Official Next Smash - Speculation & Discussion Thread

[Dinoman96]

It is interesting to imagine Zelda representation in Smash if the former series had embraced spin-offs sooner than they did. A Hyrule Warriors that comes out in 2004 and Age of Calamity equivalent in 2010 potentially shifts a lot of fighter possibilities circa Brawl and Smash 4 respectively.

Considering that base game Ultimate didn't even acknowledge Hyrule Warriors at all (presumably because of the fact that Nintendo doesn't publish it in Japan), I don't think that would of changed much lol

 

[fogbadge]

It is interesting to imagine Zelda representation in Smash if the former series had embraced spin-offs sooner than they did. A Hyrule Warriors that comes out in 2004 and Age of Calamity equivalent in 2010 potentially shifts a lot of fighter possibilities circa Brawl and Smash 4 respectively.

I dunno. Spin-offs don’t seem to get much anyway outside of Mario ones

 

[Quillion]

It is interesting to imagine Zelda representation in Smash if the former series had embraced spin-offs sooner than they did. A Hyrule Warriors that comes out in 2004 and Age of Calamity equivalent in 2010 potentially shifts a lot of fighter possibilities circa Brawl and Smash 4 respectively.

Others have already responded, but I'll say that we'd get a Waluigi or Geno situation at best.

 

[Sucumbio]

Waluigi. Geno.

Reminds me of a scene from a movie!

"Hoping against hope. Such an endearing human trait. I'm touched, really."

Nah they cool let em in!

 

[SPEN18]

This is a stupid argument. Cuts are not done out of some arbitrary reason like this. The alternative to getting Sheik in 4/Ultimate was not getting Ghirahim or Midna or Skull Kid. The alternative to having Sheik was not having Sheik. Cuts in most games tend to veer in this direction, especially in Smash. They have never cut someone for a reason this arbitrary.

I think you misunderstood my comment, there. No, getting one or more of the Zelda one-offs was not necessarily what would have happened if Sheik was cut. No particular piece of cut content is a guarantee of getting any other particular piece of content. I'm sorry if it wasn't clear but asking for Sheik to be cut is independent of asking for other Zelda characters, though as I said I think we would be spending less time on it if people were more content with the as-is Zelda roster, simply due to human nature.

Cutting Sheik is freeing up time and budget space, though it's hard to pin down exactly how that might help the development of the rest of the game (though we know PCs take a ton of work so it ought to be non-negligible). They include characters on a priority-based system, so there is really nothing wrong, unrealistic, or unnecessarily arbitrary about arguing that a character should be lower priority than they have been in the past; in this case I'm arguing for priority so low that, in practice, it is basically conflated with arguing for them to be cut.
"The alternative to having Sheik would be not having Sheik": it's a priority based system, so that doesn't apply in the same manner that "we would have Ghirahim if they had cut Sheik in 4" doesn't apply. You're mistaking the cuts I'm arguing for with the kind of cuts that happen towards the end of development when they don't have enough resources to create a content item that they thought they would be able to add at the start, which happens. The "cuts" or "perilously low priorities" that I'm arguing for are on the front end; when they first plan the game I think it should be not be a priority to include Sheik. You can argue all you want about that happening being rare so far but me asking for it is not predicated on likelihood so I'll keep asking for it regardless of likelihood. And even if it's been rare so far, it could become more common in the future anyway, especially with the larger roster size to carry over.

I will also highlight that any talk of Sheik being cut is a very, very vocal minority. She is a super popular character in general in terms of Smash, both casually and competitively. Even if we were to cut almost a dozen characters or so for the next game, Sheik would not be on that list. Smashboards already especially now is not a perfect representative sample. Not many people are actively theorizing or discussing a hypothetical next game that does not even exist yet. Even then, this is one thread on one website that has plenty of wildly different opinions on the matter. Sheik as a cut has historically even on here been a controversial idea, which only had people talking about it when Zelda was shown with a new Down B in Smash 4.

Your anecdotal evidence is as good as mine. When I float the idea of cutting Sheik IRL people are usually fine with it or even in favor of it. Popularity is not the end-all-be-all, and others have observed that Sheik's popularity has declined anyway (and is liable to further decline without further appearances in mainline games). There are people who think a dozen characters could be cut, and some have Sheik on their list whether or not the number reaches a dozen. If the matter is controversial, then let's talk about it and not discourage discussion of it.

