| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (110)

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 4:21AM ruibing said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Looks cool, would have been even better if I could have seen Snake fighting. I wish it was coming out this Christmas.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 4:25AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Who knew Sonic was Saiyan?
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 4:38AM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Anyone who went back and played the early games post-DBZ, for sure. Now all we need is an initially evil 'hedgehog' who eventually teams up with the current one and can also go Super-oh. Right.
Or another one from the future who comes back to prevent a worldwide disaster and can also go Super-ah. Yes.
Looks like Sega's got it covered.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 5:46AM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Super Sonic was the dev team's homage to DBZ. Remember the whole Dragon Ball thing in Japan happened in the 80s and early 90s.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 9:06AM Crono141 said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
No, sonic goes super sonic because Akira Toryama is responsible for sonic and DBZ.

I'm suprised Crono from Chrono Trigger couldn't go Super Sayian. I think it has nothing to do with Homage and everything to do with the guy can't come up with an original idea.

Not that super sonic or DBZ is bad. Its just obvious they're from the same people.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 9:39AM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Akira Toriyama doesn't have SHIT to do with Sonic the Hedgehog. Sonic was designed by Naoto Oshima, though Yuji Naka is often given credit as the "father" since it was he who nurtured the franchise.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 9:41AM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Akira Toriyama had nothing to do with Sonic... Chrono Trigger yes, but never Sonic.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 10:16AM Crono141 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Ok, so I was misinformed. My B.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 4:26AM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Wait, you've never played a Smash game before but you say playing Brawl with the classic controller feels like playing Smash on Gamecube?
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 6:39AM bobloblaw said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
And the funny thing: both IGN and Gamespot said they preferred the Wiimote sideways to the Classic Controller.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 11:08AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Because IGN and Gamespot are tools.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 12:58PM arrrgh said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
yeah wtf? joystiq next time don't give the high profile hands on to the n00b
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 4:43PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Probably cause you guys haven't played against guys Like Daigo, Justin Wong, Yipes, John Choi, those guys bring the 2D fighters to whole new level.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 4:43AM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
First Starcraft II and now this. Joystiq has a knack for handing off preview rights of franchises to people who obviously don't give a rip about the games in question.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 4:52AM BPMOmega XBL PSN Steam said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I think it's good, as to get an unbiased impression.

Face it. If someone liked SSB and SSBM, odds are great that they'll like SSBB, too. And if they hated the previous two games (yes, there are people who hate Smash Bros.), then they'd hate Brawl, too.

But here we have someone who has never played a game in the series before. He has no positive/negative experience. He can rate this game on its own merit alone, instead of incorporating a bias from playing previous entries.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 5:30AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I like that they had a newbie do the hands-on write-up. They did the same thing with teh Haloz kinda, but that was one third of their team of 3. Maybe they could try one fan and one rookie, so one can discuss the changes that he think improved or hurt the franchise, while the other reviewer can talk about whatever they want 'cuz it's all fresh and new to them.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 5:32AM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
It's unconventional gaming journalism, that's for sure. This wasn't a bad preview by any means, but sometimes it seems like someone with no experience whatsoever in a series won't be able to get into it as much, and will report on what Smash Bros. itself is, instead of what Brawl does that's new. Kind of like what happened here.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 6:41AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This had the same kind of tone as Variety's review of Metroid Prime 3. There was even a little ring of "too complicated". Also, the video told us everything we knew from the Bros. Dojo.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 7:48AM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I think it's bad form to pass a preview off to a neophyte like this.

Smash Brothers is unlike any other fighting game in existence, and as such has a learning curve that is inappropriate for someone who is picking up the game for the first time at a gaming convention. Someone who is spending their limited time trying to understand the percent system and powerups doesn't offer a lot to readers.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 9:31AM Fernando Rocker said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Better this hand on made by a proffesional, not a noob.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 9:45AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You guys are just crying because he didnt end up fawning all over this game, maybe its not that good.. OMG, gonna get whited out for that cause you cant say aything bad about smash on here with all these evangelical smash nerds.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 10:38AM heypaul said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
'There was even a little ring of "too complicated."'

