Hero-of-Time Posted September 26, 2014 Posted September 26, 2014 (Definitely not completely different though). It is essentially the same game brah. That's the way I see it. It's also why I'd rather wait for the Wii U version. It didn't help that I thought the demo was a bit pants. LOL at people getting up in arms over the reviews. It's like the Wind Waker HD scenario all over again. If you like the game and are going to purchase it anyway, why does a reviewers opinion even matter?
Serebii Posted September 26, 2014 Posted September 26, 2014 That's the way I see it. It's also why I'd rather wait for the Wii U version. It didn't help that I thought the demo was a bit pants. LOL at people getting up in arms over the reviews. It's like the Wind Waker HD scenario all over again. If you like the game and are going to purchase it anyway, why does a reviewers opinion even matter? Well a couple of these are spreading idiocy and falseitudes. One keeps calling it a port.
Hero-of-Time Posted September 26, 2014 Posted September 26, 2014 Well a couple of these are spreading idiocy and falseitudes. One keeps calling it a port.
Goron_3 Posted September 26, 2014 Posted September 26, 2014 It does seem like it falls into two camps through, the negative reviews complain about the circle stick and crowded action on the 3DS screen and the positive are just happy to have smash on a portable. The Eurogamer one said they thought that at the end of the day smash was just a mediocre fighting game. That hurt a bit, because I generally agree with their reviews, but it has been EDGE's position for a long time..... The thing is, it's IMPOSSIBLE to talk about the game as a 'fighting' game as the meta-game hasn't developed yet. We don't know how to push the game and its characters to its limits and we won't for some time..it's a process that evolves over time. I mean, look at Melee..it's STILL evolving now but there were people that reviewed it at the time saying it was a fun but somewhat shallow experience. It's a silly thing for a reviewer to pick up on. It would be like reviewing a Pokemon game and commenting on the meta-game without any knowledge of EV/IV's and the meta game in general. As for the controls, they are more than adequate for low level play imo. Yes, they aren't as flawless as playing with a controller but for casual play, who cares? If you're trying to learn to combo and push a character to his/her limits and discover new things, you'll be spending that time on the Wii U version anyway.
Jonnas Posted September 26, 2014 Posted September 26, 2014 I don't think one can compare smash bros to a SF, KOF, Soul Calibur etc. I am a big fighting game fan but I don't really class Smash Bros in the same genre as those games. Anyone expecting Smash Bros to be like those needs a reality check. You pick a character out of many. You fight. Someone wins by defeating the other guy. At the core, it is a fighting game. The engine in which it works is different (you control characters as though you're in a platforming game), but the fundamental goal is the same. Nothing wrong in acknowledging it is unlike most other fighting games, but it is a fighting game nonetheless. Just like other "different" fighting games, like Last Blade, Power Stone and the WWE videogames. A genre is not defined by its physics engine. LOL at people getting up in arms over the reviews. It's like the Wind Waker HD scenario all over again. If you like the game and are going to purchase it anyway, why does a reviewers opinion even matter? Well, it is worrisome that gaming journalism grows so untrustworthy. When reviewers don't bother to research a major release from a major gaming company, and get basic information about it wrong (one that involves another major release from the same company, no less), well, what does that say about the industry in general? It doesn't affect us directly or immediately, but it is one more straw on the camel's back. I can see the frustration. My once-favourite gaming magazine once said that Pit was an original character created just for Brawl.
peterl0 Posted September 26, 2014 Posted September 26, 2014 That's the way I see it. It's also why I'd rather wait for the Wii U version. It didn't help that I thought the demo was a bit pants. LOL at people getting up in arms over the reviews. It's like the Wind Waker HD scenario all over again. If you like the game and are going to purchase it anyway, why does a reviewers opinion even matter? In this case the positive reviews generally outweigh the negative reviews so they could be ignored, but surely there is always a chance that such a review could sway your decision? If a review cast doubts on your own decision to get a game and did not seem to be generally agreed on, I think it is worth discussing.