The alternative to Corrin in Ultimate was no Corrin in Ultimate. The alternative to Sheik in Smash 4 was no Sheik in Smash 4.

Regardless of whether either or both of those are true, they say nothing about what alternative items could get priority in future games instead.

Cut talk in general feels arbitrary as well

Your sense might be that it is arbitrary, but there are clear patterns regarding which characters are more popular and/or likely cuts targets.

I think that it is a waste of time to discuss the ideas of removing content for the next game that we do not even know exists yet. We have at best vague statements from Sakurai that you could argue either matters or doesn't matter broadly, but even then the next smash game is not coming for a while. I think wasting time and energy talking about cuts, a very contentious topic that really we have no way of having any proper discussion on, is boring. Its boring to hear the same people make the same points about cuts that people in general do not like. Its boring to see every 5-10 pages we get into cuts talk because it goes nowhere. It never goes in an interesting direction and just lets a few users get to talk about their very niche views on a fringe topic.

I'm not going to tell you where or where not to read/post, but it seems to an extent like you're saying this is not the thread for you. The title of the thread is "Next Smash," so if you think it is a waste of time to talk about the next Smash or think our knowledge of the future status of the series is too vague to have meaningful discussion on it, then maybe you would find the discussion more fit for you somewhere else. Cuts discussion is no more speculative than newcomer discussion. Even simply the unfamiliar situation presented by the raw roster size of Ult, IMO, warrants serious and extended discussion on what it means for the future of the series and whether or not carrying all of that over is worth it and/or likely to happen.
I am going to stress that I am not trying to discourage you from participation or anything. If you think it's boring or uninteresting or going in circles, then I can understand that but you cannot force people to stop talking about it. Make your own decision on how you participate and evaluate if it's healthy for you to do so. I am trying to say that in the calmest, nicest of ways.

If support threads were still a thing

Yeah, I would also like support threads but it's not my call of course. There are the general franchise discussion threads, though, and people can talk about prospects of Smash representation like new stages or characters for those series in those threads, fwiw.

 

[dream1ng]

I think cut talk is fine because cuts are probably going to happen. They shouldn't be off the table for discussion just because you don't want them to happen. No one need participate in a conversation they don't want to here.

People raise specious reasoning for why a character would get cut much as they raise specious reasoning for why a character would get added. It's always open for disagreement.

I believe, unless the roster significantly reboots, the cuts will come primarily from among three groups: clones, third-parties, and series with a high number of characters. The first because those characters are usually treated as supplemental by the dev team, the second because they're the most tenuous and costly additions and I just don't believe all will receive priority, and the third because I don't think the priority will be given to retain all fighters from series who have eight, nine, ten characters as it would for those that may have one third or quarter of that.

Plus, the longer the character has been on the roster, that will likely also help with their safety.

So, if a character doesn't meet any of those criteria, seems unlikely, though not impossible, that they'd be axed.

 

[Colololin]

Started support thread for Rin, Saber/Alter and Jeanne from Fate.

Rin Tohsaka support thread! Control Fate's servants

I needed to know where to post this so I got permission first. This is to support Rin from Fate. I know what you are thinking: what about Saber? Well it turns out I put a lot of thought into this. Rin is Master/summoner and the lead character, but you will control Saber and Ruler...

smashboards.com

If you are interested in seeing them in the next Smash Bros please join?

 

[dream1ng]

Started support thread for Rin, Saber/Alter and Jeanne from Fate.

Rin Tohsaka support thread! Control Fate's servants

I needed to know where to post this so I got permission first. This is to support Rin from Fate. I know what you are thinking: what about Saber? Well it turns out I put a lot of thought into this. Rin is Master/summoner and the lead character, but you will control Saber and Ruler...

smashboards.com

If you are interested in seeing them in the next Smash Bros please join?

We're making character support threads in the NintenZone now?

 

[fogbadge]

I think cut talk is fine because cuts are probably going to happen. They shouldn't be off the table for discussion just because you don't want them to happen. No one need participate in a conversation they don't want to here.

People raise specious reasoning for why a character would get cut much as they raise specious reasoning for why a character would get added. It's always open for disagreement.

I believe, unless the roster significantly reboots, the cuts will come primarily from among three groups: clones, third-parties, and series with a high number of characters. The first because those characters are usually treated as supplemental by the dev team, the second because they're the most tenuous and costly additions and I just don't believe all will receive priority, and the third because I don't think the priority will be given to retain all fighters from series who have eight, nine, ten characters as it would for those that may have one third or quarter of that.

