Nega-review: Super Smash Bros. Brawl

"Subspace Emissary is boring. There, we said it." (8) "The storyline itself seems almost randomly compiled – a pieced together jigsaw puzzle of different factions coming together." (1) No, "there's not much rhyme or reason to the plot" (3) -- "it's a narrative mish-mash and bloated as hell." (2) "Most the time, you don't know what's going on. ... We find the complete lack of storytelling disturbing." (8)
"As a platformer, [Subspace Emissary] is not great." (2) "The fine-tuned jumping mechanics needed for platformers just aren't built into all of the Brawl characters, and shoehorning fighting game characters into action-adventure side-stories hasn't worked well since Tekken experimented with the same." (9) "Dull level design and unnecessarily tricksy warp door antics" (2) don't help, nor does "a seemingly random placement of Nintendo characters and newly designed enemy fodder." (1) "If this mode were a standalone game, it wouldn't rate very highly." (9) "The Subspace Emissary component ... is simply not as balanced or entertaining as the stages designed for multiple human opponents." (1)

Online, "voice chat is not an option ... and likely won't ever be, thanks to what must be the Japanese company's desire to create a safe environment for younger gamers." (9) Instead, "there's ... just a gimped text system that uses a paltry four pre-written messages." (1) "Real-time chat would've been excellent here, especially when passing along a post-Brawl victory speech or grumbling in defeat. " (5) "Nintendo's attempt to protect us from child molesters is appreciated, but there are other alternatives to protecting the children (not to mention us)." (8)
"The same complaint can be applied to the fact that Brawl uses Friend Codes, one of Nintendo's most-hated inventions." (8) "You have to go through the trouble of entering Friend Codes in order to enlist new competition" (5) and "for more control over your matches." (7) "If you're playing against random opponents, you won't even see their names or be able to communicate with them at all" (1) -- "you won't be able to get together again after a well-played match, for example. ... It's an online system that ends up feeling very much like playing against computer-controlled opponents, as it's all very faceless and impersonal." (9) What's more, "there's no online leader board or statistic tracking," (1) and "when playing with random people over Nintendo Wi-Fi Connection, you can't play with multiple people on your console." (8)
"The graphics definitely lack detail in areas." (1) "The game has a slightly washed-out look, for example, and many of the cut-scenes are overcompressed." (8) "Many of the backgrounds are kept very simple in an effort to the keep the framerate up" (1) -- they're definitely "sometimes lacking detail and the graphical quality." (8) "Character animations, while speedy, typically ignore the laws of physics, weight, and momentum." (1) "Meanwhile, when it comes to character models, certain characters have been given obvious special treatment. ... Moreover, the game has aliasing problems up the wazoo – especially on HDTVs." (8)

"You'd be hard-pressed to tell this game apart from its GameCube predecessor when viewed side-by-side." (9) The game has "not-much-better-than-the-last-one graphics" (7) and "the overall appearance of the game does seem a little bit like Melee 1.5." (5) "From a visual standpoint, Brawl doesn't look much better than Super Smash Bros. Melee did on the GameCube." (9) "Yeah, the graphics don't really go too far forward." (5)
"Controls are an issue, too." (2) "It must be noted that Brawl is not well-suited to a standalone Wii remote." (1) "The D-pad is no match for an analogue stick and the button-starved design means that no matter how you calibrate, a key action will be relegated to the unreachable minus button." (2) Non-GameCube pads "ultimately don't offer the quickest response time" (4) and "the lack of a second analogue stick removes quick access to smash attacks." (2)
"A bloated cast ... struggles to hide the basic character types each fighter boils down to." (2) "The similarities between Fox McCloud and Falco, for example, are so great I had a hard time telling them apart." (4) "Signature moves aside, it's hard to see where Dedede differs from Bowser, and if Link, Ike and Pit weren't programmed by the same guy, we'll eat our sword flurry." (2) That said, "we'd be liars if we suggested we weren't disappointed that even more third-party character crossovers weren't introduced." (1) "We can't help but wish there were more where they came from." (9) "Yes, we could use more characters in the roster." (1)
Welcome, Nintendo fans and haters alike, to the latest Joystiq Nega-review. Like all Nega-reviews, this one compiles negative quotes from otherwise glowing reviews and arranges them into a wholly scathing whole. While some judicious snipping may have removed the positive caveats from some of these quotes, the inherent meaning of each remains unchanged -- all these quotes were meant as a negative in the original review.
