Recently questioned about his Smash philosophy by Ninty pres Iwata, Sakurai explained that he approaches each new instalment as if it were the last. Sounds like glum fatalism, doesn't it?
Thankfully Sakurai is no glass-half-empty fellow; he simply takes this as motivation to make his declaration of Ninty-love as potent as possible. If he's going out, he's going out with a bang, and if he's going out with Brawl, he's going out with the mother of all bangs.
An empty arena. Four fighters enter. They bash one another to ramp up damage. The greater the damage, the further they fly when hit. Hitting them from the arena wins the fight. That's Smash Bros.
Or rather, feel safe if they want to feel safe. Want to tackle Brawl as a technical fighter? You're more than welcome to. Shields, evasive rolls, smash attacks and all manner of items add layer upon layer to potential strategies, until you're left with an experience just as suited to championship level play as your Soul Caliburs and Tekkens.
With each new instalment come a few tweaks here and there, putting the devout Smash fans on edge as they prey for no game-breaking additions. Deep sigh of relief, then.
Brawl is a nippy experience. Any one second can see Fox McCloud firing across the screen as Peach leaves light trails with a searing beam sword, and Pikachu and Mario arc off your telly after a close encounter with an enraged Bob-Omb.
Close your eyes for a second - an unwise strategic choice - and when you open them you'll see Fox struck with a Peach-lobbed sword, while she gobbles up health restoring snacks, oblivious to the lightning strike a respawned Pikachu is about to release on her.
Snap, crackle and pop
Hectic? Absolutely. But it's more visual clutter than unneeded gameplay fat, with blame resting mainly on new items. Take the smart bomb, for example. Creating an ever-growing flaming orb - great for group attacks - it can frazzle unwitting fighters before they even know its been lobbed.
Then there's the cracker launcher - the first Smash Bros weapon you can manually aim. Firing flowering fireworks, it can be hard to see what's hitting what, but it's no great price for pursuing a flying foe with a stream of aimed hits.
Pikachu turning into a screaming electro-ball or Fox driving the Landmaster Tank not only show off Brawl's most extravagant visual excesses, but see even experienced players buffeted around like a kitten in a tumble dryer. How, then, do these moves tighten things up?
It's all in the chase. A final smash is yours for breaking the final smash icon: catnip for Brawlers. So beneficial are these moves that all fighters gun for them. Dash, leap, pummel, throw, kick; whatever you do, get to it first.
Comments
60 comments so far...
Cybermaster on 26 Feb '08 said:
You shouldn't have put it up on the site yet. The magazine isn't even out.
falloutwarchief on 26 Feb '08 said:
Sounds every bit as fantastic as I hope it will be. I can't wait, though I live in Europe so I'll have to.
Until Autumn.
At the earliest.
Goona on 26 Feb '08 said:
I might just have to buy an American Wii so I can play this game before the Autumn!
Chimpster on 26 Feb '08 said:
Only about 6 months to wait for us poor UK Wii owners then
DAEDALUS79 on 26 Feb '08 said:
Thers no way its that good. The only decent part of smash brothers is the multiplayer. Any game like that cannot be labelled as near perfect, as a fighterits also far inferior to titles such as fatal fury, KOF and SF.
Sinthetic on 26 Feb '08 said:
great review, nice to see someone not saying it is perfect, but i thought that was full of negative comments. i'm sure they are true for the most part. Sucks we have to wait for it.
cirej2000 on 26 Feb '08 said:
How would you rate it? Both the mulitplayer and the single player experience? Sounds like you've encountered some serious flaws while playing it that should be highlighted. I haven't played it yet and want to hear impressions from real players. Not just the gaming media.
Hands-on from the folks is always a good counterbalance to someone who might just be biased for/against a game because of a particular agenda (money, job security, platform bias, etc.)
Thanks!
Eric
Anonymous on 26 Feb '08 said:
Can I just ask, did that review really tell us anything we didn't already know?
No offence, but the continuity from Melee was the only part most of us needed to know. Unless a new character blows my b*****ks off online, I'm sticking with Yoshi, so the new ones being clones doesn't bother me. I never doubted the product would be samey, but that's what I want. I'd have bough Melee again if they only added online.
And I'm glad the smash ball give the experienced guys trouble, I used to take my mates on 3:1 and with the rare exception win comfortably, and balance that isn't biased is a welcome addition
DaRockwilder1 on 26 Feb '08 said:
I thought the previous games were a big pile of turd so I’ll wait and see what the folks here think first.
mrbones on 26 Feb '08 said:
DAEDALUS79 you say that all smash bros is good for is multiplayer, compared to other fighters. However, you should compare to other games such call of duty 4 and Halo 3. Your lucky if you get 6 hours on normal or 10 hours on a harder setting for your single player. They recieved higher ratings than this. I know they have more of a sophisticated online but in my opinion this is infinately more fun.
mrbones on 26 Feb '08 said:
DAEDALUS79 you say that all smash bros is good for is multiplayer, compared to other fighters. However, you should compare to other games such call of duty 4 and Halo 3. Your lucky if you get 6 hours on normal or 10 hours on a harder setting for your single player. They recieved higher ratings than this. I know they have more of a sophisticated online but in my opinion this is infinately more fun.
RumbleThunder on 26 Feb '08 said:
Ouch, quite a negative review. Not a bad score though, albeit fairly disappointing. Most of the points didn't really apply to my interests though.
LingXiao on 26 Feb '08 said:
My god, Ngamer - you're complete idiots.
How can you review it if it's:
A. Not even out yet
B. Probably the Japanese version you're reviewing
And FYI, Brinstar Depths was boring and Big Blue is returning - you idiots obviously haven't even completed it yet.