Plus, the longer the character has been on the roster, that will likely also help with their safety.

So, if a character doesn't meet any of those criteria, seems unlikely, though not impossible, that they'd be axed.

i concur. sakurais comments at the start of ultimate suggest that cuts are inevitable. if you ask me the ones in most danger are the ones who are only back cause of "everyone is here"

 

[Geno Boost]

I am curious If you had to add 1 newcomer from each decade for smash who you would pick?

Mine would be
1970s: Space Invaders
1980s: Bomberman
1990s: Geno
2000s: Penguin (Club Penguin)
2010s: Diancie
2020s: E.M.M.I.

 

[Gengar84]

i concur. sakurais comments at the start of ultimate suggest that cuts are inevitable. if you ask me the ones in most danger are the ones who are only back cause of "everyone is here"

I sadly agree that cuts seem almost inevitable at this point based on Sakurai’s comments. I fully understand that it’s impossible to keep expanding the roster forever but it’s just not a topic that I enjoy thinking about. I’ll just have to deal with it when that time comes. Like I’ve mentioned before, I’m at least thankful that Sakurai is somewhat honest with us about the possibility of not being able to bring everyone back again early on into Ultimate’s development, unlike the Pokémon company that revealed it in the worst possible way.

I am curious If you had to add 1 newcomer from each decade for smash who you would pick?

Mine would be
1970s: Space Invaders
1980s: Bomberman
1990s: Geno
2000s: Penguin (Club Penguin)
2010s: Diancie
2020s: E.M.M.I.

1970’s: Space Invaders
1980’s: Bill Rizer (Lance Bean alt)
1990’s: Battletoads (all three as alts)
2000’s: Zegram Ghart
2010’s: Golisopod
2020’s: Alphen and Shionne (transform duo)

While my preferences tend to skew towards 90’s characters, I’d be really happy with this list overall. The only one on that list that isn’t among my very most wanted characters is Space Invaders because they were a bit before my time. I did have a handheld Space Invaders game as a kid and I enjoyed it but I was a bit too late for all the hype surrounding it.

 

[SPEN18]

if you ask me the ones in most danger are the ones who are only back cause of "everyone is here"

This brings up the important question of how many and/or which characters had their priority boosted to accommodate EiH.
I assume most people would point first to the Melee clones and other characters who have been cut before, and yeah many of those probably would not have been included if EiH wasn't deemed achievable. But there are also questions about how hard they would have tried and/or how worth the budget space it would have been to re-include certain characters like Cloud or potentially Snake without being able to tie it into EiH. And besides that, how many Smash 4 newcomers would have become one-time PCs? We haven't seen how any Smash 4 newcomers would have been handled in a more typical, ground-up game yet despite those characters having been added many years ago.

 

[Colololin]

We're making character support threads in the NintenZone now?

Hi

I asked NonSpecificGuy yesterday and he told me I can do it in the Nintendo Zone and throw it in the new Smash thread. I'm guessing its considered relatable to a new Smash.

I really thought it through and Jeanne was the other I ended up landing on. I doubt if it ever happens it will go the way I've pitched it but you never know.

 

[Gengar84]

Hi

I asked NonSpecificGuy yesterday and he told me I can do it in the Nintendo Zone and throw it in the new Smash thread. I'm guessing its considered relatable to a new Smash.

I really thought it through and Jeanne was the other I ended up landing on. I doubt if it ever happens it will go the way I've pitched it but you never know.

If that’s the case, there’s definitely a few support threads I’d love to make (even though I highly doubt they’ll actually get much support lol). I’ll wait for official confirmation from a moderator before making any myself though.

 

[fogbadge]

This brings up the important question of how many and/or which characters had their priority boosted to accommodate EiH.
I assume most people would point first to the Melee clones and other characters who have been cut before, and yeah many of those probably would not have been included if EiH wasn't deemed achievable. But there are also questions about how hard they would have tried and/or how worth the budget space it would have been to re-include certain characters like Cloud or potentially Snake without being able to tie it into EiH. And besides that, how many Smash 4 newcomers would have become one-time PCs? We haven't seen how any Smash 4 newcomers would have been handled in a more typical, ground-up game yet despite those characters having been added many years ago.

that is indeed the question. My own thinking is that when they licensed cloud for 4 they got the license for two games hence the exact same stuff. Just speculation. But it really is hard to tell

 

[Stratos]

I would like to see Edward Carnby as well as spirits from the Alone in the Dark series. Edward Carnby is one of the characters on the list of newcomers that I would like to see in future games of the Super Smash Bros. series.

