, I wasn’t aware that was off limits. So fighting games are strictly for multiplayer now? When did that happen? I didn’t get that memo.

  • tomchick

    It almost — almost! — seems like you actually understand the point of a review rating. But maybe you just clicked that link at the bottom of the page labeled “our ratings system”.

  • tomchick

    I don’t think Snake is the only character in Super Smash Bros. who isn’t exclusive to Nintendo. Of course, there’s nothing in the title of Super Smash Bros. that implies it consists of characters exclusive to Nintendo.

  • http://www.facebook.com/marius.henriksen.56 Marius Henriksen

    Awful review. How do you expect people to take this seriously? You compare the game to Smash Bros in every paragraph. I’m used to reviewers comparing the two, but to build a whole review around that comparison is ridiculous. All-Stars is its own game. And your writing is too subjective as you only focus on the positive sides of Smash Bros and the negative sides of All Stars, or at least what you consider negative.

    How can you say that Kratos, Cole and Drake look like
    the same guy? A greek God, an electric superhero/villain and a modern
    treasure hunter. …Yeah, I guess Mario, Luigi and Wario have a lot
    more diversity among them.

    And how about mentioning that every level is a mash-up between two franchises and the level hazards instead of saying ”the ring is little more than a set of platforms with fancy effects in the background.” The difference between stages does matter because certain stages fit certain characters. And the super system works fine. Of course it’s annoying to waste a super, but if this happens to you all the time then you just need to practice and be more strategic when using them. Either that OR you can just save up to a level 3 super because you can’t ”whiff” with that. Why wasn’t that mentioned in this review?
    It’s a great feeling nailing multiple kills with a level 1 super and don’t say it isn’t satisfying watching other people miss with theirs.

    And last but not least; how is the leveling system pointless when you unlock icons, backgrounds, taunts, costumes etc by leveling up??? How can you present all this content as a bad thing?

    This is freakin’ amateur. There is no way this game deserves a score as bad as 1/5

    I’ll give you one thing though; you didn’t bitch about the lack of Crash Bandicoot.

  • http://twitter.com/WarpRattler Evaccaneer DOOM

    The differences as described in your review appear to be “Smash Bros. has more iconic characters than this game,” “Smash Bros. has ringouts and this doesn’t,” and “this game requires more skill than Smash Bros. and is therefore less newbie-friendly.” The last point applies to most fighting games, so to single this one out for being more technical because it resembles a game that can be played easily by players at a lower skill level is a bit unfair; the first could be applied to nearly every non-licensed game in existence that isn’t Mario or Pokémon, and certainly most fighting games; and the second is simply a difference in gameplay, which you do talk about, but only after making a snarky comment about pretending gameplay’s what matters.

    And fighting games have *always* been a multiplayer-driven genre. They may have single-player modes, but the majority of players aren’t even going to touch any of them except training mode, unless they’re required to play arcade mode to unlock characters, which is largely seen by the community as an affront to the fighting game gods. The exceptions, single-player modes that people play willingly, have mainly been mainstream “I don’t play fighting games but I like this” games like Mortal Kombat 9 and SSB, or Persona 4 Arena, which a lot of people who don’t play fighting games at all bought for the story mode.

    That said, I do like single-player modes in fighting games when they’re designed properly and have functional AI (note: I’ve only seen the latter once), and I do feel like they could’ve done more with them here, but not just because Smash Bros. has them. Something you didn’t mention in your review is that the game is also on the Vita, where single-player would be a much bigger draw than multiplayer; SuperBot definitely seem to have missed this point, and docking the Vita version a huge amount of points for its lack of compelling single-player modes would make perfect sense. (It’s one of many reasons why people are slamming the Call of Duty Vita game, which supposedly has an hour-long single-player campaign.) But for a console fighting game, where multiplayer is an actual thing people are expected to do constantly, complaining that there isn’t a lot of single-player content just reminds me of people who complain that they can’t complete their Pokédexes because they have no friends.

  • Tom Chick can suck my

    lol This is a complete joke. What kind of review system is that? So you review the game based of whether you like it or not, but not whether the game itself is actually good? How the hell you end up in metacritic?