This Nega-review could have almost been two full-length Nega-reviews --- one that focused solely on Subspace Emissary and one that focused solely on online issues. As it stands, there were plenty of unused quotes about the extreme reviewer annoyance with each. That said, there was barely a complaint to be had about the local multiplayer gameplay, which has always been the Smash Bros. bread and butter. So enough reading about the bad parts -- invite a few friends over and enjoy the good parts already!
Sources
(1) IGN
(2) NGamer
(3) GameTap
(4) GamePro
(5) GameDaily
(6) GameSpot
(7) 1UP
(8) Kombo
(9) GameSpy










Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
sicsided @ Mar 10th 2008 11:49AM
thought I should say this first for everyone,
THIS IS A NOT A BASHING, THIS IS JUST FOR THE DOWNSIDES.
Please think, then post.
JPN @ Mar 10th 2008 11:51AM
The title should be "Nega-review: Super Smash Bros. Brawl Single-Player" because that's what almost all the negatives are about.
Really, if they sold this game without the single-player game, I think it would sell almost just as much; I think few people are going to buy it just for the single-player. It's a multiplayer game.
Noshino @ Mar 10th 2008 12:28PM
uh...out of the whole article, only paragraph 2 and 3 are about single player part of it....
The rest are about online service, voice chat (which could be single player, but I don't think you talk to yourself alone), graphics and physics (doesn't that apply to multiplayer also?), controls (please, unless you control it with your mind while playing multiplayer, this does also apply), and the cast (do I need to make another remark?...)
jcd @ Mar 10th 2008 11:51AM
This is the only game that makes me want a wii
Maverick Saturn @ Mar 10th 2008 11:57AM
Galaxy? :) These are the only two games I would play often, the others I have are already boring :P
Its cool with mates, but on you own its kinda dry.
Fernando Rocker @ Mar 10th 2008 12:09PM
You like shotters? Try Metroid Prime 3 also... awesome controls.
A Pissed-off English Gamer @ Mar 10th 2008 12:10PM
Buying a console for a single-player game borders on the insane. Seriously, there's very little replay value in Galaxy, and that's if you can be bothered to complete it completely 2 times over. Sure, it's a damn good game, but most of it's not difficult enough to be very satisfying.
The reason Brawl is a candidate for "I'm buying a console for that game" is the same reason Halo 3 is. Sheerly the amount of multiplayer hours that can be gotten out of it.
Crono (NDF - Knight of the Old School) @ Mar 10th 2008 1:02PM
"Buying a console for a single-player game borders on the insane."
Maybe for you. Heads up: not everybody likes multiplayer. I haven't played "online" once this gen so far.
Mr.ESC @ Mar 10th 2008 1:22PM
Why Fernando was downvoted?
Metroid 3 is awesome.
Mr.ESC @ Mar 10th 2008 1:37PM
Hey I have a question:
Which controller is the best for Brawl or the second best? because the Wiimote+Nunchuck feel akward and people say the Wiimote alone I even worse.
Crono (NDF - Knight of the Old School) @ Mar 10th 2008 1:38PM
If you have GC controllers, use those. Otherwise use classic controller with customizations.
PS. I love that the controls are completely customizable.
Farseer (GDI) @ Mar 10th 2008 2:08PM
Brawl is best enjoyed with 4 Wavebirds. Which I kept when i sold my GameCube. Hooray for foresight. :)
Howard-the-Duck @ Mar 10th 2008 4:15PM
I can't lie... using just the Wiimote grew on me. After 2 rounds, I felt perfectly fine using it. Hell, I'll probably use it more than Wavebird. I just wish the D-pad was bigger :-(
Mr.ESC @ Mar 10th 2008 8:14PM
I'm glad you ignored the typo.
