Agree. Lot of games only get good reviews of such high degree because of it being such a named franchise.

Hmm well, the reason its so popular is BECAUSE it plays off the franchise. Thats WHY it was made and why its popular.

Still, if it was people I didn't know, I don't think I would even buy it, I really like it, would probably rate it a 8, but its the Mascots and all that that make it GREAT.

There have been a few times in Super Smash Bros when I almost wished it didn't have such deep roots in Nintendo. But I enjoy the game because it's such a fun combat system. Sure, a large amount of its extras center around Nintendo trivia and references, but the core gameplay is what makes it so much fun.

Well, the fanboy element is what makes the game a 10 to some people. They ignore the clunky elelements because they enjoy the nintendo characters. If fanboyism is what makes the game good to the purchasers, why ignore it?

The fun part about brawl IS playing as your favorite character and using his moves to kick another masscots ass.

Ness ftw.

I've been saying this about Nintendo games for a decade, and it's quite obvious which titles still hold up.

Hint: most do not

@Kyle81: Don't forget its also a reason for them to get worse reviews. ;]

But yeah...its usually better reviews.

If a game appeals to people because of the mascots, doesn't that in itself make it a better game?

I know my girlfriend gets a huge kick out of which characters she plays - she loves the personalities of some of the characters (mostly the 'cute' aspect).

But that's what makes Smash Bros great, you take the role of a familiar, lovable character and fight other familiar lovable characters!

Nintendo love makes people give this game a 10. It's an 8 at best. Silly bouncy slappy game.

Although I agree with the points made in the article, I won't be surprised in the slightest when the home of the writer is egged into next Easter.

Well the thing is like 1up said its made FOR fanboys, it doesn't create any new characters to play as because thats they've all been involved in nintendo in some shape or form, the trophies themselves are a glorious recap of nintendo history, I mean if smash bros didn't have any nintendo in it at all would it be the same game? No way it would be nowhere near as steeped in wonderful nostalgia and nintendo moments as it.

Now lets say you remove the Halo brand from Halo 3....that would be interesting to see what scores its got

This is true, in many reviews I read of SSBB I saw the line: "great fan-service"

I'm sure that fan-service helped a lot of reviewers overlook how repetitive and stagnant the gameplay was in Subspace Emissary.

@ForAllThatEverWas: Well in a lot of reviews thats mentioned about the subspace emissary

Why did Halo 3 get alot of 10s? It was just Halo 2 with a coat of paint and some new models thrown in. Giving it a 10 was a way to sidestep all the fanboy hatemail if they didn't give it a 10.

I was kind of annoyed by this logic when people tried to use it for Mario Galaxy.

You could make that argument with any media, the characters and setting of a game/movie/tv show/book/etc. is a huge part of the entire thing.

I like playing Smash Bros. because its fun to play, the bonus is having all my favorite characters to play with.

Fanboyism didn't seem to have any affect on the reviews of Mario Party 8

Scrapping numerical scores is the epitome of hopeless idealism. Yes, we all know it'd be better in some ways, but no way in hell will it ever happen.

since i didnt really grow up on ninty franchises (yes, i played some and loved those) smash characters dont mean a whole lot to me personally. on the other hand, they are really diverse and most of them are actually really cool.

brawl would probably get an 8-9 because its still a really good game, but melee would be a 9.8 due only to balance issues. melee is a far far better and deeper game. but thats not saying im gona go back to melee.

Perhaps label reviews as by a fanboy (which type, ie: pro nintendo or anti nintendo), or neutral. Or just say its done by a neutral or a fanboy. Otherwise we just have to learn from each reviewer I suppose and see in which ways they lean. The fanboy in most people will steer what you think of actually getting a game. But some things stand out to people that don't to others as negatives and as positives, so its difficult.

Well, Brawl has a winning formula for gameplay, and tampering with that TOO much would upset too many people.
Next-gen gaming has become surprising "un"next gen. There's been a few things here and there, but what, besides graphics and bigger worlds, has been revolutionized by all this new tech? I mean, besides what the Wii and DS have done? It'll be interesting to see how long before we all realize how stail and repetitive alot of games are becoming? Even top-notch games?