Also, newsflash - BOWSER AND DEDEDE ARE BOTH BIG CHARACTERS! :O
AND LINK AND PIT BOTH USE BLADES!!!!
ZOMG REVELATIONZZZZ
NGAMER UR SO CLEVURS.
They're not even clones, the only similarities with DDD and Bowser are they're both kings and both end bosses in their respective games.
The stages are stunning. There's plenty of variety, and enough to keep you occupied - at the end of the day they're just a stage, you know, somewhere to fight. Most of the time you'll be looking at your characters on screen than admiring the scenery and IMO, they've touched up on almost everything and included some really innovative ones like Pictochat and Warioware.
And for game modes, there's plenty on offer!
If you've been checking the Dojo you'll have seen how many of the things they've been churning into the mix, and they all add to the meaty package.
Half of them are Wifi too!
All adding to the meaty package, and if you can't respect them then you can f**k off, and go enjoy the rest of the rubbish on the white brick.
You're obviously blind if you can't appreciate the effort and time put into this game.
At the end of the day, you've under-rated this criminally.
Yeah, it might not be the BEST video game ever, what is these days? But as you can see across the board already it's getting perfect, or near perfect scores, and you've probably got a screw loose.
There's nothing better on the Wii at the moment, and probably won't be for a while.
RumbleThunder on 26 Feb '08 said:
Well, as harsh as your tone is, I agree. I think the stages comment is unfair, seeing the vast improvement from Melee (with the backgrounds and music) Id on't think it's right to disregard the level of detail in each.
samjef11 on 26 Feb '08 said:
Apparantly NOA got on the line to 1Up saying they had 'taken Reggie's quote out of context' and no definitive date had yet been set. So once again another rumour lets out, and once again it's vehemently denied. Its a bloody shambles really.
Just read the NGamer review here
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/ar ... ?id=183358
They make some good points and the review and score seems fair and in line with my epectations, but I disagree about their comments about the stages being disappointing (they like Big Blue and Brinstar which looses them brownie points in my book, and then they go on to complain at a lack of Big Blue despite the fact its in the game), and also their comments about Dedede/Bowser and Link/Pit/Ike being too similar. Yeah ok NGamer, I'll give you Dedede/Bowser are big and heavy and that Link/Pit/Ike all have swords, but seriously the similarities end there. I can tell that instantly and I haven't even played the game. so the Autumn release date for uk is not true
Cpt.Price on 26 Feb '08 said:
same here too bad its coming out in autumn what a bummer
Enasni on 26 Feb '08 said:
THANK YOU for acknowledging Smash as a deep game! The only time I ever see complaints leveled at this series is from people that play other fighting games and call Smash a "mindless button masher," and most reviewers didn't do anything to help Smash's case with Melee. The smash series is every bit as complex as Street Fighter or Tekken.
NG_21 on 26 Feb '08 said:
f**king hell man, hypocrite.
Do you really think that a game needs to be out for it to be reviewed. Reviews get sent games before they come out so they can publish the review before the games release.
And what difference would reviewing the Japanese version make, especially as its a fighter. It maybe different if it was story heavy, but it isn't.
Dont call people idiots unless you yourself aren't one.
HammersUK on 26 Feb '08 said:
its been out in japan for weeks, why should us brits have to wait til autumn?
vectra on 26 Feb '08 said:
Despite the comments in the review it still got a very good score. Didn't like Smash Bros on the N64 or the GC but I'm hoping that this one will let me see what all the fuss is about.
If not then it looks like Mario Kart is my only must buy this year
until I see something interesting on the 3rd party list that is. 
SoulChimera on 26 Feb '08 said:
Under-rated with a 9.3? They are basically saying it's close to perfect.
I didn't like the previous games either. I don't know anyone that did. I'll be interested to see how well this actually does.
sonicka on 26 Feb '08 said:
A) It's out, in Japan.
B) You answered your own question here, so obviously this is an import review. A specialty of NGamer.
C) They know Big Blue is returning, if you'd bothered to have read through the review properly they compare the fact that playing it within Brawl makes them yern for more Platform-y Goodness within other stages. In actual fact NGamers comments on this is something that had me worrying from the beginning in terms of stage layouts, thus far anyway.
D) Brinstar Depths is an opinionated comment.
E) Sorry that some of the character playing similarities upset you. Go and email the development team SORA, don't shout at NGamer for pointing stuff out.
F) Please Don't YOUS DIS TLK to make yourself sound CLEVURS. It doesn't work.
G) They gave it 93% for goodness sake. How's that Criminally underrated? Last time I checked that was a preddy decent score. It doesn't qualify for your unjustified ramblings.
...Oh, but of course I forgot. You have the game already so you'd know wouldn't you? 'Idiot'. ;D
Tis just a review remember. And it's good to see one that doesn't cut corners in the 'biased land of Nintendo games' too.
Anonymous on 27 Feb '08 said:
curious how it mentions the game becoming too familiar as a weakness. wouldnt that be the case for all sequels? For example, I think GTA4 is going to be about as familiar to its predecessors as it comes. Halo 3 was mostly touted for the XBlive play, and only got glanced over for its campaign mode. most sequel games are in danger of drying themselves out
Anonymous on 27 Feb '08 said:
You seriously said Bowser and Dedede are hard to tell apart? I... really don't think I can take you guys seriously after reading that.
And Brinstar Depths? Are you kidding me? You're complaining about the lack of gimmicks in stages? I'll... I'll just stop complaining. I can't even imagine what you guys think a Smash Brothers game is. If Ike, Link, and Pit are clones of each other, so are Mario and Samus. Projectiles, see? Clone!
The only real clone is Toon Link, and he's pushing it. No, Luigi, Wolf, Falco, Ganondorf, and Lucas are not clones.
Sure, the score was good, but in the review you made the game sound like crap. Luckily I'm not a Smash newb, otherwise I wouldn't buy the game after this review. Thank god I know what this game really is.
And now I know why most of you commenting agree with this review: You didn't like Melee or Smash 64. If you didn't like them, why do you even bother waiting for this game?
Hell, anyone that actually keeps up with the Dojo will know this review is mostly crap.
Anyway, I shouldn't be bickering about a minor review like this. I know what to expect from Brawl, and it's surely not this. Every character in this game is unique. I still can't get over the Bowser/Dedede comparison. It makes me want to vomit.
Anonymous on 27 Feb '08 said:
Funny how you rip the game apart in the review, yet you give it a score of 9.3.
Anonymous on 27 Feb '08 said:
Did seem like a lot of negatives in there. I do however agree with the poster above that it was good to see an acknowledgement that Smash is a deep and technical game and can be every bit as challenging and complex as Soul Calibur or Tekken.
On the GC Melee dislike, I was in the same boat to begin with. Spent ten minutes on it and remember turning it off in disgust. Controls felt sluggish and the general presentation of the game did nothing for me.
Few months later I turned it back on, gave it more time, and I've probably spent over 100 hours on the thing. I've never turned around on a game like that before, and this time around I'm giving Brawl and Sakurai a healthy respect.
The Wii control issues seem disappointing, but I'll be plugging in the Gamecube pads anyway.
vulcanraven01 on 27 Feb '08 said:
To sum the whole series of games up, the gameplay is no where near rock solid and its pretty much a multi-player game.
However, what boosts the series from being good to great is the fact its a Nintendo fans wet dream and its one of the most fun multi-player games I've ever played.
Mr.Frosty on 27 Feb '08 said:
What a Strange review
After reading that negative review I didn't expect that score at the end.
Besides it was quite a petty review. As if the person hasn't played all of it to comment accurately or even played the prequels.
Better reviews elsewhere...
Dajmin on 27 Feb '08 said:
I agree with the weird negative comments but still massively positive score. Maybe they felt that because Smash Bros is an amazingly fun game they felt they should point out the shortcomings that are inevitable in any Smash title.
But I have to point out to the people commenting on the whole "you can't tell these characters apart" it's not appearance they're talking about.
Look at Mario and Luigi in most games. They're pretty much the same except for looks. They are the all-round characters. Likewise, any character holding a sword is obviously going to be defined as a sword-weilding character and as such limited to sword-based moves. That means that they will be similar, irrelevant of what game they come from or how different they look from each other. Because you can swing or stab with a sword.
Presumably this is the same kind of similarity that Bowser and Dedede have - clumsy and powerful.
The fact is that this is (as suspected) a must-have Wii title. If you liked the others, you'll like this one. If you hated the others, you'll hate this one.
It's all about the multiplayer chaos, and so am I
Mappman on 27 Feb '08 said:
My thoughts exactly. This happens all the time. It happened with Halo 3, it'll happen with MGS4. For some reason, some games just can't get bad scores.
It reminds me of Metallica's last few albums. They're clearly terrible, but for some reason reviewers can't bring themselves to score objectively. From the reviewers comments, I'd have said an 8.5 would've been more believable.
level_up on 27 Feb '08 said:
Maybe there are negative comments simply because they wanted to game to live up to their expectations, and it's incredibly rare that one does.
With games as hyped as MGS4 and SSBM, I guess you'd expect them to be perfect (albeit this review give it a near perfect score) given the amount of hype about it and reputation.
Get Over Here on 27 Feb '08 said:
93%!
That is a massively high score for a fighting game and I won't believe this biased hype and think this game is anywhere near as good as Virtua Fighter 4/5.
And don't make me laugh by insinuating this game has anything like the depth of the VF series and I doubt it has as much depth as Tekken 4/5 or Street Fighter either.
So stuff that down yer pipe
fanboy on 27 Feb '08 said:
It is a very curious review. Its as if they had decided that Nintendo had really dropped the ball on this one, but then chickened out at the end and gave it 93%
I cant help wonder that if this was one of EA's sequels it would have been marked down to about 85% because it wasnt original enough.
The thing I really dont understand is that they heaped praise all over No More Heroes and yet it only scored 1% higher! Wierd. Not to mention Zack & Wiki which I think scored lower, but again the review concentrated only on the positives. What on earth would they say about cruisin'??!!
I guess they came from the standpoint that most readers are going to know about Smash Bros already and instead of just writing a love letter about it, they decided to tell you whats not so great. I commend them for that, but it makes their other reviews look a bit wierd. Especially when Bully scores less but gets a pretty much perfect write up on the previous page - it seems a bit inconsistant.
I just wish they'd bring the DVDs back!! I loved them!
Enasni on 27 Feb '08 said:
Kind of depends what you mean by depth. You don't get the incredibly complex button inputs that you have in "normal" fighters, but Smash is MUCH faster paced. Despite having very simple to perform moves, you can do them so quickly that you end up with more button presses per second than in other fighters. Playing Smash with precision require a lot of skill. It has an enormous tournament scene for a reason: the difference between a newbie and a pro is huge. I could write an essay on why Smash deserves respect as a complex fighter... I guess the simplest thing I can say is that it's gameplay is very open-ended, and therefore requires constant adaptation from the players.
It's very different from VF, Street Fighter, etc, so maybe they shouldn't be compared, but playing Smash well requires ridiculous reflexes.
Anyway, not only do I think that Smash requires more skill to play well than traditional fighters, I also think it's a hell of a lot more fun to play with your friends. The beauty of Smash is that it's very accessible to beginners (which leads hardcore fighter fans to bash it) while still being very hard to master. Whenever I get four people together to play Smash, we're laughing constantly, and that's what counts.
Anonymous on 28 Feb '08 said:
now i know why i dont waste my money on ngamer....
because of s**tty reviews like this that contradict themselves twice within each paragraph
how can the perfect formula get 9.3 huh?
seriously who writes these reviews?
too repetitive... bowser = dedede ?
are you blind, deaf,dumb senseless pieces of crap?
"we'll eat our sword flurry" please, eat it and die
i dont even know what KOF is and i can tell its crap.
and street fighter STREET FIGHTER street fighter was never good
Anonymous on 28 Feb '08 said:
shut up
your name should be DaDickwilder1
Quoted for truth
okay then, your an idiot
no, no 9.8 is close to perfect.
Anonymous on 28 Feb '08 said:
@ Matthew Castle
you must be some sort of freak of nature your mum and dad arent related are they?
your a retard, a spaz, probably gay and an idiot.
die, just please die and rid the world of your pitiful existence
if you dont relegate this review i will personally, find you, then hang draw and quarter you, sending your body parts to your family.
to conclude you are a piece of s**t
Anonymous on 28 Feb '08 said:
93%!
That is a massively high score for a fighting game and I won't believe this biased hype and think this game is anywhere near as good as Virtua Fighter 4/5.
And don't make me laugh by insinuating this game has anything like the depth of the VF
So stuff that down yer pipe
ok ill stuff it down my pipe then shove it in your face
virtua fighter is crap its got as much depth as a kids paddling pool filled with dew
Anonymous on 28 Feb '08 said:
Right. First things first. For a magazine that has constantly been promising that this game is the game to end all games, you've rated it pretty poorly, haven't you? A game that has sold over 1.2 million units in Japan alone cannot possibly 93%. It defies the laws of physics.
That beside, I'm going to argue against all your niggles and blatant lies. First up is your stages. You have said that Melee stages only draw attention to innovation lacking elsewhere. That's like saying a game is not allowed to take its pros from its predecessors. And I'm sorry. but WarioWare, PictoChat, and Frigate Orpheon to name a few, are simply not boring. Stages like Battlefield and Final Destination are included because simple fights can sometimes be the best.
Please shrivel up and biodegrade. Please take a look at Subspace, and change your pitiful mind before God himself comes down from the clouds and neutralizes your living essence.
Moving on to my second, possibly the most biggest mistake Ngamer have ever made. Even bigger than the Chernobyl incident they caused.
'Signature moves aside, it's hard to see where Dedede differs from Bowser'
Please wait for me to laugh. Loudly.
Thank you. Sorry, I need to laugh again.
Thanks again, avid readers. I don't even know where to begin with this. The difference between Dedede is so dramatically monumental, it baffles me to think a bona-fide magazine does not know the difference. Probably some sort of mutation at birth misled Matt's judgement. For a start, Bowser is a close-combat player, whilst Dedede uses Waddle-Dees and the likes to hit players from afar. The have completely different special moves, and since when could Bowser inflate his body five times in quick succession without vomiting?
Link Ike and Pit are worlds apart. Yeah, they all wield swords, but each is uniquely different! Ike is pure combat, Link has bombs, and Pit flies. Each different attribute, among others, can change a battle plan right down to the very core. Save that crap for somewhere else, Ngamer.
We can tell you play Halo.
Next bit. A Nintendo magazine saying that the Wii's premium multiplayer, and you have only given it an outrageously low 93%. I can see from bdcool's youtube posts that this game is easily 98%+. I am beginning to think that you folks have just played it once, and probably don't know what an ukemi is. And the Mario Strikers comment is pure shock horror. Don't even dare say MSCF was a bad game. Yeah, it may've been short, but it was a blast, and you know it.
You've said something about repetition of a perfect formula. And what is wrong with a perfect formula? It's like shagging the perfect girl and then dumping her the day after, because she's too repetetive. And how can the perfect formula be 93%!! Contradictopolis.
Did you and your friends lose vital organs in a car crash?
Ngamer, please give any improvements as to how the controls could be more innovative. I think it is pretty unfair to have a go at some control types that may not suit you. They were included for other people, not for you. So you play with the GC controller. Then why are you fussed about the other controllers? I can guarantee there will be a lot of people who would kill you and everyone in your immediate vicinity due to poly-spontaneous human combustion, whilst using the Wii-mote and Nunchuk controls.
That is a massively high score for a fighting game and I won't believe this biased hype and think this game is anywhere near as good as Virtua Fighter 4/5.
Is that that generic game where you have to aimlessly circle each other a couple of times, and punch a ginger guy till he dies on a cold, hard, floor? I heard it didn't even have a bob-omb in it. I bet its rate fun.
Admittedly, Smash Bros.'s single-player isn't its strong point. But then, a game so flawless and superior in multiplayer, how can it be? Sakurai has done his darn best to deliver what is a special adventure, and he delivered possibly what can be optimal of a SSB game. I've heard that the storyline is phenomenal (I don't want to know the plot for now). So I can see SSE being played many a time.
And with that, I, and many others, condemn N-Gamer to a life of unthinkable shame. Take off your NES belt, and give it to someone worthy.
Anonymous on 29 Feb '08 said:
I created a account for this website strictly for the purpose of putting down the author of this review.
