Kirby VS Megaman: Clash of Clones

Here we have two beloved video game characters who just love to steal their opponent's abilities. The first is the blue bomber himself, Mega Man! The second is the pink blob with the black hole gut, Kirby! A spectacular Smash Bros. 4 customs tournament was held recently, and some of the top players in the nation attended. Allow them to show you the terrifying fighting prowess of these two esteemed combatants! Fight!   

Donkey Kong Country 1 VS Donkey Kong Country 3: Planet of the Apes

The original Donkey Kong Country series holds a very special place in my heart. The Super Nintendo was the first game console I ever owned, and Donkey Kong Country was my first game. To put it simply, the game blew my mind. The stunning visuals, atmospheric soundtrack, tight platforming, insane difficulty, and expert level design came together to create something amazing. I spent all my free time playing DKC1, who needs friends right? My parents would often called me obsessed- they were right. Very right.

Donkey Kong Country 2 and 3 released in the next few years, and both were spectacular games. However, the reason I chose DKC3 for this comparison is because of the wealth of new mechanics and characters added. Although it kept the core game-play of the first two games intact, new features such as an explorable over-world, mini-games, and grabbing/throwing mechanics spiced things up. So what did I think of these additions? Well, although I did enjoy them, I thought they got in the way of the core game-play at times. Grabbing and throwing your partner character was cumbersome, and the over-world didn't really add much to the overall experience.

Where DKC3 has the original game beat was in sheer imagination. DKC1 is beautiful and vibrant, but the level locations are slightly generic. DKC3 took things up a notch- many notches actually. From waterfalls, to sewers, to mountaintops, to wooden cabins, to ship docks, no location was left unexplored. You can really tell that the genius developers at Rare worked hard to avoid limiting themselves to predicable, and expected, jungle settings. You never know what to expect from the next level, and this unprecedented visual diversity is reason enough to complete the game.

In conclusion, both games are fantastic. DKC1 is the very definition of simple, unadulterated platforming bliss. DKC3 has the same great platforming mechanics and superior art design, but is hampered by unnecessary mechanics and features. However, if I could only play one game for the rest of my life it would have to be DKC1 simply because it's so easy to jump into the game world and start playing. All you have to worry about are those nasty Kremlings! To be honest though, the real reason I'm choosing DKC1 as the winner is because it was my first game ever, how do you compete with that?! DKC1 is your Bit Brawl winner!

  

Mortal Kombat 9 VS Super Smash Bros Melee: Which is the better fighter?

At their core, fighting games come down to one simple thing- defeating your opponent. So why not pit two against each other? I've chosen Smash Bros. Melee and Mortal Kombat because they represent two distinct styles. First up we have Mortal Kombat- a very traditional fighter. Each character has a life bar, and the winner is the first to completely deplete their opponents.' This can be achieved by using a combination of attacks, counters, and grabs. Each character also has a long list of special moves. These can be unleashed by inputting complex button combinations.

Super Smash Bros. Melee takes a much different approach, and can best be defined as an 'open-world' fighter. Each character has a life percentage, and the more they get hit, the higher their percentage goes. Once it gets high enough, what is refereed to as a 'smash attack' will send them rocketing out of the arena, and to their demise.

Instead of needing to memorize lists of complicated button combinations to pull off combos and special moves, players are essentially given the ability to create their own combos. Each character has all their moves mapped to two buttons, with tilts of the joystick leading to variations of them. Thanks to a generous amount of 'hit-stun,' upon impact your opponent is incapable of retaliating for a split-second. During this time, you can instantly string together various moves to create impressive and flexible combos.

The two games are very different when it comes to character selection. Mortal Kombat presents users with a variety of very traditional, generic fighters. The majority are variations of ninjas, soldiers, and monsters. Although they are well-designed and relatively diverse in regards to their move-sets, the fighters are generally forgettable as a whole. Super Smash Bros. has a much more varied and memorable cast. The game is filled with classic Nintendo characters as well as a few third-party guests in the later games such as Sonic, Snake, and Pac-Man. This makes the game extremely captivating. Who hasn't wondered who would win in a fight between Link, Mario, and Donkey Kong?