Clunky user interface - What? You'd have to illustrate this because what I see isn't clunky at all. It's extremely clean and easy to use.

High percentage of total content to unlock - In what way is this a bad thing? Everything should be unlocked from the start? That'd be dumb. There'd be no reason to play any of the modes at all aside from VS. The game just simply has far more content than nearly every other game on the market.

Complete lack of Wii control - You can turn on wiimote smashes if you want to. Also, people enjoy that it isn't inundated with gestures and whatnot. The game gives people choice, something that is very nice.

Lack of graphical progression - I really really have to disagree on that. Playing them side-by-side, I notice a LOT of improvements on models, stages, zero slowdown ever and overall.

Lack of gameplay progression - Honestly, saying this just proves you've never bothered to get into the game really. There is a TON different from Melee. It played amazingly before. Now it's even more refined.

If you took out the characters, it would still play amazingly and be amazing but if you took out the characters, would the game even exist? You can't just go "if the biggest idea this game revolves around didn't exist, it wouldn't be that great." That's just dumb. There should be no "what ifs" in reviewing. You can't sit there and review a game based on how you think it might be with it different. You review what you're given.

People play the games because they have fun with them. Well known games are well known because they are fun! Unlike movies, games tend to get better or at least still really fun with sequels. Smash Bros. may be popular because of fan service, but that doesn't its not fun. No matter how much anyone bitches about a popular game series, no can convince anyone with words that a game is shitty. The only way is to find out for yourself!

"the complete lack of usability of the Wii controls"

Really?

I really don't get this hatred towards the Wii controls. I've played tons with both the Gamecube and Wiimote+nunchuck schemes, and they both seem completely usable, especially if you turn off tap jump and use the d-pad to replace the c-stick. I like having the jump button on the other hand - it's easier to fight midair. The only thing thats awkward is grabs and throws.

I think that people had the idea in their head before the game came out that it would be bad with the new controls, and never let that idea go. I got used to the GC pad from playing Melee to death, but kept an open mind and was able to use the nunchuck scheme without any problems.

More on topic, however, the game has Nintendo fanboyism in mind. Who cares what it would be like if it was made differently? It was made the way it was, and the result is a game that is a ton of fun to play. I also argue with the point that it's a bad fighting game if you remove all the nostalgia. I know plenty of people whose familiarity with Nintendo is limited to the big names, yet they love the game because of the unique fighting system and its extreme fun when playing with a couple of friends.

@JimElNino: it got pretty crappy scores, alot of 5's and 6's. imagine what it would have got minus nintendo characters

If you take out all the mascots, you are losing what makes the game great to begin with. Yes, as a whole there are a few problems here and there. But to say the game more-or-less sucks once you take out all the Nintendo mascots.. umm.. duh? The whole point of Smash Bros is the mascots.

Now it would be one thing if the game was not fun. But it *is* fun. A "clunky interface" (which is something I really don't get.. what's clunky?) does not mean it's a terrible game. And *gasp*, god forbid we have to play the game to unlock stuff! What a tragedy! -_-

For those of you who visit GameFAQs, this is poignant:

[boards.gamefaqs.com]

But to be honest, with the support it's getting, I believe it will certainly be considered by the higher-ups (ie. Sailor Bacon). That's not to say it's a shoo-in for inclusion, but it defintely will warrant thinking about it.

@Thassodar: Still confused as to why Halo 3 got so many 10 out of 10s myself, it didn't even increase the number of people you could play online with, I thought Edge would avoid the hype but even they gave it 10/10....and that was fucking Edge!

The more and more I play SSBB, the more I realize that I can't take this game seriously, competitivewise. But hey, it's fun in the degree that Mario Party was.

Yet, that only goes so far.

Yeah this guy seems to forget it's BECAUSE of the nintendo characters that this game does so well, and the easy to play mechanics aren't that bad. But that's the WHOLE POINT the characters, would I play it if there were some generic characters, maybe. Because of the insanity, but the characters push the game over the guage, that's why it's called super smash bros.

I find this idea absolutely inaccurate. To make the assumption that the game wouldn't be as good without Nintendo characters is faulty. Like it or not, the characters are part of the game, whether they only promote fanservice or are part of a greater whole. Without them, the game may fail...but with them, the game flourishes. You can't seperate one from the other, or divorce the characters from the game.

