2 
1 
Yo PlayStation.Blog readers! Gamescom is finally upon us, and you know what that means: time for some highly anticipated Playstation All-Stars Battle Royale reveals!
We’re thrilled to announce the inclusion of Insomniac’s Ratchet and Clank in PlayStation All-Stars! Given the wealth of tools and gadgets at their disposal, it made perfect sense to us to include them in our roster. This duo is strongest at mid-range, and they can cut off many points of entry with varied angles of attack. We made sure that iconic Ratchet and Clank weapons such as the Combusto Pistol, the R.Y.N.O., and Tesla Spikes are available for players to utilize on the battlefield. Clank joins in on the fight wielding his powerful Chronoscepter, and even Mr. Zurkon can be summoned to lend a hand!
Also joining the cast is Spike from Sony Computer Entertainment’s franchise Ape Escape — a character that was on our radar from early on. We here at the studio have fond memories of the original Ape Escape on the PlayStation, which was revolutionary at the time for introducing unique gameplay elements facilitated by the first Dual Shock controller. The Ape Escape series has cemented itself in PlayStation’s history, and it’s our pleasure to have Spike as part of our roster. He’s a well-rounded character that can compete at close range, or from a distance with traps and projectiles, including the classic R.C. Car. He comes brandishing not only his signature stun clubs, but also peculiar gadgets, crazy weapons, and, of course, apes!
Dante from Capcom’s Devil May Cry has also made his way into PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale! It was imperative that a character with such a rich history and dazzling play style was part of the cast, and Dante fans can finally pit their favorite demon hunter against heavy hitters like Kratos and Heihachi. Dante’s offensive capabilities and mobility allow players to be creative in their assault, ensuring Devil May Cry fans will feel right at home hacking, slashing, and shooting their rivals into oblivion with devastating weaponry and stylish combos.
Lastly, we are pleased to announce that Media Molecule’s Sackboy from LittleBigPlanet is joining the rumble! Fans have been clamoring for his inclusion in our roster, and we’re more than happy to oblige. We had a panoply of items and gadgets to draw inspiration from in forming Sackboy’s moves for our game, so we eventually decided we’d give him a quirky and curious moveset that makes him stand out from the rest of the cast. He can produce various objects, gadgets, and tools that have varying effects when in play, affording him a distinct playstyle that is likely to catch foes off guard. Sackboy can pester enemies from a distance with his Cakeinator, and bounce them back to a non-threatening distance with a bounce pad!
We are also excited to show you our newest level, Stowaways, taken straight from one of the more frantic sequences in Naughty Dog’s Uncharted 3: Drake’s Deception. Stowaways is a unique stage that forces players to adapt to both long-range and close-quarters combat. The environment is constantly moving and changing, benefiting those who can quickly adapt. As usual, players can expect this Uncharted-themed level to be mashed up with elements from another franchise — which will it be this time?
We’re also really excited about the promotional pricing announcement for PlayStation All-Stars that was made at today’s press conference. For all of you that purchase the PlayStation 3 version of PlayStation All-Stars – at retail or digitally through the PlayStation Network – you will be able to download the PS Vita version of PlayStation All-Stars from the PS Network at no additional cost. How awesome is that?!? Now you’ll be able to experience all of the great cross-save and cross-play features that PlayStation All-Stars has to offer on both the PS3 and PS Vita at one great price. So if you haven’t pre-ordered your copy yet, perhaps this news will pique your interest.
That’s all for now! We appreciate the continued support for PlayStation All-Stars Battle Royale from the fans. We still have plenty more surprises in store for everyone between now and our November 20 release date, so keep checking back for more news!
Related Posts:
Replies:
This is an even bigger copy of smash bros. than I thought it would be.
Anyone who doesn't see this as a blatant rip-off of SSB deserves to be shot.
I was thinking the exact same thing. Bundling the two games for, hell I'd even go as far as like $20 more than a regular Wii U game, would be a hell of a deal.
WHERE IS IT
that is spike from ape escape. to keep it short he will most likely be a young link rip as far as this game goes
are you just that bad at video games that you blame your losing a game on being "unbalanced" or "disengaging"?
A game has to be engaging otherwise no one will buy it.
Balancing is pretty important in a fighting game, if not to make it potentially competitive then to keep the arguments between friends to a minimum. You know, to prevent your typical "you only won because you used meta knight, no way I won because you're shit, *crag* you, no *crag* you, stab stab die" arguments. All-stars will almost definitely be more balanced than any SSB game, mainly because it's one thing the creators of SSB have always neglected. It's a problem they're aware of though, and Namco should see to its solution.