The winner of this Bit Brawl (hehehe) is....Super Smash Bros. Melee!

PS4 VS XBOX ONE: Which new generation console has the edge?

After years of excitement and speculation, the next generation of consoles has finally arrived. Sony launched the PlayStation 4 on November 14th, and Microsoft launched the Xbox One on November 22nd. Although the initial selection of games was limited, both sold well and released without any major issues. So which is the superior console?

Spec-wise, the machines are very similar, with a slight edge going to the PS4. Due to quicker RAM, the PS4 consistently outputs visuals at 1080p,  while the Xbox One tends to struggle, and instead runs the majority of taxing games at 900p. Although this is nothing major, it's proof of the superior graphical capabilities of the PS4. However, this advantage will be relatively short-lived. Microsoft has recently announced that they will give developers the ability to disable the Kinect, giving the Xbox One slightly more processing power to work with, essentially putting it in line with Sony's machine.

In terms of software selection, things are largely up for debate. Neither console has a decisive 'killer-app.' Many AAA-games are available on both platforms, some examples being Destiny, Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare, Assassin Creed: Unity, Evolve, and Dragon Age: Inquisition. The PS4 has a few quality exclusives such as Infamous: Second Son and The Order. The Xbox One also has a decent selection, with Sunset Overdrive and Forza Horizon standing out. Overall, the two consoles are pretty even at the moment.

Moving on to online services, both machines offer great experiences. Lag is minimal, video and party chat work well, and streaming capabilities are present. PlayStation Online and Xbox Live also have  identical price-points. However, in terms of indie game selection, the PS4 has a definite edge. There is a larger selection of excellent games, and members are given access to 2-3 free games each month.

The controllers of both consoles are excellent. The Xbox One controller is essentially an upgraded version of the Xbox 360 controller, arguably the best controller of the previous generation. Sony's Dual Shock 4 is a comprehensive re-imagining of the Dual Shock 3, and feels spectacular in the hands. If I had to chose one though, it would be the Dual Shock 4. It simply feels perfect, and the touch pad and light bar are nice touches.

As you can probably tell by now...the winner of this Bit Brawl is...the PS4!

    

Motion Controls VS Traditional Button Controls: Which is truly superior?

Since the dawn of video games, game worlds have become increasingly immersive. Thanks to leaps in CPU and GPU power, visuals are quickly approaching near life-like quality. However, the way games are controlled has remained pretty stagnant in comparison. Since the mid-80s, nearly every game console released has incorporated a d-pad, a joystick, and buttons into its controller. This all changed when the Nintendo Wii launched. For the first time, a motion controller was used as the primary form of command.

The Wii Remote allows the player to interact with and manipulate items on screen via gesture recognition and pointing. This is achieved through the use of an accelerometer and optical sensor technology. Later on in the Wii's lifetime, an attachment called the Wii Motion Plus was released. This add-on granted the Wii Remote the ability to detect motion with 1:1 accuracy- rather than simple gestures. This made games even more immersive, and finally gave developers the tools they needed to give gamers the feeling of holding an object in virtual space. The Wii was very successful, and a variety of games in particular such as Wii Sports, Wii Sports Resort, Metroid Prime: Corruption, Red Steel 2, Boom Blox, and The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword demonstrated the intriguing potential of motion controls. For the first time, gamers truly felt like they were within the game worlds.

 
Now that you have a brief history of game controls, let's decide which is the superior method. It really is a tough question, and the answer largely depends on the game you're playing along with the precision you require. For a complex fighter such as Street Fighter or Mortal Kombat, motion controls are simply too simple and imprecise. A traditional controller gives players the ability to perform advanced combos and techniques using complex button combinations. The same is also true for tactical MOBAs such as League of Legends, if you replace the controller for a mouse and keyboard that is. However, for a fun, party oriented game like Wii Sports, motion controls are clearly the better option. They give the player the feeling of playing sports without the harsh reality leaving the living room. Mario Kart is also a good example. If the stakes are low, and fun is the primary goal as opposed to competition and technical skill, motion controls are the way to go. I hate to end it this way, but it's a Bit Brawl tie!