No there wasn't. If anything, it was "not complicated enough." I like Smash as much as the next guy, but it has nowhere near the depth of a Capcom, Namco or Sega fighter. Nessuno's comment about the learning curve is also absurd. There hasn't been a more pick-up-and-play fighting game since Yie Ar Kung Fu. We can all agree that Smash is entertaining, but arguing that it has technical complexity is like arguing that Itagaki actually cares about the fighting in his "fighting" games.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 10:49AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Nessuno,

Every fighting game has its learning curve, and there are is no franchise that are equal to each other, and the fact that you say so, shows me that you don't know much about fighting games...

How in hell is SC, Tekken, DoA (ugh), MK, SF, and/or KoF the same? hell, they all have different stuff, combos, some have weapons, hell, you have to even time the knockbacks, delays, etc....so saying that SSBB is like "Fighting game but above them all" is crap, the ONLY difference is the fact that there are 4 players, that's all

Oh, and the fact that the reviewer is new to the franchise is really good, like someone mentioned, he is neutral, and apparently he has some sort of expertise in fighting games...

"I like my fighting games with more of an immediate sense of cause-and-effect and without this power-up focus"
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 11:38AM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Smash Brothers is extremely different to the average 3d fighter these days. To say it's just as different to other fihters as they are to eachother is wrong, as there are so few games out there like Smash brothers. And I, for one, think that there is a hell of a lot more depth than in Tekken and Soul Calibur, both of which i've played gratuitously. Tekken did have a lot of strategy going for it, but let's face it, it's just a traditional fighter with a lower jump and slower pace. Soul Calibur didn't have the sheer amount of moves as Tekken, but it had depth in its balance between vertical, horizontal, ducking, jumping and 8-way run. This made for a lot of strategic gameplay. But in Smash brothers, you could go anywhere on the screen to accomplish your ends, with characters who didn't just have different moves but get hit the same. They were all extremely different in the way they moved, the way they attacked and the strategems that came with these differences.

What really separates Smash Brothers from other games is the freedom to move where you want and fight how you want. In a normal fighter, if you're by the ledge or a wall and your opponent is coming at you, there are a quite few options at your disposal. In Smash Brothers there are thousands.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 1:37PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Seriously. Joystiq needs to stop doing this crap; it's making certain hands-on useless.

Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 1:57PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Upz, if you think SSBM doesn't have depth, you haven't played it enough. Take it from me, someone who's played other fighting games competitively (Soul Calibur 2 and Street Fighter III: 3rd Strike in particular), SSBM is way more deep than SC2, and just as deep, if not more, than 3rd strike.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 2:39PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
What Vince said.

I spent some time around the 3d Strike and GGXX tournament scene back in the day, and I gotta say it's way harder to get into SSBM's metagame than people tend to believe.
Reply

Posted: Oct 13th 2007 1:55AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
As BPM said, "we have someone who has never played a game in the series before. He has no positive/negative experience. He can rate this game on its own merit alone, instead of incorporating a bias from playing previous entries." But on the other hand he's also only familiar with the usual fighting games like the 2D Street Fighter like games or the Virtua Fighter/Tekken type of games. Like he said, he's more familiar with the technical "fighting games with more of an immediate sense of cause-and-effect and without this power-up focus." Let's not even forget he's console preferences either. So I guess, like for any reviewer, it'll depend on how objective he is.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 5:02AM ThornedVenom said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Must.. get.. wii.. next.. year..
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 5:02AM BPMOmega XBL PSN Steam said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Smash Bros. is a great series, in my opinion. While it may be a fighting game, it is far from being a traditional one.

It is chaos. The game is big on speed. Which is why it's tough to play as the slow bruisers (Bowser and Donkey Kong). While they hit very hard, it's tough for them to catch up with the faster characters in the game (Sheik and Fox, in Melee).
It is very customizable, too. From rules to available stages to available items and beyond, Melee had a lot of options to customize how you play. And Brawl adds even more customization (what music plays, what special effects are permanent, etc.).
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 5:34AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I love playing as Donkey Kong and Bowser! I've been that way ever since they were all top speed and no acceleration in the first Super Mario Kart in 1992. I got pretty good with DK in Melee, but I still suck with Bowser. I'm all Game & Watch, but my understudies are DK, Dr. Mario, and Captain Falcon.

