Reply
Treasure Hunter
Registered: 02/25/2012
Offline
4668 posts
 

Re: So is 22 characters still considered small?

Nov 18, 2012

DosTheGHOST24 wrote:
I think 22 is good for a series starter... If this was part 2, then it would be a problem...

This right here.

 

For the first game of a brand-new, 50-man studio that took two years to create, 20 is impressive in itself, considering the reboot of the Mortal Kombat series only had, what?, 24, and that was made by one of the most talented studios in the genre and with an established series, AND with another year of development time.

 

People seem to forget that Brawl had a total development team of between 200 and 450 people, as well.

ecdf9e46
Visit PAStadium's YouTube Channel for all of your Project Axis needs!
Message 21 of 39 (149 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Fender Bender
Registered: 01/16/2012
Offline
2925 posts
 

Re: So is 22 characters still considered small?

Nov 18, 2012
Compare to the first Smash Bros man. This game has a really good roster
Message 22 of 39 (148 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Survivor
Registered: 06/30/2012
Offline
2179 posts
 

Re: So is 22 characters still considered small?

Nov 18, 2012

Proyoteck wrote:

RaiXku wrote:

 I never even considered 20 small for a few reasons.

 

1. We knew DLC would be coming so that could possibly bring the 20 up to 26 or maybe even more if they add multiple character packs.

 

2. This is a first attempt at making a game like this for the Playstation, lets hope they make a sequel and learn what needs to happen to make the game better.

 

3. In SSB some characters were variations of another or the game just contained multiple characters from 1 franchise (Toon Link, Young Link, Dr Mario, Zelda, Wolf, Lucas, etc) each character in this game with the exception of Cole is unique and represents their own franchise, not multiple characters representing 1.

 

4. In SSB, certain character's moves were recycled from another except in their form. Look at all the Starfox characters, they literally all have the exact same moves, just slightly altered. Same goes for Captain Falcon and Ganondorf, Mewtwo and Lucario, Link and Toon Link, Lucas and Ness, and even Ike and Roy had very similar traits/moves. In PSASBR each character's combos and attacks are unique to only them and nobody else.

 

In short, if you wanted this game to have a bigger roster, SB could've just done what Nintendo did with SSB. Take multiple characters from the same franchise, and copy movesets. I'm not a hater of SSB, just saying that it wasn't exactly perfect when it came to its roster and actual gameplay. And I compared these two games so heavily because they are pretty much the same general thing.

 

/Rant


I agree. And not to attack smash but they did get lazy with final smashes. I just wish people would do what you did and make some detailed points. So many people just say "oh smash is just better in every way because it just is." Like it is impossible to enjoy both for what they bring to the table.


Thanks. I kinda was one of those who said that for awhile until I really thought about it. All those old games that we know and love weren't perfect, we all just loved them too much to see any of their flaws. And your right about those Final Smashes, they really did some well and some bad. Ike, Link, Zelda, and Mario's were my personal favorites. But to even further prove my point they gave Lucas the same one as Ness and all the Starfox character's got the tank. All the SSB games were great, but when you look back on it, were they 100% original and unique? Nope. I wish people would stop treating this game like its a huge rip off. Sure they took the same general idea from SSB, but as I said in the other post, the game does have more overall originality gameplay wise, and thats the main component in a fighting game. Er meh gerd what is with me and these long posts today....

Message 23 of 39 (147 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Uncharted Territory
Registered: 07/24/2012
Offline
1660 posts
 

Re: So is 22 characters still considered small?

Nov 18, 2012

harley2947 wrote:
Compare to the first Smash Bros man. This game has a really good roster

Because comparing a 2012 game with a 1999 hame totally makes sense.

You all like to win easily right?

 

Message 24 of 39 (146 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Fender Bender
Registered: 01/16/2012
Offline
2925 posts
 

Re: So is 22 characters still considered small?

Nov 18, 2012

RexLozuresky wrote:

harley2947 wrote:
Compare to the first Smash Bros man. This game has a really good roster

Because comparing a 2012 game with a 1999 hame totally makes sense.

You all like to win easily right?

 


First of the series compared to another first of the series. It doesn't matter what year they made

Message 25 of 39 (142 Views)
Treasure Hunter
Registered: 02/25/2012
Offline
4668 posts
 

Re: So is 22 characters still considered small?