    Why not have a simple thumps up system instead of 5 levels of “likes”? The reason why professional reviewers have a number scale is to rate the quality of the game not whether one likes a game or not.

  • Tom Chick can suck my

    How does PlayStation All-Stars imply exclusive? Logic implies characters on the PlayStation platform. Last I checked there was Bioshock is on the ps3, no? Wishful thinking on my part I guess…

    God are you such a sad joke for a human being.

  • Ari

    ur review sucks ass i hope ur not getting payed to write this kind of sht

  • Ari

    Your review sucks ass I hope ur not getting paid to write this kind of sht

  • http://twitter.com/DeltaCanuckian Sandro Desaulniers

    Another review that’s only for hits. I don’t know why the hell this trash is even on Metacritic.

  • Eschatos

    Clearly any review that gives less than 4 stars(or the equivalent) is only done for hits and no other possible reason.

  • Barac Wiley

    Reviews are always about whether the reviewer likes the game or not. There is no such thing as an objective scale of quality. What a lot of reviewers do is dramatically restrict the range of their review scores unless a game is flat out broken. Tom doesn’t.

  • luke

    Mmmmmm…there’s nothing quite like the taste of freshly shed tears from Qt3 virgins. It just about makes up for the fact that none of the whiners in these reviews have anything new to say. Couldn’t you guys at least come up with some more creative ways to insult Tom’s name?

  • luke

    Actually, “Tom Chick can suck my tomchick” is good, though not on purpose. I stand corrected.

  • ghostandgoblin

    I was really looking forward to this, I figured at worst we’d get a good Smash Bros. style game with good online play (Brawl’s huge weakness). Then I tried the beta. I was really underwhelmed – the game felt cheap (the barebones AI), looked ugly (a soft blur over everything and dull colors), and just wasn’t very interesting.

  • Joseph Shaffer

    Pretty much any review on any site is there to get hits. It’s not like critics are submitting their work to a void, they want people to read their material regardless of whether they take an unpopular stance or not.

  • http://twitter.com/WarpRattler Evaccaneer DOOM

    The beta didn’t have single-player at all outside of a short tutorial, so there would be no AI to speak of. It also only had one stage and a handful of characters, so unless you *really* like God of War, there wasn’t much there.

    I would say people should stop treating betas as if they’re indicative of the final product, but we have a lot of betas now that are basically just the final product with a couple of limitations slapped on, as well as full products that don’t stop calling themselves “beta” for ages after release. So in this case, I would say people shouldn’t treat the several-months-old PSASBR beta as if it was indicative of the final product.

  • tomchick

    As someone who played Bioshock on the PC and the 360, I have a hard time wrapping my head around Big Daddy somehow being a Playstation All-Star. Kind of like you have a hard time wrapping your head around the concept of a review. I suppose we all have our crosses to bear.

  • Ronecvan

    Ahh, so this is do with the title. Fair enough, I’d be pissed of call of duty turned out to be a cooking mama simulator instead of being a shooter which would make the title misleading. That said, don’t think I can bring myself to criticize the name of any game. ‘What’s in a name’ usually strikes true to me.

  • caca

    Tom Chick have advanced Progeria…please, dont listen to them…Thanks.

  • anon

    Might try it out when it’s inevitably free for PS+ on Vita(which is an impressive port it seems), mostly just to see Parappa and Sir Daniel Fortesque again. I grew up with the PS1, but most iconic PS1 characters were third party. I’m guessing Cloud would have been too expensive while DmC Dante is free advertising.

  • Matthew

    I think your reviews are god awful, you often lie (unintentionally due to not paying attention maybe I don’t know), and so many of your arguments/points of discussion for and against are entirely baseless drivel, which is okay if your an average Joe but you’re a critic who can affect a games reception via metacraptic, so it isn’t okay for you for as long as you allow your reviews to affect that turd of a website.

    With that said, I actually come here for the comments section.
    The flaming is beautiful, that was all I really wanted to say, so please, continue everyone!

  • Eric Cartman

    Friendly faces everywhere. Humble folks without temptation.

  • http://twitter.com/DeltaCanuckian Sandro Desaulniers

    No, but this is a poorly written review that focuses way too much on a game that isn’t PlayStation All-Stars. This writer is known to give games that are well-received, terrible reviews, and they are often extremely poorly written.