Hero-of-Time Posted September 26, 2014 Posted September 26, 2014 Well, it is worrisome that gaming journalism grows so untrustworthy. When reviewers don't bother to research a major release from a major gaming company, and get basic information about it wrong (one that involves another major release from the same company, no less), well, what does that say about the industry in general? It doesn't affect us directly or immediately, but it is one more straw on the camel's back. I can see the frustration. My once-favourite gaming magazine once said that Pit was an original character created just for Brawl. It's something that just doesn't bother me. Gaming journalism has been awful for a LONG time. There are very few sites I trust for reviews and even then they have little bearing on my buying decisions.
Dcubed Posted September 26, 2014 Posted September 26, 2014 (edited) It's something that just doesn't bother me. Gaming journalism has been awful for a LONG time. There are very few sites I trust for reviews and even then they have little bearing on my buying decisions. You might not trust them, but lots of people still do. Many of the people who go out in swarths to buy these games are indeed swayed by these comments and the numerical value placed on the reviews. It's why most major western publishers link monitory bonuses for the game's developers directly to the metacritic scores that they generate and why many games are designed directly for the game reviewers themselves, rather than the players who actually buy the games (and lately, many games are being directly designed for display by Youtube celebrities - specifically, the onslaught of indie horror games that are designed to "freak out" Youtubers who promote, often directly paid by the developer via shared royalties, these games). Indirectly, these reviews DO affect you. Edited September 26, 2014 by Dcubed
Guy Posted September 26, 2014 Posted September 26, 2014 (edited) Never scroll down past the article on Eurogamer. The comparison to other fighters is slightly unfair, but inevitable. I don't think For Glory is mediocre, but I do think it strips away a lot of what makes Smash Bros. so enjoyable and so attractive to me over other brawlers. I have way more fun playing even a bare-bones demo of Smash Bros. on the 3DS than I do on full release fighters like Tekken and Street Fighter on consoles. 7 or 8/10 seems like a perfectly reasonable score. As technically impressive as the game is, the control stick and the screen really do hold it back from greatness. Edited September 26, 2014 by Guy
Cube Posted September 26, 2014 Posted September 26, 2014 The thing is, it's IMPOSSIBLE to talk about the game as a 'fighting' game as the meta-game hasn't developed yet. I pretty much say this in my review (which will be uploaded once it's been properly proofread and edited). I did a bit of research into it and found that a few characters appear to be "low tier", but I mention that at this stage people may have simply not found the right way to use them, and they could be awesome in the right hands.
Hero-of-Time Posted September 26, 2014 Posted September 26, 2014 Indirectly, these reviews DO affect you. Meh. I don't see it.
Lens of Truth Posted September 26, 2014 Posted September 26, 2014 Why not take a leaf of out the Destiny thread and completely ignore the reviews?
Wii Posted September 26, 2014 Posted September 26, 2014 Why not take a leaf of out the Destiny thread and completely ignore the reviews? Sound advice. That's what I'm doing with Bayonetta 2. I've looked at a couple of scores and their summaries. Not that it matters now, it's been ordered the last month and I know it's good at this stage. I'll glance at the scores just out of curiosity and see what particular sites score it. It's the same with Smash 3DS. It looks good, we know it's good and the scores have been good. I wouldn't pass any heed of some low click bait reviews.
Aneres11 Posted September 26, 2014 Posted September 26, 2014 This is kinda why I'm glad we got a demo. From playing the demo, I know I want the game. I was blown away by what had been achieved on the 3ds but I'm also aware that this isn't going to be a game I play the same way as it's bigger home console brother. It's short bursts, a couple of fights and off. Purely due to becoming a bit uncomfortable after a while, as some reviews have pointed out. But had it not been for the demo, I probably would have held off. So screw em. :p
ReZourceman Posted September 27, 2014 Posted September 27, 2014 This is kinda why I'm glad we got a demo. From playing the demo, I know I want the game. I was blown away by what had been achieved on the 3ds but I'm also aware that this isn't going to be a game I play the same way as it's bigger home console brother. It's short bursts, a couple of fights and off. Purely due to becoming a bit uncomfortable after a while, as some reviews have pointed out. But had it not been for the demo, I probably would have held off. So screw em. :p (I agree with Aneres)
dazzybee Posted September 27, 2014 Posted September 27, 2014 Yep. Same. Though I always knew i was going to get it, I'm more excited now. I do worry it may dampen the Wii u version but oh well! Anyone live in London/east London fancy having a smash meet up?