 

[SPEN18]

that is indeed the question. My own thinking is that when they licensed cloud for 4 they got the license for two games hence the exact same stuff. Just speculation. But it really is hard to tell

I generally doubt that they have/would license characters for more than one game at a time, but given the short time between 4's DLC and Ult's project plan and the apparent quirks in negotiating for FF stuff, it's possible there was an exception, yeah. The potentially prohibitive cost of more music tracks and things could also simply just be taken at face value. Most people agree it was quite the effort to bring in and retain Cloud, though.

 

[Opossum]

This brings up the important question of how many and/or which characters had their priority boosted to accommodate EiH.
I assume most people would point first to the Melee clones and other characters who have been cut before, and yeah many of those probably would not have been included if EiH wasn't deemed achievable. But there are also questions about how hard they would have tried and/or how worth the budget space it would have been to re-include certain characters like Cloud or potentially Snake without being able to tie it into EiH. And besides that, how many Smash 4 newcomers would have become one-time PCs? We haven't seen how any Smash 4 newcomers would have been handled in a more typical, ground-up game yet despite those characters having been added many years ago.

When it comes to Smash 4's newcomers, it's tough to say for the same reason you mentioned. Due to the nature of Everyone Is Here, it's tougher to judge how they'd be prioritized. However, with that being said, I do think most would probably be prioritized enough to be kept.

Villager, Little Mac, Palutena, Shulk, Duck Hunt, and likely Robin I don't think I need to explain, but I will if prompted. Most seem to agree they'd be kept.

Pac-Man, Mega Man, Ryu, and Bayonetta would all also likely be kept, but their status as third party characters leaves at least some room for questioning. Either way I think they're among the most likely third parties to return, alongside Sonic. Cloud is often a hot topic when it comes to cuts, though I'm definitely more comfortable leaning toward him returning than many seem to be. Might just be me though.

Greninja and Rosalina & Luma I also think are surefire returnees, but for one reason or another many folks disagree. Greninja has, in my mind, achieved close to Lucario's status as far as popularity and notability within the Pokémon franchise, so I think Greninja's in it for the long haul. Him being a well-designed, relatively-simple character also helps, I imagine.

With regards to Rosalina & Luma...I'm genuinely confused as to why they think she'd be cut. She has an incredibly unique style, being Smash's only puppet fighter, and is a major fan favorite within her franchise. Her being a Mario character that wasn't made in the 80s is also a nice plus. Pretty much the only way I see her being cut is if the Mario roster gets cut down to just Mario, Luigi, Peach, and Bowser, and that...really seems unlikely to me.

Bowser Jr. is...admittedly more of a toss up, based on what we know. His fate is, in my opinion, heavily dependent on just how much the roster is downsized. Sakurai has gone on record stating that Jr. almost didn't make the cut in Smash 4, and was completed fairly late into development compared to the rest of the roster. Ergo, we have proof of him having been low priority, as well as objectively lower priority than Rosalina & Luma. On the other hand, however...there's no way I can imagine a reality where Bowser Jr. is the Mario character with the lowest priority. Not when Doctor Mario and Daisy are clones, and Piranha Plant was similarly low priority but on a much larger roster. He's a toss up.

Probably my most controversial opinion so far, but I do not think Wii Fit Trainer is at risk of being cut. Could I be wrong? Of course. However, I do think she has precedence on her side. For first party franchises at least, cuts tend to not eliminate an entire playable franchise wholesale. The only instance of this happening for a first party franchise was Ice Climber in Smash 4...and it's very well documented that Sakurai moved hell and earth to try, but ultimately fail, to get them to work on the 3DS. Wii Fit Trainer wouldn't have any such limitations, so I really don't think she'd be cut for that, and precedent has shown that she likely wouldn't be low priority due to being the sole representative of her series.