I'm buying a new keyboard this week.
ogvor @ Mar 10th 2008 11:54AM
Never saw what was so great about this game. I have but a pasing interest in it, and that's only because my friends play it. Then again, these friends are crazy for the game, they play it all the time (and not much else).
Shimrra @ Mar 10th 2008 12:00PM
I totally agree. I remember trying each Smash Bros that has come out and they never really appealed to. If I was looking for a fighter there are plenty of other games out that offer more than what SSBB offers. At the end of the day this game is gear right at the Nintendo fanboys that get a kick at just mashing buttons and win with one of there favorite characters they grew up playing it. Its hard to accept a fighting game that anyone can come without any knowledge in fighting games and just mash buttons and win against someone who has learn how to play this game and what ever mechanics in gameplay SSBB has come to use.
Geist @ Mar 10th 2008 12:04PM
If you think someone that knows nothing about Smash Bros can just come and 'mash buttons' and beat someone who knows a lot about it, then you have yet to play Smash Bros against someone with a modicum of talent.
Fernando Rocker @ Mar 10th 2008 12:11PM
Every person that says that SSBB is a button masher, is only because they suck at SSBB.
Satruday night I was playing Dead or Alive 4 on the 360. I swear, DoA is more a button masher than this.
At least SSBB is a lot more fun than DoA.
Yourself @ Mar 10th 2008 12:12PM
The key to Smash Bros. is this: you can think you're winning when you aren't. Though anyone can jump in and mash buttons without memorizing combos and studying techniques, they will never win against a skilled player. But the reason SSB is so great is that it's still fun. It's not like Street Fighter or Soul Calibur where the inexperienced player won't even land a hit or get a chance to play, because the match keeps going regardless of how you're doing.
I'm not saying it's everyone's cup of tea, I just get bugged when fighting fanboys rag on it.
Shimrra @ Mar 10th 2008 12:12PM
The game itself is just for show casing Nintendo's IP properties. Its nothing like compare to KOF where it took alot of the characters in the beginning and threw them into a real fighter. SSBB is not a horrible game but I personally do not understand why this game is getting this much hype. If you strip away all the IPs characters and just release this game using other characters it would fail.
A Pissed-off English Gamer @ Mar 10th 2008 12:14PM
On the contrary, really; more conventional fighters are far more button-masher friendly. I've played Soul Calibur 2 about as much as Smash Bros. Melee, and while the chance of a new player beating me at SC2 is remote, the chance of them beating me at Melee is non-existant.
xFenixKnightx @ Mar 10th 2008 12:35PM
Shimrra
"The game itself is just for show casing Nintendo's IP properties. Its nothing like compare to KOF where it took alot of the characters in the beginning and threw them into a real fighter. SSBB is not a horrible game but I personally do not understand why this game is getting this much hype. If you strip away all the IPs characters and just release this game using other characters it would fail."
I couldn't agree more with what you just wrote right there. 100% Correct on that one.
zero @ Mar 10th 2008 12:49PM
And here I thought I was the only one who thought that. It's nice to know that Joystiq isn't completely over-run with Nintendo/Smash Bro. Fanboys. Yet anyway.
Crono (NDF - Knight of the Old School) @ Mar 10th 2008 1:06PM
Shimrra, ever heard of jump superstars? Exact same play mechanic as smash brothers. Wildly popular and successful, with no nintendo characters around.
Seriously, just because you can button mash and have fun doesn't make it a simplistic or mediocre fighter. Smash has more variety of play styles and combos than any other game out there, due mostly to the fact you don't have to memorize a crazy number of button combos to be any good at it.