Mario VS Mario: To 3-D or not to 3-D?

There are two main types of Super Mario games; two-dimensional and three-dimensional. They both contain that similar 'magic' only Nintendo is able to infuse into their games. But there has to be a winner. right? Which dimension is the better dimension for our lovable hero? There has been a great debate raging in the gaming community for years on this very topic, and I'm here to finally claim a winner.

Super Mario, the lovable Italian plumber is absolutely synonymous with gaming, and the original 'Super Mario Bros.' revolutionized video games forever. The simple concept of running from one side of the stage to the other while stomping gombas and hopping flagpoles captivated the world. The game turned the now-legendary 'Nintendo Entertainment System' into a must-have item in a age where arcades were slowly dying out and the game industry was fading into obscurity.

Super Mario Bros. is generally regarded as one of the greatest games of all time, and 2-D gaming wouldn't be what it is today without it. However, in 1996 an equally monumental game was released, a game which also revolutionized the gaming world. Super Mario 64 was that game. It was the first great 3-D platformer, and demonstrated the limitless possibilities of gaming in the third dimension. Never before had a game world felt so open, so free, so perfect. Nintendo's introduction of the 'joystick' pushed things even further, giving the player full control over their character. Up until then, game controllers used 'd-pads,' and although they work perfectly for 2-D games, they didn't afford the player a full 360 degrees of movement. The combination of the joystick and the revolutionary 3-D platformer, Super Mario 64, was an absolutely killer combination.

2-D and 3-D Mario games are both fantastic, but also cater to much difference audiences. The 2-D  variety are definitely the more accessible of the two, due to their simplistic nature and clear objectives. All the player has to worry about is moving their character from one side of the stage to another, with one button assigned to jumping, and the other to running. Additionally, players navigate between levels using a 'world-map,' which is ideal for short play sessions. In terms of visuals, 2-D Mario titles are bright and colorful, and don't attempt to create hyper-realistic worlds. Although this is fine, they also all tend to look quite similar, and don't really reflect an evolution in art style. As a result, they attract a more casual audience, one perfectly happy to play a game that stick with the tried and true Super Mario formula. Although they haven't changed in any major ways for years, they don't really need to.

3-D Mario titles are quite the opposite, and innovation is their main focus. They are essentially all completely new and original games, the only similarities being the characters. For example, 'Super Mario Sunshine' featured a water-pump mechanic were the player was tasked with cleaning up a polluted island in order to save the day. Another title, 'Super Mario Galaxy,' featured spherical worlds and tasked players with navigating through them while wrestling with shifting gravity levels. These games are much more complicated than their 2-D counterparts, and require a high-level of skill to complete. Additionally, the visuals are much more flashy and typically take advantage of the given hardware to create large and impressively detailed worlds. As a result, the 3-D Mario's are not as accessible to the casual gaming audience. They are much richer and engrossing gaming experiences, and generally appeal to a more gamer-centric demographic.

To conclude, both 2-D and 3-D Mario games are fantastic, and are arguably the best in their respective classes. However, in terms of pure game-play bliss, the 3-D titles are the clear winners. They are constantly bringing new ideas to the table and reinventing themselves, and this is their greatest strength. They are filled to the brim with spectacular visuals, unique game-play mechanics, engrossing worlds, and constant surprises. The Bit Brawl winner is 3-D Mario!

Nintendo VS Sony: Let's take a step back

With the past generation of gaming consoles coming to a close, it seems like the perfect time to reflect back on the successes and failures of the Nintendo Wii and the PS3. These consoles were released within weeks of each other, and both hit the ground running with great software lineups and killer features. What makes this match-up so intriguing is the history Nintendo and Sony share.

Way back in 1996 when Nintendo was developing the N64, they reached out to Sony to help them manufacture a CD drive for their new console. However, due to disputes stemming from high costs and differences in opinion, the drive never saw the light of day. Instead, Nintendo reverted to the aging cartridge format, a decision that would eventually bite them in the butt.