My older sister stopped playing video games when they went 3-D, so I showed her the first Brawl and said "Look it's 2-D!" and so much stuff was moving around on the screen at once that her head almost exploded and she immediately left. Such beautiful chaos though!
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 4:47PM Mr Khan said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yeah, i don't like the really fast characters (Fox especially, i just find that he's too fast to control accurately), and Sheik i just don't like. When i use Zelda, i only use Sheik to spam some smash attacks if i'm trapped in a corner of sorts, Zelda's got better technique

I prefer characters that have good "flow" (like Ganondorf or Marth) good moves (like Game and Watch) or both (Kirby)
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 5:38AM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Oh, and by the way, how the hell have you never played a Smash Bros.? Even I've played Halo 2, and I hated Halo 1. I'll even try Halo 3 soon. I like to stay on my toes like that. But then again, there are some pretty big games I missed.... but I won't mention them here, nevermind... you'll have to find that post from a million months ago where we all revealed the games we haven't played.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 9:01AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Not really my type of game but that looked kinda tight...
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 9:04AM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Shit I didn't mean that to be a reply...


My bad.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 9:10AM Crono141 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I've never played Metal Gear Solid.

The only metal gear I've played is Metal Gear for NES. And its impossible.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 10:46AM heypaul said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Crono... Seriously, man... You bust on other people for not being "real gamers" because they can't pick more than a couple titles they like in the Wii lineup, yet you haven't played Metal Gear since it's been on Nintendo. Are you're really qualified to call out anyone else's bias or brand loyalty?
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 10:59AM Crono141 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Its not bias or brand loyalty, I missed the boat is all. And I will revise my statement, As I played metal gear ACiD on my PSP for the short while I owned one.

Its not that I hate the game, I've just never played it. I'd probably really like it, too.

The the GC remake for MGS any good, or would you recommend me digging up the original PSX version.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 11:11AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Crono,

Go with the original, the NGC one was ported by another team, altho I don't know much about that version, ports don't always feel that great when they are made by another dev team....just like what happened with RE4 when it went from NGC to PS2 =(
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 11:27AM heypaul said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Given the choice, I'd go for the remake. It's prettier, the cutscenes are better directed and gave an overall greater sense of immersion that only a leap in console generation could. There's such a focus on story in MGS that it makes a world of difference.

That said, Metal Gear seems to get better with each iteration. If you get the chance to pick up one of the later ones first, go for it, though you might need to read a few Wikis to figure out what a guy who looks exactly like Snake is doing in the 60's.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 11:45AM Crono141 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
yeah, I'm not a big fan of picking up stories from the middle. Thats why I was pissed when I was 8 and figured out that "the first starwars" was actually part 4.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 6:52AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Excellent. Hearing that you can remap the buttons and get rid of the up for jump is good enough for me. Wasn't clear here but hoping you can make a separate button for tilt attacks too.

Seeing items being grabbed during a jump is beautiful as well.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 6:58AM Cyantre said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I hope the Nintendo World Store in NYC eventually puts up the demo version of this game in their store. If they do I will spend all day there. =P
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 7:02AM 1UPMASTER said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
why did you guys let a non-smash bros fan initially play the game? people are going to say to show the instant appeal of the game, but id disagree.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 7:16AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
With Brawl being my most anticipated game, it was a decent review.

The opinion was pretty much neutral,a nd I'm sure if he had some more experience with Smash than he'd enjoy it more.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 7:32AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
And on the website itself, we've a.... pink censored box of something apparently in development.

1) Ok, is this why we're supposed to wait a couple more months?
2) What could it be anyway? It has to be related to photos somehow...
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 11:56AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm thinking the pink box has something to do with the stickers you collect. Maybe you can paste them into pictures.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 7:46AM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
One thing I can say for sure about Smash Bros., the first time you play should be in a relatively sedate, one-on-one fight against an easy computer or someone not too great at the game. It takes time to adjust to how the game controls and the level of chaos that goes on. It's not hard, but it is something you have to ramp up to.

Also, since I see a few people making this mistake, let's try to correct this now: if you are offering an opinion on the game, you are biased. A non-biased look is a recital of features. If you like something, it's biased towards the game. If you don't like something, you're biased against it.
Reply

Posted: Oct 12th 2007 8:34AM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Here's the problem, I learned nothing from the review. He basically said "I didn't get the pace" which is hectic in all Smash Brothers games. We learned the reviewer isn't comfortable in the Smash style of game just yet.

What we didn't learn is how Brawl plays differently from the other smash games. What additions / subtractions / alterations have been made... which is really what is important in a sequel.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Rhythm Heaven Fever review: Crazy into you

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 12:00PM

Remedy not done with Alan Wake

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 10:30AM

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW