Regardless I'd still rather play PSABR than any Smash."
There's much more to consider here: issues where female characters are conservatively clothed but still sexist (e.g., Peach), games like Skullgirls unfairly accused of "sexism" by white knights because of art style, formerly strong female characters like Samus Aran or Terra Bradford warped by Japanese ideologies on what women supposedly are, etc.
It also peddles an easy answer (blaming male gamer upbringing) and shortlists, with little backing, strong female characters in games; there are far more, and not everyone on that list deserves to be there."
But fine, let's stick to MMOs for the sake of this response, not because mentioning other genres is fallacious (it's not), but to cut down the tangents:
Vanilla WoW. Stun-locking Rogues in PvP. We know this wasn't intended by devs, given the myriad of later patches to prevent Rogues from taking someone from full health to zero while kept immobile and unable to act the entire time. Blizzard didn't retroactively ban players for doing this... yet they did for other, very similar things (finding rooftops where mages could snipe without fear of reprisal). Arbitrary. Nonsensical.
The best one can do to argue in favor of players policing their own behavior is appeal to emotion, which is logical fallacy and therefore bunk. The ideal, correct solution is for devs to patch out the problem mechanics... or incorporate the happy accidents (like the bug that made Warriors generate 1 rage every 3 seconds under the old Anger Management talent) into the actual game.
"You should know better" is, within the scope of a game's electronically-regulated environment, bunk. It runs contrary to asking players to overcome challenges by creatively using what's in the game -- sometimes in ways devs don't intend."
I don't feel multiplayer is a playground where, in an electronic game, I should have to "check my behavior" like a real world playground; maybe it's because I attend fighting game gatherings, but there's comraderie to build when a bunch of players try to one-up each other in a competitive environment where anything in-game goes, dev-intended or not. There, the idea of "players should know better" is silly to me, and smacks of dev arrogance and laziness, like a player should hold back because a developer doesn't ensure the ruleset is polished.
Still, thoughtful feedback and I will ponder it further."






PSABR has neutral stages; check the second page of stages. There's a small, medium, and large neutral stage.
I'll agree that 6-players should have been possible, and that some iteration will be nice, with the caveat that this game was made in a way to allow touching up as required (Sackboy is infinitely more sane now)."