The situation would be much the same if we tried to pry the setting or the music away. Each is as much an integral part of the game as the last, and together they make a coherent, viable experience. If you feel like the gameplay was lacking, then dock the game some points...but don't believe for a second that you can judge the game based on a different perception.

To further illustrate my point...imagine Guitar Hero without a guitar. Do we only like guitar hero because it uses a guitar? According to this reviewer, we would find the menus extremely obtuse (up/down, no left/right) and the gameplay repetitive. But we can't make that argument, because as soon as you take away the guitar, it isn't Guitar Hero anymore.

The same is true for Smash Bros., Halo, or any other franchise you want to bring up.

If they took the Nintendo characters out it would probably get a C+ to B-. I give it a B+ right now. (Yes, I prefer the grade scale...) The SSE is only playable because you want all the characters. I have never cussed with the Wii until this game. I mean am I supposed to believe that Nintendo can't make a decent friggin' platformer within a game? Believe it! It's horrid. I don't even mind the repetitiveness, but the controls are just not there. In fact, the whole game feels kind of loose.

Lack of usable wii controls? As soon as you spend more than 10 minutes using it, the wii remote and nunchuk is basically as easy to use as a gamecube controller. Sure, the game isn't a 10 game, but what is perfect really? Name one game today that honestly meets every criteria of 'perfection.' To me, if a game is fun, it's worth buying. If it's even better with friends, it deserves a 10.

I think I understand what he's trying to achieve by saying "remove the characters", in the he wants to treat it without any predisposition, but you can't do that with a game like Smash bros. because 1/3 of the charm is controlling pikachu, or Samus, and having all these different franchises collide. You can't take that away without inherently altering the way the game plays. The balance that has been achieved between these different characters from different universes with different rules, and yet you don't fell that they have been altered to an obtrusive point. But, even if the characters were all original, and there were no stigma attached, the new stages, items, animations, gameplay modes, and gameplay mechanic, make smash bros. thoroughly without peer. There simply isn't another game that has the feel that is conveyed in smash bros. and that makes it atleast 9/10, without any "fanboyism".

Comment on On Fanboyism and Reviewing Super Smash Brothers Brawl....Totally over rated. Same crap as before. I hate it when people actually go out there and put it in the same class as a real fighting game. It is not a fighter. It's Mario Brothers (you know the old arcade game) with crazy items and every character that's ever crossed a Nintendo system thrown into a pot. It requires very little to no skill to play. It has a ridiculously long and repetitive story mode. OMG, Nintendo, come up with something original already.

@EggmaniMN: I really couldn't agree more. I realize the point the guy was trying to make but he kicked himself in the ass with some (read: all) of his critisizms. I'd elaborate further but you did a pretty good job.

Putting aside that I disagree with some of his claims on Brawl about the controls, etc, I really hate it when people try to say, "Well Brawl would be a 7 and not a 10 without the characters."

First of all, it would be an 8. Second of all, of course it would get a lower score without Nintendo characters! At least 50 percent of the game's appeal is the nostalgia and all of the cool memorabilia that you can unlock. The rest of the fun comes with what a great game it is to play with your friends.

While we were waiting for Brawl, everybody kept going, "Omg, Sonic confirmed for Brawl! Omg, Wolf confirmed for Brawl!" It was fun because we wanted to see which of our characters would be included. Would we care about unlocking Generic Character A as opposed to Wind Waker Link? Would we care about Generic Location C and Generic Soundtrack D as opposed to unlocking Shadow Moses Island or Pit's original soundtrack?

Smash Brothers Brawl gets high marks because each character (excepting perhaps Ganondorf) is lovingly implemented, each stage is carefully crafted, and there are so many instances where you go, "Oh awesome, I totally remember that from this Nintendo game."

It's appeal lies in the fact that it's a well-designed love letter to Nintendo fans. You take that away, and you get a fun party game. The logic doesn't hold.

wait, are small arms and power stone similar to smash? didnt those games do well despite having no well established franchise characters?