D_Average @ Mar 10th 2008 1:07PM
I'll just say I was a N64 Smash hater...couldn't stand it (never played Melee)....However, two mins w/ brawl and I was addicted...bought the game n spent all day yesterday w/ it
xeleion @ Mar 10th 2008 1:28PM
@ Shimrra
Ugh. Could you be more wrong? The reason people enjoy the Smash Bros series is because they're GOOD FUCKING GAMES. Yes, it's pretty sweet that it has all these awesome Nintendo characters, but if it wasn't a well-made game at it's core than it wouldn't get the praise it has been getting. It's fun. It's competitive, but it doesn't have to be. It's easy to pick up yet frighteningly hard to master. It IS a real fighter because the objective and the way of going about it are just like any conventional fighter: you're trying to kill your opponent using the techniques at your disposal.
What you have to understand is that it's not a game about Nintendo characters. It's about fighting. You can call it casual or a beat-em-up whatever the hell you want, no one really cares. However, don't let your desire to be a nonconformist fool you: that's the main focus of the game, not the collection of characters themselves. The lack of Nintendo characters may cause the game to lose some of it's appeal due to the lack of recognizability, but that it would still be popular, as all good games are.
Shimrra @ Mar 10th 2008 1:32PM
xeleion
So with that statement would you say then that SSBB is a deep fighter like say Virtua Fighter series or even Street Fighter 3rd Strike?
Crono (NDF - Knight of the Old School) @ Mar 10th 2008 1:34PM
I would say its every bit as deep as street fighter series, if not deeper
Shimrra @ Mar 10th 2008 1:50PM
Crono (NDF - Knight of the Old School)
With that statement I pretty much have an idea already about what you think "deep" gameplay is. Also I didnt say Strike Fighter series I specifically said SF 3rd Strike. Next time you should pick up a real fighting game like VF and see with deep fighting game really is.
Noshino @ Mar 10th 2008 1:58PM
wow Crono, that was too much man, SSB is far from "deep", that subject has been talked about so much, I don't deny that the series isn't fun and good, but it lacks the "deepness" that games like KOF, Guilty Gear, Tekken, Soul Calibur, Virtua Fighter....and specially SF have...
Its funny, because SFII still considered the best fighting game...
xFenixKnightx @ Mar 10th 2008 2:12PM
Noshino
Thank You for correcting this clueless idiot. For some reason I have a fealing that most (not all) of these Brawl lovers are clueless when it comes to REAL fighting games.
xeleion @ Mar 10th 2008 2:17PM
Yes, I would say that Brawl is just as deep as Third Strike. I play Third Strike. I play Tekken. I play Virtua Fighter and Soul Calibur as well. And Brawl's as deep as every one of them. A lot of people have the misconception that because there are less types of attack in SB than in traditional fighters, it's not as deep. That's simply not true. Take a trip to Smash Broads. Go to YouTube and watch Melee/Brawl tournament videos. Find someone who plays the game competitively and talk to them about advanced techniques. Or maybe... play the game and get a feel for it, and then watch an experienced person play the same characters you did and watch them do shit you never thought of doing or even thought possible with that character.
As much as I love traditional fighters, the majority of them have one almost-broken fighting mechanic (parries, cancels, etc.) or overly-reliable combos that dictate how deep they really are, and what separates the casual from the hardcore is the simple fact that some are willing to learn and exploit those things. Advanced play and metagame in Smash Bros series relies more on creativity and cleverness. There aren't premade combos handed to you; players themselves create them while playing the game. Smash Bros requires you to think differently than other fighters, but that doesn't mean it's any less deep. You just have to learn how to play it right.
ck @ Mar 10th 2008 2:49PM
I love all these fighting fanboys whining about Brawl. I hate fighting games. The worst problem with fighting games is playing with someone you know who loves the game and knows every combo and then they think they're the shit because they've memorized every move and can beat you with one hand tied behind their back. Then they gloat about how great the game is on message boards and how "deep" (seriously - what the hell does this term mean when applied to fighters) the game is. Who the hell cares if you hate Brawl? Don't buy it and keep playing SF or DOA or whatever...
Noshino @ Mar 10th 2008 2:59PM
xeleion
I have been playing SSB since it first appeared on the N64...
Ok, Im not good at it, but its fun and chaotic. But I have a few friends that are amazing at it, specially 2 of them, and when they play against each other it is a blast man.