Sony, the crafty sons of guns that they are, used the technology they had developed for Nintendo and expanded upon it, creating their own gaming console, the PlayStation. Ironically, the PlayStation went on to become an enormous success, going on to quickly sell millions of units. In fact, the console outsold the N64 so badly that many software publishers, such as Square Enix (Square Soft at the time), jumped shipped and got on the Sony bandwagon. Nintendo essentially created their own worst enemy, and the decision not to use Sony's disk drive haunts them to this very day.

Back in 2006 when the Wii and the PS3 launched, both companies were in a similar position. Sony had absolutely dominated the gaming market with the PS2, which went on to become the most successful console of all time. The Nintendo Gamecube, on the other hand, had failed to save the company from the hole they had dug themselves with the N64. They were loosing tons of market share, and simply could not compete with the more 'mature' brand of gaming Sony offered. Although Nintendo did have hits such as Smash Bros. Melee and Mario Kart: Double Dash, the sales of these games seemed minuscule in comparison to the likes of Grand Theft Auto 3: Vice City.

Nintendo was in a tight spot, and the fate of their entire company depended on the success of their next console. They had to do something different, something no one saw coming, they had to create a brand new gaming experience. They did, and they called it the 'Wii.' Nintendo took a huge chance with the console, and decided not to create an ultra-powerful system like Sony had. Rather than relying on sheer horsepower to sell their product, they instead introduced a brand new controller, and the dubbed it the "Wii-Remote." Unlike game controllers of old, the Wii-Remote contained a motion sensor which made it possible to control games with nothing but the players natural movements. This novel concept captivated consumers all over the world, and made gaming more accessible than it ever had been. Additionally, every Wii console was shipped with a copy of 'Wii Sports,' a game that became an instant classic. The Wii absolutely blew up, so much so that the console was sold out for months after its release. It was in such high demand, in fact, that Wii's were being sold on EBay for up to $1000. As of June 2012, 96 million have been sold worldwide.

The Wii was immensely successful and gave Nintendo a second shot at life, but what about the Sony PlayStation 3? Well my friends, it didn't get off to such a great start. The PS2 was easily the most profitable gaming console of the previous generation, and all signs pointed towards the PS3 following a similar trend. The console had it all; a Blue-ray Drive, a state-of-the-art graphics processor, tons of storage space, and a bevy of great software titles. However, there was one small problem, it cost $549.99. This price was absolutely unheard-of at the time and turned off many potential consumers. Another issue was that the 'cell' processor used in the console was brand-new technology, and because of this many game developers found it difficult to work with. In fact, it took years until developers got their heads around the processor and were able to take full advantage of its power.

The PS2 was successful because it was easy to develop for and inexpensive, and the PS3 was less successful because it did the opposite. However, it wasn't all doom and gloom for Sony. Although it took a few years to find its' footing, the console eventually gained steam and started putting in the numbers originally expected. The price gradually decreased, developers leaned the ins and outs of the hardware, the online infrastructure was improved, and a motion controller was released. Additionally, titles such as Uncharted, Killzone, and Little Big Planet became instant hits and went on to sell millions of copies. The system was the very definition of late-bloomer. Although lifetime sales of the Wii are superior, the PS3 has sold a respectable 64 million units to date. Additionally, PS3 sales have gradually increased each year since release, while Wii sales have decreased. Many attribute this to the Wii's weaker processor, less-sophisticated online infrastructure, and over saturation of the 'casual market.'

The early Bit Brawl winner? The Nintendo Wii. The late Bit Brawl Winner? The PS3.

Welcome to Bit Brawl!

Welcome to Bit Brawl, the blog that pits all your favorite video games, companies, and characters  against each other in an epic battle to the death! Do you have a passion for the video game industry? Do you spend unhealthy amounts of time in your basement leveling up your World of Warcraft characters ? Do you sometimes find yourself neglecting basic necessities such as food, water, and social interaction all for the sake of knowing that you're the number one ranked League of Legends player in the world? If you said yes to at least one of these questions, you can rest easy, this is the place for you. Gaming has always been a passion of mine, and I am certain that my life-long love for all aspects of gaming will allow this blog to grow into a thriving and informative community.