With the Mii Fighters, this is the one case of a Smash 4 Ice Climbers I can think of as far as "has a chance to be cut due to limitations." However, said limitation is, for now, unknowable...it's whether or not the next Nintendo system will include a Mii Maker at all. It's a fairly well known dilemma at this point that ever since the Switch's release, Nintendo has been further and further distancing themselves from the Miis, likely as a byproduct of wanting to distance themselves from the Wii branding after the Wii U was a catastrophic failure of a console. If they maintain or reverse course, then I think the Miis are for sure coming back (though for time limitations, perhaps only as a single moveset instead of three, but again, that's dependent on how many cuts there are). If they double down on ousting them to the point of not including a Mii Maker on the console though...then I'd be worried for them.

Dark Pit and Lucina are likely going to be deemed low priority due to their status as clones, which has precedence on its side. It's possible they could be kept, like Falco or Ganondorf going into Brawl, but at the same time, if any echo fighters were to be given higher priority like that, I'd imagine it would be Chrom and Dark Samus due to their ballot status. We'll have to see.

Corrin...oh, Corrin. Corrin is the one Smash 4 newcomer who's unique that I firmly lean toward getting cut over being kept. Sakurai's sadly been on record about his view that Fire Emblem may have too many characters, and of them, Corrin is easily the least popular (very easy to see when looking at Choose Your Legends, which, yes, should be considered, as IS has clearly used this for non-Heroes purposes at least twice this year alone), comes from a very polarizing set of games (making them controversial even among Fire Emblem fans), and to top it all off, seems to have the least people playing as them, going by tournament results and online multiplayer censuses (the latter of which is data that Nintendo will absolutely be looking at, especially since theirs is even more precise than the online estimates). All of this adds up to a character who may very well get deemed as low priority.


So basically, the main ones I'd be worried about are Dark Pit, Lucina, Bowser Jr., Corrin, maybe Cloud, and depending on whether or not the next console has a Mii Maker, maybe the Mii Fighters.

 

[fogbadge]

Cloud is often a hot topic when it comes to cuts, though I'm definitely more comfortable leaning toward him returning than many seem to be. Might just be me though.

i think cloud has a decent shot at returning too. people have these odd ideas of SE being stingy or having a vendetta against nintendo but by all accounts none of those things are true. so the only reasons for cloud to be cut are reasons to apply to all 3rd parties

 

[dream1ng]

It's hard to gauge worry for certain cuts until we see how extensively they take them. Perhaps it will be superficial, perhaps it will be mostly those we can somewhat anticipate. Perhaps it will begin to pare away more of the roster than expected.

Because if they more rebuild the game instead of just continuing off Ultimate like it did with 4, cutting even 20 characters would only take the number down to around 70 vets. And with a normal amount of newcomers... that would bring it back up to Ultimate's numbers. Which is unrealistic for a game that would start from a more foundational framework.

Even having double those cuts, 40 characters, would give the next game of a roster around 70 or higher, which is a big ask for something starting from the bottom, if that's the route they go. Because presumably characters will also receive changes or additions to provide a compensatory hook for the roster not being able to expand indefinitely.

And before people say, they're not going to scrimp on the newcomers for the sake of the vets. The newcomers are a huge draw, and Nintendo knows that. Expecting less than the normal amount there seems unwise.

What may happen is significant cuts to the launch roster with more of a frequent rollout of DLC to populate the roster, almost GaaS-style. But hopefully less predatory.

 

[Stratos]

I apologize for what I am writing and it saddens me to write it, but I read somewhere that Shigeru Miyamoto announced that Mario did everything and that Nintendo will close after 40 years. I don't believe it and it's not going to happen. Nintendo forever, immortal Nintendo, just like Mario forever.

 

[Perkilator]

I apologize for what I am writing and it saddens me to write it, but I read somewhere that Shigeru Miyamoto announced that Mario did everything and that Nintendo will close after 40 years. I don't believe it and it's not going to happen. Nintendo forever, immortal Nintendo, just like Mario forever.

Nintendo
Closing

 

[dream1ng]

I apologize for what I am writing and it saddens me to write it, but I read somewhere that Shigeru Miyamoto announced that Mario did everything and that Nintendo will close after 40 years. I don't believe it and it's not going to happen. Nintendo forever, immortal Nintendo, just like Mario forever.

Don't believe everything you read on the internet.

 

[TCT~Phantom]

I generally doubt that they have/would license characters for more than one game at a time, but given the short time between 4's DLC and Ult's project plan and the apparent quirks in negotiating for FF stuff, it's possible there was an exception, yeah. The potentially prohibitive cost of more music tracks and things could also simply just be taken at face value. Most people agree it was quite the effort to bring in and retain Cloud, though.