I'll probably still buy this game for curiosity's sake, and I'm sure it will be fun, but I'm confident that SSBU will shit all over it.
what the hell isn't engaging about smash bros? Do you pay attention to the screen in order to play the game? Yes. Do you actively think out which combination of buttons to press in order to preform the move you find best for the moment? Yes. Do you at any point strategize in anyway on how you approach whichever situation you find yourself in during a match? Yes if your actually playing and not just mashing buttons randomly because HURR DURR VIDYA GAYEMS R HURD HURRRR. I think a few of you need to look up what exactly engaging means. Just because you saw it in a video game ad doesn't mean you know what it means.
Since Namco is taking charge of Smash 4, though, I think they're going to put more effort into making the game balanced. They have a couple quotes out there that talk about balance in the new game and it's making me hopeful.
Should we just excuse Brawl from analysis because "herpderp it's meant to be something fun you play with your friends?" *crag* that; that's idiot logic. Have you ever stopped to think about what your vague, nebulous term "fun" actually means? What makes a game "fun?" Because your argument seems to consist of "it's fun in and of itself," which is unintelligible and, yes, "hipster" butt*crag*ery.
Being a higher mind, I like to stop and think about what makes these games entertaining. Is the game balanced enough, so that some characters or items are not completely broken, removing the element of skill from these games? Are the mechanics engaging, constantly requiring me to use any and all input at various times, or is it a dull button-mashing fest?
I can assure you, Brawl is a fairly broken game, and its mechanics are not engaging in the slightest (How can someone who demands a game to be more engaging (In other words, DEMANDS MORE THOUGHT AND INPUT) and balanced (In other words, DEMANDS THE GAME NOT BELITTLING THE SKILL OF THE PLAYERS ON THE BASIS OF FIGHTER CHOICE) be demonstrating how he is "durr bad at video games?!").
Call me an elitist, and I'll wear that label proudly. I take pride in not having low standards. Whether or not All-Stars will live up to those standards remains to be seen, but as video games naturally tend to become better in time as they are tweaked, I can assure you, it will at least be a better game experience than Brawl.
If you're arguing that one game is "more fun" than another due to the reactions you get out of playing it in a group, then that is not a matter of the game itself being fun but its external factors being fun. I have fun playing Bubsy 3D with friends because we mock how unfun it actually is.
Fun (Which in reality is just another term for "pleasing," which is the standard by which we define what is "entertaining" and "quality" in art: how much pleasure it gives the viewer (Note: "pleasure" does not necessarily mean that something is "happy;" Schindler's List is a pleasing movie due to its excellent cinematography, riveting narrative and excellent acting, even if the events it depicts are very, very unhappy)) can be defined. It's subjective, but it isn't arbitrary, meaning that subjectivity can be by no means a dismissal to an argument. Icycalm does a good job at explaining how quality can be analyzed and isn't a matter of the arbitrary:
"The question of whether fish or beef tastes better is, like all questions, entirely subjective. But science can determine to a great deal of precision which of them is better for which person AND TOWARDS WHAT END. The answer will be radically different if the desired end is a long life-span, or an easier digestion, or more appropriate nourishment for a specific sport, or to treat a specific disease, etc. etc. And THAT's what people would call an "objective" judgement -- which would again be wrong because even the highest so-called "objectivity" is not objective at all -- since the answer will be different depending on the subject (i.e. the person for whom we are answering the question). And vice versa: even in the highest "subjectivity" there's at least a certain element of "objectivity". For example, that many people do not like complex games is a subjective preference. But once you've run some IQ tests and discovered that these people are generally stupid, you've uncovered a rather "objective", scientific truth -- one which you can use to build a theory on. And so on and so forth, until you ultimately come to enlarge your definition of "people" to include all animals, and eventually all life-forms. Then you start comparing the games dogs, for example, play, to those played by homo sapiens. And all throughout your studies the evidence keeps mounting that more complicated life-forms generally prefer more complicated games. And finally your question "what is a better game?" ends up being transformed, after having passed through the most careful and most rigorous "objectively" scientific analysis, into the question "what is the game a higher life-form would prefer?", which is entirely subjective -- affirming not only THE SCIENTIST'S PERSONAL PREFERENCE, but also the dog's, and the rat's and Derek Yu's."
(He also goes into this further in his essay, On the Genealogy of "Art Games:" A Polemic.).