  • ghostandgoblin

    I didn’t mean AI, I meant interface. My mistake. It was really boring – that dull helvetica font everywhere and that lazy gradient. It looked cheap.

    As you said yourself, publishers have backed themselves into this position with betas that are just glorified demos. Still, what would you have me do? Spend $60 after I didn’t like the beta on your word? That’s asking a lot.

  • http://twitter.com/WarpRattler Evaccaneer DOOM

    I’d suggest just trying it other ways if you can. See if anyone you know bought it, or if you go to events like PAX or Comic-Con, see if Sony or SuperBot has a booth where you’d be able to try it out against real people. With fighting games, there are usually a lot of post-launch showings where that sort of thing is possible.

  • ghostandgoblin

    The character lineup isn’t very appealing to me. I am sure their initial lists included names like Crash, Spyro, Cloud, Ico, some Resident Evil characters, Lara Croft, etc. that they couldn’t get in there. As it is, the lineup just seems compromised and forced – two Coles, the new Dante that nobody likes, etc.

    Compare it to Smash Bros, where all the obvious entries were in there from the start.

    I wish there were a few more irreverent characters too, Polygon Man was a start but I would’ve liked to see, say, a Nissan Skyline (like the Daytona car in Fighters Megamix) as a nod to Gran Turismo, which is of course the PlayStation’s biggest franchise.

  • Quarter to Bull

    This review is awful, Tom Chick is a fucking twat. If I didn’t know better I’d say that he’s a Super Smash Bros. fanboy or someone just craving attention.

    Pretty much nothing he said in this review made a fucking lick of sense. He pretty much complained that PS All-Stars BR isn’t exactly like SSB. This asshole seriously needs to get his shit off Metacritic because he’s about as unprofessional as they come with his “reviews”.

  • Quarter to Bull

    Tom’s review scale is the bare minimum that can be considered “passable”, there’s no objectivity to his review scale whatsoever. I seriously don’t know how this asswipe ended up on Metacritic.

  • Anonymous

    My lord, do you sound full of yourself. How do you know the majority of players who buy fighting games don’t touch the singleplayer modes? Did you go and do an extensive survey of all the fighting games released in the last decade and have detailed statistics showing this?

    Ever since games like Tekken 3, Soul Calibur or Street Fighter Alpha 3, fighting games have had extensive single player content and I don’t see any reason why it should be out of the question to expect it in this day and age, when so many do offer extensive singleplayer options. From Blaz Blue to Virtua Fighter to Dead or Alive Dimensions to Persona 4 Arena and so on. People who don’t get deeply into the competitive aspect of fighters are just as welcome to a game that will captivate them longterm as those who don’t, but you speak of the difference of the two as if those who want these extensive modes are some kind of lower life form.

    You have to be drinking some serious amounts of Kool-Aid to somehow come to the conclusion isn’t heavily inspired by Smash Bros. I don’t care how much the end result differs, if you make a silly crossover game based on a platform holder’s wide array of characters with a knock out condition other than the traditional life bars, you will be compared to Smash Bros. If you make a movie about somebody who hides their identity by dressing in a suit to fight crime no matter how much you try it will be compared to a super hero movie.

    This game doesn’t stand up to its very, very obvious source material because it obviously doesn’t understand why or how Smash Bros. maintained its immense popularity in both fighting mechanics and character appeal. Liking it for what it is, that’s fine, but arguing that the mechanics which ultimately exclude a larger audience is something good stinks of the kind of elitism in the fighting community that makes it so repugnant to people who might want to join it. Inclusiveness and dumbing down for the masses are not the same thing.

  • Pennsylvania

    This review of a review is awful comma Marius Henrikson is a #^@*%$’ing *#((@^#. If I didn’t know better no comma, I’d say that he’s a PS3 fanboy or someone just trolling the internet for attention.

    Pretty much nothing he said in this review of a review made a &#^@% lick of sense. He pretty much complained that Tom did not like his new favorite game that is vastly inferior to (and way later than) SSB. This &#^@%^ seriously needs to get his comments off of the internet because he is making everyone dumber after reading his review of a review.