This is a 2018 take and should have died when Seph came out. The rights for FF content is byzantine and we know that Sephiroth negotiations were in place for a long time. Did Square hold back some content like Spirits? Potentially sure. But the myth that Cloud was this hurdle to keep in only really spawned in 2018 when FF7 had the lack of content it had in the base game. Negotiations take time, and we know that before the game even came out Hero and Sephiroth were in negotiation talks. Cloud absolutely was not the hurdle to get into Ultimate. If anything, getting him into 4 on shorter notice was the hurdle that had to be overcome.

Cutting Sheik is freeing up time and budget space, though it's hard to pin down exactly how that might help the development of the rest of the game (though we know PCs take a ton of work so it ought to be non-negligible). They include characters on a priority-based system, so there is really nothing wrong, unrealistic, or unnecessarily arbitrary about arguing that a character should be lower priority than they have been in the past; in this case I'm arguing for priority so low that, in practice, it is basically conflated with arguing for them to be cut.
"The alternative to having Sheik would be not having Sheik": it's a priority based system, so that doesn't apply in the same manner that "we would have Ghirahim if they had cut Sheik in 4" doesn't apply. You're mistaking the cuts I'm arguing for with the kind of cuts that happen towards the end of development when they don't have enough resources to create a content item that they thought they would be able to add at the start, which happens. The "cuts" or "perilously low priorities" that I'm arguing for are on the front end; when they first plan the game I think it should be not be a priority to include Sheik. You can argue all you want about that happening being rare so far but me asking for it is not predicated on likelihood so I'll keep asking for it regardless of likelihood. And even if it's been rare so far, it could become more common in the future anyway, especially with the larger roster size to carry over

Development time just flat out does not work like that. For starters, you are equating the work that needs to be done for a newcomer with that of a vet when that is almost never the case. With a veteran, all the conceptual design has been done. There are animations to use as an example from their previous installment. They do not have to workshop them nearly to the same extent as they do for a newcomer. If you want an example of how the process works, look at how Sakurai and his team have designed newcomers in the past. They do research on the characters to attempt to come up with a creative and fitting moveset. They get motion dolls to display how he thinks an animation will go and figures of the characters to illustrate how that works. While there are shortcuts that are taken, such as using an existing character as a base instead of building them hard from the ground up, it still is a long process to make the accurate model, animate it, balance it, and so on. The process of making a new character furthermore gets more complex as time goes on because the development team has increasingly tried to make more complex characters. Plenty of characters both in Smash 4 and Ultimate's base game and their respective DLC seasons had a gimmick. Some of these gimmicks were more visual, such as Wii Fit's Yoga poses or Corrin's transformations. Others are gameplay focused like K Rool's armor, Hero's MP, Little Mac's KO Punch, Steve's Mining, or Cloud's Limit.

Now lets compare that to a veteran, who has had all that R&D done. Lets take the the example of Sheik, who has had her core design more or less the same since Melee, albeit with some revisions in Smash 4 after she and Zelda were separated due to the 3DS's limitations. A large portion of the work has already been done to bring Sheik back for Smash. You do not need to do nearly as much work bringing a veteran back as making a new character. Cutting Sheik or any veteran early or having them be lower priority does not automatically mean we are going to get a newcomer in that spot.

Speaking in hypotheticals and fear mongering that it can be an issue in the future is not really that much of a solid argument. Could it be an issue going forward? Who can say. Ultimate had to build more of its characters from the ground up since there was not really relevant usable code or animations for any of its returning vets save Ice Climbers. While not as much work as making newcomers, making any of the non IC newcomers (who we know were in a good state on the Wii U version from Sakurai's words) was always going to be more resource intensive. You cant really pin a number on how many characters we would have gotten if EiH did not happen, but I think that it is a unique situation that does not really have too much bearing on the next Smash. It is always going to be easier to make Wolf again for instance now than it was to make him for Ultimate since we have Wolf in Ultimate. Will there be lower priority vets? Sure. But given the way Smash has conducted its roster so far, I would put more stock in us getting 4 low priority vets than 1 big newcomer.

Your sense might be that it is arbitrary, but there are clear patterns regarding which characters are more popular and/or likely cuts targets.