This review is laughable. The reviewer obviously has no clue what he is talking about. He pretty much throws his credibility out the door saying Link, Marth, and Ike are all the same. OOOOhhhh they all have swords this makes them completely identical characters.
Claiming that a lack of 'gimmick' levels is a bad thing??? Big Blue, and Brinstar were 2 of the worst levels in smash, and were consistently set to off on random stage switch. Complains about a lack of new features, then praises the smashball... How can you even try to complain about the online not working when you have an imported copy of the game!!!!! The online servers have a lot of trouble accepting players from america in japanese games.
"Signature moves aside, it's hard to see where Dedede differs from Bowser"... WTF SIGNATURE MOVES ARE WHAT DIFFERENTIATES CHARACTERS (other then weight, ground speed, attack power, range???). Thats like saying signature moves aside its hard to see the difference between Guile and Ryu in street fighter.
"Instead we find Smash Bros stubbornly sitting on Wii, only really making use of enhanced graphical power and a handful of Wi-Fi options." So tell me then would you have preferred a dumbed down game with a much simpler interface just so you can have some stupid ****ing waggle control? I mean seriously, then you complain about Controlls???? The game has 4 different control schemes, if you don't like the way one works go to another, don't bash them for making the game as accesible to as many people as possible.
*updated*
On another note please let me know how Bridge of Eldin, Sky World, Castle Seige, Wario Ware, Shadow Moses, Picto Chat, The Summit, Frigate orpheon, Mushroomy Kingdom, Distant Planet, Luigis Mansion, New Pork City, and Spear Pillar lack in either size or concept??? All the stages just listed feature entirely new concepts in terms of level interaction in the smash universe!
I previously posted on the "reviewer" (term used loosely since I question how much of the game he even played) comparing Ike, Link, and Marth. I was mistaken it was Ike, Link, and Pit. Can you even tell me one move that these 3 characters have in common? Sword swing??? I guess all the characters in soulcalibur are pretty much the same by that metric.
I honestly had never heard of Ngamer, or been to this site before reading this review, now I know why. with inaccurate reviews that contradict themselves like this one its no wonder this magazine/webiste isn't well know or respected in the game industry.
kim_b on 29 Feb '08 said:
Those kind of ignorant comments are exactly the sort that will get you booted off. Regardless of your thoughts on the review, making homophobic comments and being offensive towards the disabled (not Matthew
)is just not on.
Anonymous on 29 Feb '08 said:
Thanks Jamesesdad, because you managed to get across those points I couldn't. I'm glad someone is on the same wavelength as me.
PS: I too also made an account for the pure purpose to rebuke Ngamer.
Note to all: If it wasn't for Ngamer, Metacritic, and GameRankings (two independant companies that accumulate official critic's scores and create an average), SSBB would be rated a perfect 100%, which is quite unprecedented. But now, it is 98%, which I think is still extraordinary (and more important, unprecedented). But still, it is no substitute for a perfect score. In my opinion, a review needs to reflect its score, and clearly, the Ngamer staff needs to get a clear picture, and an accurate score. I think it is necessary to send Matt back to the Journalism drawing board.
noobpotato on 29 Feb '08 said:
you say the stages arn't creative like big blue and brinstar? wario ware,pictochat,electroplankton. So what are you on about, and as for the character complaints, that was retarted, i'll tell you how dedede differs from bowser, dedede 1 is a giant penguin and 2 he has a giant hammer and can float.
review games properly or not at all
Anonymous on 29 Feb '08 said:
I would like to note that I don't really care too much about the score and how it changes the average score on aggregate sites like metacritic. 93 is a very respectable score for any game. I'm more concerned with the content in the review, that doesn't seem very well thought out, and in some cases bordering on fallacy.
I really think either the author or the rest of the editorial staff on this site needs to sit down and take a good hard look at this review, and either ax it completely or edit the living daylights out of it, because as it stands now this review is rubbish.
This site has an article on the front 26 reasons why smash will be the best in 2008, yet No More Heroes scores a 9.4? Not to knock the quality of no more heroes, but seriously, not even mentioning the god awful bike controls. A serious lack of replayability? Boring missions to earn cash to get to the next hit???? I could keep going on and on with this. you slam the hell out of such a high quality game for really nitpicky irrelevant stuff, and then give no more heroes a significantly lower quality game that is more 'out there' a higher score without mentioning A SINGLE FLAW. curiouser and curiouser...
Anonymous on 1 Mar '08 said:
@ Matthew Castle & Ngamer Staff
Are you kidding me? a 93%. Bar far the stupidest review I've ever read. Your review is basically negative, pointing out the smallest and irrelevant details and things you don't like about the game. For Example: The worst is how you compared Bowser to King Dedede not to mention Pit/Link/Ike comparison.
"It's the lack of sizeable or 'concept' arenas that irks - like Melee's rotating Brinstar Depths or the Big Blue. In fact, Sakurai's inclusion of such original Melee stages only draws your attention to the lack of innovation elsewhere."
- Are you kidding me?! Your complaining about a freakin' stage? Simply ridiculous for some critic to point out.
"Something different. Repetition is Brawl's only real crime, but this is the curse of Smash Bros. After all, how do you revolutionise what is, arguably, a perfect formula? The answer is beyond us, and it would seem, slightly beyond Sakurai."
- The hell do you expect?
I can go on. Your whole review is filled with this crap. In my opinion, you guys couldn't find anything wrong with this game so you decided to make some stuff up to make the game look bad. You Ngamer staff obviously don't know what REAL game is. Do us all a favor and get rid of this review or better yet, give Brawl a score it truely derserve.