But when we want to prove who is better, we always fire up Tekken or Soul Calibur (we don't know where the SNES is...)
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ltbHAgdrAiA&feature=related
http://youtube.com/watch?v=HFI1KgsnpEM
Almost all games rely on the creativity of the user, so that argument isn't good.
All the other games rely heavily on timing, and thus you need to learn the delays, and combos...at the beginning is memorizing, but then it gets easier and you do them without even thinking.
Crono (NDF - Knight of the Old School) @ Mar 10th 2008 4:00PM
"KOF, Guilty Gear, Tekken, Soul Calibur, Virtua Fighter....and specially SF have..."
And what is it about these games that makes them so "deep". Especially considering this from the last page of this topic:
"The only difference between the depth of Smash Brothers and the depth of more technical fighting games is Smash Brothers has a better control scheme.
Each character in Smash brothers has (sorry hardcore fans if my numbers are off):
4 throws + sucker punches
5 weak attacks
5 weak aerial attacks
4 smash attacks
4 smash aerial attacks
4 special attacks (some can behave differently in the air)
1 Dashing attack
Blocking
'Perfect blocks' (are these still in SSBB?)
Ground Dodges
Aerial Dodges
Parrying (both attacks and items)
Catching
Several additional moves while hanging (such as rolling up, attacking, jumping or dropping then jumping/attacking)
Each move has their advantages and disadvantages and rarely will 2 moves on a character just be the same thing but with different animations. Even the 'clones' like Falco/Fox play completely differently to someone who's played smash for a decent amount of time.
The only time Smash can be a button masher/luck game is with items (which can always be disabled).
If two newbies in a fighting game go at it they can win by button mashing so you can't sit there and play against the computer/newbie friend and then turn around and call it a button masher.
So the point is people who belittle Smash for a lack of depth generally just don't understand the game. You don't have to like the game or play it, that's your own opinion, but calling it shallow is very misinformed."
Or is it that Smash Brothers isn't deep because mario's in it instead of generic buff fighter #12.
Thanks to Asunedr for being way more articulate than I am.
xeleion @ Mar 10th 2008 4:11PM
Noshino
Man I love me some Tekken. :)
It's just the opposite with my friends; we're in a fighting game club at our college and play everything from SFII Turbo to SC 3 to Melty Blood. People will come brag about there skills, but everyone knows the king of the castle's the guy who can beast everyone else in Smash.
Yes, other fighters rely on creativity as well, but I would argue that Smash relies on it moreso because there are more factors to consider when fighting. The aerial game in Smash is just as important as the ground, adding a dimension that's not usually present in traditionals except in overly flashy superfast 2Ds like Marvel vs. Capcom and Guilty Gear. Also remember that that the y-axis is far more important in Smash than other games, making the relative location of your opponent even more important. There's also character-specific item manipulation (Peach's turnips, Snake's... everything, etc) that comes into play. And all that's on top of the simple fact that knocking someone off of a stage involves a bit more strategy than beating them until they die.
I could get into even more stuff, but I don't think anyone wants to read a post that long. ^^;
Co @ Mar 10th 2008 4:44PM
Fenix,
You claim to not be a fanboy, yet I never see you extend this much effort to hate in a 360 thread...
You really have it out for Nintendo 90% of the time.
naxe @ Mar 10th 2008 11:55AM
How many reviews do you really need to do??
I mean its NINTENDO.......
and IT's BRAWL......
Thats all you really have to say. i dont see casual gamers picking this up. while it is easy to pick up and play. It takes a great deal of smash know how to master the game. and not using the waggle aspect of the wiimote will turn people off. after all that is what you bought it for right??
Geist @ Mar 10th 2008 12:06PM
Actually I find it's great for a the less-than-hardcore audience because you can just say "It's a game where Mario characters can battle it out" instead of having to list combos and special moves and all the crap that comes with other fighting games.