And yet you ignore patterns almost exclusively when you discuss cuts. Cuts in Smash have been the exception, not the norm. Brawl's cuts to Smash 4 can easily be explained by either the vets being lower priority, techinical issues due to the 3DS version, or Konami in the early 2010s being an absolute dumpster fire that almost pulled out of the gaming industry as a whole. Melee to Brawls cuts were done for time constraints at least for Mewtwo, Roy, and Doctor Mario. Yet we have people that still argue that characters should be cut to free up development time. The pattern for cuts is that there are very few cuts and the devs do put a strong emphasis on keeping vets in.

I'm not going to tell you where or where not to read/post, but it seems to an extent like you're saying this is not the thread for you. The title of the thread is "Next Smash," so if you think it is a waste of time to talk about the next Smash or think our knowledge of the future status of the series is too vague to have meaningful discussion on it, then maybe you would find the discussion more fit for you somewhere else. Cuts discussion is no more speculative than newcomer discussion. Even simply the unfamiliar situation presented by the raw roster size of Ult, IMO, warrants serious and extended discussion on what it means for the future of the series and whether or not carrying all of that over is worth it and/or likely to happen.
I am going to stress that I am not trying to discourage you from participation or anything. If you think it's boring or uninteresting or going in circles, then I can understand that but you cannot force people to stop talking about it. Make your own decision on how you participate and evaluate if it's healthy for you to do so. I am trying to say that in the calmest, nicest of ways.

It is a waste of time to just talk about the same thing every five to ten pages tops. Most people can agree with me here that it is boring to hear the same three people whine over cuts when we have next to no idea on what the next smash looks like. We do not even have a new system on the horizon to look at Smash on. Even then, the sheer rate of cuts discussion is just pointless. There are so many more interesting things the thread can talk about instead of a very vocal minority whining about Sheik, Pichu, or Corrin. Its always the same few people whining over cuts. Its a boring circular discussion that happens over and over again due to the hyper fixation of a few individuals. Smash is gaming's greatest crossover. There is a vast ocean of possibilities that can be discussed instead of talking about cuts every five to ten pages at most. Clearly you are part of the very vocal very small minority that asks for cuts, this thread can be so much more than the same three users talking about cuts. I know that you are very adamant about the topic of cuts, in no small part due to how frequently you participate or outright instigate in its discussion. But I am pretty sure even you can agree that there is so much more that can be touched upon in Smash's discussion than just cut talk.

But it is that last paragraph that I have a big issue with. Your response to someone saying that this thread has a few users talk too much about cuts to be to suggest someone not participate in discussion. This level of gatekeeping is just disgusting. At no point in my call out of cut talk did I discuss outright suggesting people should not participate in discussion. At worst, I said that a short term moratorium on cut talk would be a good thing for the thread. But here you are saying I should not participate in this thread because not only do you value said circular discussion, but also turn it on me. You have even agkowledged in the past that your views on the topic are divisive at best, but now it is my fault for saying that this thread could be better off if we dont discuss cuts every other few pages. I find this level of gatekeeping honestly very toxic, even if it is coming from a place of good intentions.

I am curious If you had to add 1 newcomer from each decade for smash who you would pick?

Mine would be
1970s: Space Invaders
1980s: Bomberman
1990s: Geno
2000s: Penguin (Club Penguin)
2010s: Diancie
2020s: E.M.M.I.

I always love posts like this since they are a nice breath of fresh air.

Pre 1970s: A Hanafuda Character
1970s: Pong/Color TV Game 15, which ever you want to go with
1980s: Adol Christian
1990s: Crash Bandicoot
2000s: Neku Sakuraba
2010s: Officer Howard
2020s: Gonna go with Noah and Mio since XC3 looks awesome and I loved XC 1 and 2

Started support thread for Rin, Saber/Alter and Jeanne from Fate.

Rin Tohsaka support thread! Control Fate's servants

I needed to know where to post this so I got permission first. This is to support Rin from Fate. I know what you are thinking: what about Saber? Well it turns out I put a lot of thought into this. Rin is Master/summoner and the lead character, but you will control Saber and Ruler...

smashboards.com

If you are interested in seeing them in the next Smash Bros please join?

Not huge on Fate but honestly happy that a support thread exists again. Here's hoping that this is a turning point and we can get more!

Speaking of Fate, Saber always seemed to me like something that could be relevant in the future of Smash, pending the series fate (no pun intended) after the success of FGO. While I personally can say that I am very uninvested in if Saber does join smash, I would not personally be too opposed since Fate at least has a solid history behind it.