This game derserves a score of 100%, NOT a 93% score.
P.S: I've created this account solely to respond to this ridiculous review.
MartinGlow on 1 Mar '08 said:
You know what really grinds my gears? You Ngamer, wow. You obviously just turned the game on for about 10 minutes aad said "Yep, that's about it, it wasn't good. For the sake of it, lets just give it a score it doesn't deserve to get". Thats what I think you did. This article got me to scratch my head, when comparing Link Ike and Pit. I mean you have to be stupid to say they are exactly the same. Link has his use of items, Ike is his ONLY sword attacks and Pit is his bow/sword movements and flying. Also the Bowser Dedede comparison made me slightly angered. Please, in what way (other than their size) are they remotly close? Seriously.
Then going on and saying that the stages, from how you said it, sucks and their is no new options are objects added. I seriosuly think Matt was on something when he wrote this, because this is the most unfair review of Brawl I have read. I mean, Famitsu gave it a perfect 40/40 and every other were 98% or above.
I truly think you need to redo this article, bring in a guy who actually knows his stuff and knows Brawls history, and bring in a fair review, not rushed in 10 minutes.
supersmashbros on 1 Mar '08 said:
ahem, what are you on about, that review seemed so negative.
truth is that brawl will be amazing full stop
just play the game as its meant to be played, FOR FUN
*edit* TRY ONM (Official Nintendo Magazine) Its SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO much better
Anonymous on 3 Mar '08 said:
Comments are too funny
All these guys insulting N gamer because their highly anticipated game has not a perfect score.
So in fact I guess everyone who said that the review is false actually have the game?
I'm not really sure of it...
And for the ones not understanding why games with better review get a lower grade and visa versa, it is simply because Smash Bros is a sequel. We all know what it would be made of, and what we want to know is why after being improved this game is still not perfect.
Personally, i loved both SSB and SSBM, and I think 9.3 is a good score, maybe a bit under what I was attending but still good.
And for the part with the "clone" characters... it might be true, look in SSBM: Ganondorf and Captain Falcon... pretty much the same...
So obviously, before insulting the reviewer maybe it would be good to play the game?
And i am almost sure, some fan boys, seeing someone defending the reviewer, are going to insulte me like trash, simply because i am not saying:
OMG THIS GAME IS PERFECT, I NEVER PLAYED IT, BUT FROM WHAT I HAVE SEEN I CAN TELL THAT SOMEONE WHO PLAYED IT AND GAVE IT 9.3 IS AN IDIOT!!!!!!
>.<
Anonymous on 3 Mar '08 said:
@kastore01
No, if you took the time to read any ones comments you would see we are bashing bonehead comments that just don't make sense or clearly contradict eachother, and that can be observed even without playing the game, I.E Marth,Ike,pit are the same (characters who are clearly distinct, not captain falcon and gannon as you said...)as well as the same comment for bowser and dedede, and claiming a lack of inovation on in the playable leves int he game. First he Bashes Ike, Pit, and Link for all being the same, and then praises Pit for his new and unique playstyle?
Pointing out all these negative flaws (that aren't even really wrong with the game) in one game that is near flawless and giving it a lower score, and then reviewing a game with several clear flaws and not noting them but giving that game a higher score doesn't make any sense. If the reviewer were truly a 'smash fanatic' like he claims he would know the obvious difference between major characters. "After all, how do you revolutionise what is, arguably, a perfect formula? The answer is beyond us, and it would seem, slightly beyond Sakurai." I'll tell you how, you add new characters, new levels, new ways to play (online, SSE mode, stage builder, replays, smash ball). Its like the author chose to focus on the negative aspects that he tried to come up with, and completely glazes over whats good about the game.
I mean come on show me one negative comment he had for the game, and if I can't argue the point with a reasonable argument I will delete my posts, and the account to this website. None of the negative comments he levied against the game makes sense, and this is why I bash the review, not because of the score which is meaningless, but the false content of the review.
Anonymous on 3 Mar '08 said:
"Controls are an issue, too. Vertical remote is no substitute for classic controller or - our pad of choice - the GameCube pad. 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."
Yes there is 4 different control schemes. But this game is made for wii, which we all know for its revolutionary controllers. Unfortunately, this game doesn't take part in this "revolution" because using a Gamecube controller or classic controller (which is a gamecube like) is much better.
MartinGlow on 4 Mar '08 said:
@Kastore01
Isn't it agood thing for 4 controllers? Everyone has their own way of playing, and everyone wants to have fun playing it. BUT, there is the option to change the controllers so it works for you, so bashing the control schemes (not saying you were) isn't so clever when you can change it, therefore, you can make the Wiimote/nunchuk attachment better than the others. There.
Anonymous on 4 Mar '08 said:
ok so this review is obviously a really early April Fools joke i mean seriously i laughed sooo hard after reading this review that it can't possibly be real. Although i have not played through the Subspace Emissary I can tell by the hundreds of videos on youtube that it looks very enjoyable. Reading these comments i was wondering why people were bashing SSBB's single player and then saying other fighters had a better single player experience. I am sorry but I can't see that Smash has not only the Subspace but a classic mode as well an all star mode home run contest break the targets multi man melee etc I am unaware of other games single player experiences but it seems to me Smash bros trounces other fighters in this area. Actually i do remember Soul Caliber 2 and that is pathetic and repetitive compared to Brawl's single player.