Nov 18, 2012

RexLozuresky wrote:

harley2947 wrote:
Compare to the first Smash Bros man. This game has a really good roster

Because comparing a 2012 game with a 1999 hame totally makes sense.

You all like to win easily right?


Both had small studios, 2 years of dev time, and would've had about 20 total characters each (if not for the fact that the N64 cartridges held no memory).  

 

You can generalize all you want to make people look stupid, Rex, but in the end that comparison IS valid from a development standpoint.

ecdf9e46
Visit PAStadium's YouTube Channel for all of your Project Axis needs!
Message 26 of 39 (134 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Uncharted Territory
Registered: 07/24/2012
Offline
1660 posts
 

Re: So is 22 characters still considered small?

Nov 18, 2012

harley2947 wrote:

RexLozuresky wrote:

harley2947 wrote:
Compare to the first Smash Bros man. This game has a really good roster

Because comparing a 2012 game with a 1999 hame totally makes sense.

You all like to win easily right?

 


First of the series compared to another first of the series. It doesn't matter what year they made


Yeah right. Then let's compare Little Big Planet Karting with Super Mario Kart: totally makes sense.

Message 27 of 39 (127 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Hekseville Citizen
Registered: 07/28/2012
Offline
309 posts
 

Re: So is 22 characters still considered small?

Nov 18, 2012

I think you misread my reply. I'm in agreement. I was saying that Brawl and Melee both had somewhat larger roster but with smaller over all characters due to clones. 20 is a good reasonable roster size. 


I kudoed you by mistake lol. Anyway, take out all the supposed "clones" from Brawl (they're not), and the roster is still much much bigger than Battle Royale. 


I call them varients. Wolf, Falco and Fox play really similarly but aren't exact clones, hence varients. Cpt Falcon and Ganon. Mario and Luigi. Lucus and Ness. And you are right, Brawl has more characters even if you eliminate the varients. That's not my argument though. My argument is that 20 is a completely fine number and Melee proved it. I would much rather live with this roster than have a bloated one with uninteresting characters. And again, that statement doesn't mean I think Brawl's roster is bloated. 

I look foreward to well thought out DLC characters and if this game turns out to be good come tuesday, I will gladly pay for it twice and get all the dlc if that ensures a sequel on the PS4 with greater content. 

Check out my video game blog: http://pixeltrowel.wordpress.com
I don't regurgitate, I provide valuable opinion. Delve into video games with me.
Message 28 of 39 (118 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Uncharted Territory
Registered: 07/24/2012
Offline
1660 posts
 

Re: So is 22 characters still considered small?

Nov 18, 2012

khailcon wrote:

I think you misread my reply. I'm in agreement. I was saying that Brawl and Melee both had somewhat larger roster but with smaller over all characters due to clones. 20 is a good reasonable roster size. 


I kudoed you by mistake lol. Anyway, take out all the supposed "clones" from Brawl (they're not), and the roster is still much much bigger than Battle Royale. 


I call them varients. Wolf, Falco and Fox play really similarly but aren't exact clones, hence varients. Cpt Falcon and Ganon. Mario and Luigi. Lucus and Ness. And you are right, Brawl has more characters even if you eliminate the varients. That's not my argument though. My argument is that 20 is a completely fine number and Melee proved it. I would much rather live with this roster than have a bloated one with uninteresting characters. And again, that statement doesn't mean I think Brawl's roster is bloated. 

I look foreward to well thought out DLC characters and if this game turns out to be good come tuesday, I will gladly pay for it twice and get all the dlc if that ensures a sequel on the PS4 with greater content. 


Now I get what you're saying and I can agree. As I said before, the number is not the problem in this roster.

Message 29 of 39 (110 Views)
Hekseville Citizen
Registered: 01/27/2009
Offline
373 posts
 

Re: So is 22 characters still considered small?

Nov 18, 2012

Personally I never had a problem with the roster size for Allstars. I think all the characters are all unique, and have interesting movesets. My favorite thing too is that no two characters are the same, Smash Bros Melee is my favorite SSB game, and that had variations of characters, Captain Falcon/Ganondorf, Fox/Falco, Mario/Dr. Mario, with my favorite characters being Donkey Kong, and Game & Watch for being so different in playstyle.

I'm just really glad each character has their own unique set of moves that only they have, heck not even Cole and Evil Cole are the same.

Message 30 of 39 (88 Views)
Reply
0 Likes