Kendall B @ Mar 10th 2008 11:58AM
Yeah, The Subspace Emissary is pretty lackluster. It's a step up from the adventure mode from melee though. It really doesn't stand well on its own, but it's a neat little diversion if anything.
I would gather that not many people bought it for the single player stuff, though.
It's not to say that I'm not having a little fun with the Subspace Emissary mode. But it's pretty repetitive and not something I'd want to play through a second time. Collecting trophies and stickers is really what keeps it interesting as it is.
Crono (NDF - Knight of the Old School) @ Mar 10th 2008 12:01PM
The complaint about simplistic stages must have been from the half dozen or so stages that they took from Melee, because all the other stages are filled with great detail.
And seriously, when will people stop complaining about the aliasing. Yeah, its got it. Unless you're running your wii through an expensive external scaler, you're going to get aliasing on an HDTV, no matter WHAT game you play. Deal with it.
And yes, subspace emissary is boring, but still fun and interesting. Just repetitive.
rivaldi22 @ Mar 10th 2008 12:18PM
You know you just used 'boring' and 'interesting' to describe the same subject--in the same sentence, no less?
Crono (NDF - Knight of the Old School) @ Mar 10th 2008 1:00PM
Well it is interesting, until it gets boring. :)
xeleion @ Mar 10th 2008 1:33PM
Haha, my thoughts exactly about Subspace. I 100% it, but I don't think I'm going to be going back through it anytime soon. I will say that it was worth beating it to see some of the awesome cutscenes though.
bigd7387 @ Mar 10th 2008 12:02PM
Nintendo only innovates every few years or unless they're forced to. If not for the Genesis we would just now be getting the SNES. Until people quit buying the rehashes we will just keep getting an update and never any type of true sequel.
naxe @ Mar 10th 2008 12:19PM
ah men brother.
in my own personal opinion...... (I)am sick of the same old rehash's. I get it; MARIO..... yea what else. What's NEW! while i do enjoy playing wii @ my G/F house. i cant help but feel like ive played these games before. on MY Neighbors N64.. cant wait to see what comes out of Wii(2) super mario (something) zelda (something) SSB(something) and last but not least Donkey kong (something).... along with mario kart. mario party. wario.
iam really not trying to bash. its just too easy. LOL J/k
i grew up on NES and SNES and OG Brick Gameboy playing nothing but tetris. but COME ON big N get it together. yea there fun but they were also fun 12+ years ago. seriously
Fernando Rocker @ Mar 10th 2008 12:28PM
Naxe? What about the infinity numbers of Final Fantasy and spinoff? What about MGS? There are more Metal Gear Solid than SSBB and Mario Kart.
wait in the car @ Mar 10th 2008 12:38PM
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. The series has been polished so heavily that Brawl's sheen is damn near blinding. A complete overhaul (if that's what you mean by "true sequel") would most likely end up destroying many of the things that make these games so great.
I agree with you that Nintendo is far too hesitant to explore new territory, but they do the rehashes so well I'd hate to see 'em abandon them altogether. Let them crank out the next generation of their classic IPs first, then focus on new ground (hopefully). And after MarioKart Wii, that's going to need to happen if the Wii is going to last for the next several years.
Crono (NDF - Knight of the Old School) @ Mar 10th 2008 1:10PM
Yeah, nintendo never explores new territories or takes a risk. I mean look at Wii. Its exactly the same as every other console out there...
Oh wait...
tmacairjordan87 @ Mar 10th 2008 2:47PM
@ fernando:
um while there's only 1 more MGS (if you count the unreleased # 4) than SSB, there's about 5 mario kart games maybe 6 if you include the game boy game/s. Technical yes but w/e.
also, those games you mentioned change a lot from each new one specially MGS. There was a lot of little new gameplay things from 2 to snake eater, and there's lots more just from that 1 gameplay video of 4 than in the entire third one.
Plus, MGS and FF have STORY, something that i dont even think nintendo knows how to spell let alone implement a decent one in their first party games. Nintendo fans may argue that it's not needed, but if their games had at least a manageable story a lot of these reviews saying it's the same game over and over would happen less and less.