On to the real Bread and Butter of Brawl... The multi-player. Ok first off id like to address that this reviewer obviously did not play through the game I even doubt that he unlocked all the characters. I have actually played Brawl(imported Wii) and it truly is the best multi-player experience I've ever had the pleasure to experience(lulz at redundancy). Before people get started on picking this post apart Id like to add that I've have only played this game for about 15 hours of game play and that the majority of the matches were stock matches with items and smash balls off. I have also played Smash since 64 although i didn't really get into smash till Melee which I play competitively. So I am gonna give my shot at a review of the multi-player coming from a competitive Melee player who has actually played Brawl for more than 10min.
First off the roster has 35 (for the most part) unique characters. Many of the returning characters have a different flavor to them. One such example is Bowser's side special attack where in melee was a slow claw swipe that had a short range and was a grab if done close to an opponent. In brawl it is really only a grab is a much faster attack and once grabbed bowser jumps into the air does a flip and you can control the horizontal trajectory making it possible to kamikazi with the attack. Many other changes with melee characters include Marth's B move, Samus's missiles, Yoshi's Up + B, Mario's Down B, Fox's Down B, and many others not including changes from Melee's meta game that i won't even come close to finish talking about.
Back to the roster of characters... The roster includes 35 characters not including Pokemon trainers 3 different characters Sheik or Zero Suit Samus. Some characters are similar in the style of their moves or special moves but by no means do the characters play the same or even close to that. For example Fox/Falco/Wolf all have similar special attacks but all of them have different effects as in damage distance knock back (how far and direction) and the general effect of the move. Also one can argue that these characters are "clones" but they in no sense clones of each other as they all have varying A attacks and all play very differently. Toon Link/ Link and Ganondorf/Capt. Falcon are the only sets of characters that can be compared to have similar move sets even then they play completely differently as each character is a different weight and speed and the attacks also vary in effect. I can guarantee no matter which character you choose you will have a different experience each time you choose someone new.
In melee there was no doubt an issue of balance ask any competitive player don't just take my word for it. In brawl I had the chance of playing as every character some for longer periods of time than others and for the most part the characters all seem relatively balanced(closer than most fighting games at least) I found a majority of the characters could be used competitively while only a few characters IMO Yoshi being one of the few characters that does not seem to hold up with the others.
Smash Balls are a very fun addition to the smash series and add their own depth to the strategy of Smash brothers. Should I go for the smash ball, stop my opponent from getting it or avoid it all together. Although I don't see smash balls making it into competitive play because many of them are very over powered, they are however very exciting in non competitive matches where there can be more luck involved.
There are many new items added to brawl including the Smash Balls. Such new items as Assist Trophies sticky bombs pit falls additional poke balls rocket launchers soccer balls and various other items to add to the hectic experience Smash Bros can deliver. I don't see items making it into competitive Brawl because it adds an element of luck into the game that many competitive players want left out in competitive play.
ok this post is getting truly massive so ill try to rap it up...
In brawl the amount of customizable matches is ridiculous giving players near limitless possibilities on how they want to play the game. Be it giving everyone bunny hoods increasing sizes of players perhaps the speed slowing them down + loads of other options seriously increases the depth to this games multi-player.
The levels are also amazing and artfully done to represent whatever game they hail from. Many levels this time around are not as hectic as levels such as brinstar or big blue(which is included as a bonus stage in brawl). TO say there are no innovative levels would be a blatant lie. I can remember a promise of Halo 3's "completely destructible levels" well thats plain BS and we all know that. But Brawl actually includes a very innovative stage that is completely destructible called Luigi's Mansion as well as the new ice climbers stage which is the tip of a mountain that breaks off and slided into the ocean as well as pits cloud level. Other innovative stages include Wario Ware where you pretty much play a mock version of the game while brawling it out. I can go on about the levels but I doubt i could do them justice.
Based on the just the multi-player portion of the game I would give this game a 10/10. With one of the most impressive rosters of any fighting games, Stages that are both beautiful and unique in design, countless game modes and options to customize your matches, and a vast list of items to add to the "AWESOME" that is truly Super Smash Bros Brawl. Did I mention the customizable control system. Well no only can you use either a Game Cube Controller, A classic controller, a Wii mote, or a Wii Mote + Chuk, but the controls can be mapped by the user to be whatever the player wants. Don't like hitting B for specials remap to Z or A and try it out. Sure Brawl doesn't take advantage of Wii's motion controls but with countless variety of other control schemes i doubt it will be missed.
Anonymous on 4 Mar '08 said:
@ L2Review
*clapclap* Well said my friend. Well said. I enjoy reading your review better than Matthews who apparently doesn't give a crap about the game.
Anonymous on 4 Mar '08 said:
@Kastore
Once again if you had actually read what I had posted before, I wouldn't even need to write this, however, I told you I would argue any negative point in his review you could come up with (I already talked about control complaints in a previous post). He says one control scheme doesn't really work, but others work just fine for him. You use what is comfortable for you, if you don't like southpaw control scheme in halo don't use it, but these extra ways to play are there for people other then yourself. If you knew anything about how precise the controls need to be in smash, then you would know that the game would have to be dumbed down in order to fit some BS waggle control onto the game. I'm sorry but I don't think the 'motion' controls on the wii are near precise or sensitive enough to map such a complex game like smash on it (def. not for competitive play any way.)
Just because the wii is hyped for having a "revolutionary controller", doesn't mean that every f***ing game that comes out for it has to have waggle controls shoehorned onto it. Look at metal slug collection for the wii, the game would have been great except for the fact that they forced the user to use motion control for grenades (which worked poorly), essentially rendering this game useless due to the precision, and timing required for a fast paced arcade game like ms. So in closing yeah... you couldn't even find one negative comment that actually made sense, try reading before you just go shooting your mouth off claiming everyone that posted is an angry fanboy.