Mike Posted September 27, 2014 Posted September 27, 2014 I got this on Thursday and am having a blast with it so far. Nearly got all the characters unlocked now. I've quickly discovered how much I must suck at it though - played about 20 online matches so far and only won two!
Cube Posted September 27, 2014 Posted September 27, 2014 @Mike, is that For Fun or For Glory? I got destroyed most times when playing For Glory.
Guy Posted September 27, 2014 Posted September 27, 2014 How is the online play for those of you that have the game? I've been reading it's miles better than Brawl, but there's still a fair amount of stuttering and lag to contend with in four player matches.
Cube Posted September 27, 2014 Posted September 27, 2014 How is the online play for those of you that have the game? I've been reading it's miles better than Brawl, but there's still a fair amount of stuttering and lag to contend with in four player matches. The important thing to note is most games will be against players in Japan, which will be the main reason for the lag. I played some games with @Serebii and encountered zero lag.
Mike Posted September 27, 2014 Posted September 27, 2014 @Mike, is that For Fun or For Glory? I got destroyed most times when playing For Glory. For Fun (although I'd probably find it a bit more fun if won a little more often!) I dunno, maybe it's just the people I'm up against, although I am still trying to get used to the circle pad controls... Still, if anyone wants an online punching bag when they get a copy, let me know!
peterl0 Posted September 27, 2014 Posted September 27, 2014 @Mike. Who are you reviewing the game for?
dazzybee Posted September 27, 2014 Posted September 27, 2014 Is there any communication in the online? Really hope people here play it a lot, glad there's a quick jump in function like mario kart, is the online drop in and out then?
Guy Posted September 27, 2014 Posted September 27, 2014 The important thing to note is most games will be against players in Japan, which will be the main reason for the lag. I played some games with @Serebii and encountered zero lag. Thanks for the heads up. That's somewhat reassuring. One video I watched talked about and demonstrated the game as being pretty unplayable in four player online even when all four users were playing from the USA. They said it worked better in 2 player, but were able to get 3 working alright if they organised matches based on connection speeds etc. I assume matchmaking is server based and then the actual matches rely on hosting for the other players? Regardless, they said it was way better than Brawl, so that's definite progress. If there are issues with the 3DS version I hope they can be resolved for when Wii U hits.
Serebii Posted September 27, 2014 Posted September 27, 2014 (edited) Thanks for the heads up. That's somewhat reassuring. One video I watched talked about and demonstrated the game as being pretty unplayable in four player online even when all four users were playing from the USA. They said it worked better in 2 player, but were able to get 3 working alright if they organised matches based on connection speeds etc. I assume matchmaking is server based and then the actual matches rely on hosting for the other players? Regardless, they said it was way better than Brawl, so that's definite progress. If there are issues with the 3DS version I hope they can be resolved for when Wii U hits. To be fair, it's not like being in the USA is suddenly a thing which would prevent lag. The USA is huge. If a person in California was fighting a person in New York, that would require a constant connection traversing almost 3000 miles. Assuming no lag on any of the server hops and instant speed of light travel, that'd take around 0.016 seconds. That may not seem much, but when you factor that in, going both ways continually, with server hops at different speeds along with the processing, it would result in the lag. That's the equivalent of someone in the UK playing with someone in Kazakhstan. True story. Edited September 27, 2014 by Serebii
Recommended Posts