I would for sure enjoy smash bros gameplay with random characters. As far as I know there are no other fighters like it, with the platforming style of fighting and whatnot. Small arms (or whatever) for the xbox live arcade got me excited for a bit because it looked kinda like smash bros at first, I didn't care the characters were random animals. Unfortunately it wasnt actually that well put together

I've been hoping someone would actually come out and say this. It's definitely true that making the game's characters familiar faces whom gamers are excited to control/fight against adds a lot of real enjoyment, and therefore isn't worth just tossing out. But is it to the point of being 10/10? It's a good game, but there's definitely problems with it, and if we MUST be using the number system a game with problems should not be getting 10/10 so frequently.

If we are sending out the message that the surest way to get good reviews and sales simultaneously is to pack a game with as many old things as possible, how can we expect to ever get something truly new and original in video games?

Don't rely on reviews. Take them with a pinch of salt and use them as a rough guide only.

Problem solved.

Halo 3 is another by-product of this type of game reviewing.

But then again, by giving it a high score just means that the game is a must have for that console. So in that case...

I'll also add, why all the complaining about little things like the Wii controls? You have FOUR different control options. Don't like the Wiimote controls? DON'T USE THEM! You don't have to!

Similarly, there are multiple ways to unlock most of the characters/stages. Don't like single player? Play only multiplayer and you will still unlock everything. Don't like SSE? Play other SP modes, and there are ways to unlock stuff that way too.

Frankly, I think it's great. Rarely do game developers really give you options like they do in this game. Even something as small as being able to remap every single button however you want is nice.

Honestly, I'd have to say the article itself seems hypocritical. The whole notion of "take out the mascots" in order "stop the fanboyism" seems rather fanboyish, since you have to basically ignore aspects of the game to "properly review it" according to them. It's almost as if they are LOOKING for things to complain about, just because it's getting such high marks. I'd say looking for excuses to hate a game falls under the same "crap" category as their whole idea of "blind fanboy reviewing."

Yeah, if you take away the references to video games of yore, it's not as good. And if you take the music out of a musical, it's not as good. So what?

Oh hey, another guy mentioning Halo 3. I was playing Warhawk yesterday and my roommate brought up the review score for Halo 3 and compared it with Warhawk's. Oh wow, you don't think fanboyism weighed in on the game's score do you? Of course not. Even though, you know, pretty much everyone on my floor that's nuts for Halo and plays it every day in my room thought that Warhawk was more fun after playing it. But that's nothing, right? It's HALO after all T_T

Much like Kaemon said, the characters make it great. That's what made it fun, and if that works, do it for crying out loud. Whether you want to see if Mario could beat Link while Go K. K. Rider plays on a cel-shaded pirate ship or you just want to punch Sonic in the face (and who doesn't?), SSB gives you that. I don't even need the most original, unique games all the time. Sometimes I want simple distilled awesome. I may love the complex flowing melodies in prog rock, but somtimes I need some simple music to indulge in. I won't reveal who they are but rest assured I'm not proud to own their CDs. And in an interesting point, SSB didn't always have Nintendo characters in it: [www.unseen64.net]
@excel_excel: I always thought reviews would go down, but the internet hate would flip and it would become the new underdog. When it comes to games you're either overrated name recognition garbage or widely unknown godsend. I just ignore people and enjoy the damn game; try not to over think it.
@MoeB: Spectacular and simple.

I'll have to entirely disagree simply because Kyle agreed.

No. Actually, I just disagree that the game would lose so much appeal simply because the faces were gone. Say you cut out from the very beginning the use of franchise characters and made something entirely original. Is the fighting solid? The game fun? If yes, then there's not much to gripe about, period. The only reason we gripe about this stuff in the first place is because of the popularity of mascots or systems. Gamers seem to care less about the quality of a title, and more about the ability to boast or laud something over one another. At least, here on the vocal interwebs. Would the game be any less fun with original characters? No, if those characters had the same amounts of polish and attention you'd expect from a first party software. Sure, maybe it wouldn't have a fanatical following, but would it be any different from the Street Fighter nutjobs, or the Tekken faithful? There would be little difference, if the characters were all original.

Challenging reviews? Aren't we all doing that as it is? Isn't it every day someone else says 'We gotta change it!'? If things are so broken, why is is it just now that everyone's clamoring to change it? Because Game