Anonymous on 5 Mar '08 said:
ive stopped buying ngamermagazine bout a year now.i used to think highly of there reviews but i found the quality drop bigtime like there rushed out,all their old mags used to focus on the good points,now its like this give a game 9.3 out ten but say all the bad points????fair enough no game is perfect,but ive read this review no mention of how stunning the stages look but how small they are,unless they turn super smash bros into a racing game it might not be so familiar,but in all fairness its a fighting game and always will be.and i for sure can not wait to get this i hav the other 2 and this will be bigger and better,not to mention its stunning looking.
ricflair on 25 Mar '08 said:
Does anyone know if a US copy of SSB on a UK Wii will work online (with freeloader)?
Thanks!
mr marill on 30 Mar '08 said:
I lol'd so freaking hard at this review. NGamer are noobs lol.
I mean you go on about items etc and Smash Balls and they're not used in proper matches. The stages aren't as hectic? What? Big Blue was completely f***ing crud, you died way too easily by complete hax. Rumble Falls, the Summit and stages like that are pretty hectic! You didn't say one good point in the whole game. And how are Link, Pit and Ike similar??? Ike is slow and powerful, Link is good projectiles and Pit flies for god's sake. Bowser and DeDeDe is stupid. THE HAMMER IS A HINT. They're heavy and... Er... THAT'S THE ONLY SIMILARITY. The hammer is a hint.
Oh and Brawl's out in May, not Autumn in Britain =P
MartinGlow on 18 May '08 said:
Well, having brawl for w while now, and still none of those flaws make sense.
YankeeSkyPirate on 31 Aug '08 said:
Although I don't agree with all of this review's points, there are definetly ones that I've noticed. There is a lot of visual clutter on screen, eg: Space Armada or some shiz, that Starfox level, has explosions going off in the background, making the action even more difficult to keep track of than usual, and many of the items are stupidly small: The Nova Bomb is tiny, and it does a massive amount of damage, a ridiculous design desicion to make. I never had any trouble identifying an item in Melee, but it's quite hard to see what you're picking up sometimes. This is a noticeable flaw in such a fast paced game, where simople to read visuals are a must. Giant eye candy is one of the last things needed. Stages, I felt, were nowhere near as interesting as Melees. Brinstar wasn't a great stage, but most of Brawl's stages are "meh". They're ok, but few are great, unlike Pokemon Stadium in Melee, or Onett. Many of the stages just feel like floating platforms with pretty themed backgrounds, unlike many Melee stages, which were designed more interestingly and imaginatively, with mroe relevance to the world they were set in. Characters are also pretty disappointing to me: many characters have been nerfed needlessly: I mean, what the hell was wrong with Ganondorf? They made him EVEN slower. As well as this, many characters don't feel unique. While I can't agree with the Dedede/Bowser comparison, I was pretty miffed when I found out Ganondorf was still just like Falcon, with some minor changes, that Toon Link was like Young Link, himself a tweaked Link and that Wolf was ANOTHER Star Fox character that felt like a tweaked Fox, to go along with Falco. I mean, I don't mind a character that feels like another one, with their own subtle tweaks, but they should also have their own signifcant changes. It feels like a lack of imagination to me. There were some missed opportunities to put in some more original characters: in place of Wolf, they could have put in Dark Samus, which would also have balanced the amount of characters from certain franchises: eg: There are 3 Star Fox characters, and 4 Pokemon characters. I would rather have a more diverse range of new talent, that more Pokemon. Smash Balls are a pretty controversial entry among my friends and I: some of them are wildly overpowered, such as the Landmaster tank, which can take 2 stock from everyone if used correctly, or Sonic's 18 second golden orb of power, while others just suck: Pit's Smash Ball makes everybody sigh when it comes to the field. I've also noticed some unbalancing issues: Pit seems to be slightly overpowered, for instance. Subspace Emissary is also terrible, worse than Melee's adventure mode. That development time could have been better spent on other elements of the game, such as more stages and characters. And yet ANOTHER gripe I felt was that content was unlocked incredibly quickly: I had all the stages and characters within 4 days of buying the game. Melee lasted much longer, and was played for much longer than Brawl. My friends and I, who've been playing since the original game, feel disinterested and apathetic towards Brawl. Maybe it's because we'd played Melee to death and beyond, for 5 years, and that Brawl is too similiar, but maybe it's that all of these niggles add up, and make the game feel worse overall. Don't get me wrong, Brawl is a good game, especially to newcomers, and I was expecting it to be more of the same, but there were obvious points Melee could have been improved upon, and they have gone ignored, and in some cases exaggerated further: eg: more clones, and new ones created: harder to identify items, visual clutter.
To make this simple: Melee must have had close to, if not more than, 1000 hours of multiplayer game time on it. Brawl has about 100. It's too similiar, and I wasn't expecting great change or anything, and there are too many niggles. Melee was a better game overall, even if Brawl has more content. It's by no means a terrible game though, and is definetly one of the best games on Wii, I'm just focusing on the negative points.
(I apologise for making this post so long, I just had to get all of this crap off my chest, as disjointed as my points are.)
The Sandbag on 8 Sep '08 said:
i know it's probably a bit too latr to post as u may have all gone onto something else, but i hated that review. there are so many out there that focus on all the positives, and the very few negatives (see ONM)
i have had this game since the day it came out (june 27th, GB yay
) and have loved it. i had it in my wii for nearly two months, and only took it out when it froze online (turned out to be extremely bad lag, one of my problems with the game). there is so much to do it's scary, and it's one of the few games that i will keep on playing two years from now.