 

[PeridotGX]

I apologize for what I am writing and it saddens me to write it, but I read somewhere that Shigeru Miyamoto announced that Mario did everything and that Nintendo will close after 40 years. I don't believe it and it's not going to happen. Nintendo forever, immortal Nintendo, just like Mario forever.

Unfortunately it's true . It was posted by the Hard Drive, the truest source of news.

they've already burnt down hq

 

[Opossum]

But it is that last paragraph that I have a big issue with. Your response to someone saying that this thread has a few users talk too much about cuts to be to suggest someone not participate in discussion. This level of gatekeeping is just disgusting. At no point in my call out of cut talk did I discuss outright suggesting people should not participate in discussion. At worst, I said that a short term moratorium on cut talk would be a good thing for the thread. But here you are saying I should not participate in this thread because not only do you value said circular discussion, but also turn it on me. You have even agkowledged in the past that your views on the topic are divisive at best, but now it is my fault for saying that this thread could be better off if we dont discuss cuts every other few pages. I find this level of gatekeeping honestly very toxic, even if it is coming from a place of good intentions.

Dude what?

That's not at all what this is, and this is, frankly, a very gross mischaracterization. Saying someone can choose not to participate in conversations about cuts is absolutely NOT gatekeeping. It's a reminder to folks that they don't need to participate in every conversation in the thread, especially if they get personally upset by said topic.

But on the other hand, acting like cut discussion is any more circular than any other conversation in the thread, and therefore deserving of a moratorium, can absolutely be construed as gatekeeping. Saying "a few users talk about cuts too much" is, itself, gatekeeping, as it implies they go beyond some vague and non-existent socially acceptable limit.

The next game will have cuts. Sakurai outright said that bringing everyone back again would be basically impossible, and that was before Ultimate's DLC. Therefore, cuts happening is basically the only thing we know for sure about the next game, and as a result, of course it would be brought up in a "future Smash games" discussion thread.

Yours was the only post here that could be viewed as out of line.

 

[fogbadge]

Nintendo will close after 40 years. .

nintendo's 133 years old

 

[Sucumbio]

nintendo's 133 years old

Lol! I found the article those guys are hilarious. But yeah that title alone should tip ppl off.

They did one about Mario being dead or something (or was it Luigi) I don't remember.


1970s: Asteroids

1980s: Rygar

1990s: Leon Kennedy

2000s: Alex Roivas

2010s: Geralt of Rivia (I know I know)

2020s: E.M.M.I.

 

[HyperSomari64]

I gotta go with not-so-common, very weird non-video game characters:

• Pre-1970's: Felix the Cat (1919)
• 1970's: Hongo Takeshi/Kamen Rider 1 (1971)
• 1980's: Kevin Keene/Captain N (1989)
• 1990's: Kinomoto Sakura (1996)
• 2000's: Dennis from the SpongeBob movie (2004)
• 2010's: Betrayus (2013)
• 2020's: Amity from the Owl House (2020)

 

[fogbadge]

1990's: Kinomoto Sakura (1996)
2020's: Amity from the Owl House (2020)

yes

 

[Laniv]

Say, remember those old surveys where Nintendo asked if we wanted animated projects based on their IPs? Well, they may be taking steps to make it happen:

Perhaps more relevantly, they've worked on the Pikmin Short videos and Metroid Other M.

Full list of work: https://t.co/098WLJql3D

— Stealth (@Stealth40k) July 14, 2022

Either that, or improve the quality of their cutscenes. Not quite sure yet...

Interesting that we're seeing this now, and yet with less than a year to go until the Mario movie, we haven't seen so much as a teaser for that.

 

[Sucumbio]

While I love the Super Mario Bros movie from 93 it's not for everyone or even every 1 in 4 apparently lol but I love a good video game movie myself even when they flop (never seen alone in the dark but I've heard it's terrible)... so a new one is certainly exciting... Odd choice for Mario but ok lol I think I'm just tired of Star-Lord. But Jack Black as Bowser ha that'll be nuts. And Seth Rogan as DK lol!

 

[Colololin]

If that’s the case, there’s definitely a few support threads I’d love to make (even though I highly doubt they’ll actually get much support lol). I’ll wait for official confirmation from a moderator before making any myself though.

You never know. It is always worth a shot in case others like your suggestions. Who do you have in mind?

Not huge on Fate but honestly happy that a support thread exists again. Here's hoping that this is a turning point and we can get more!

Speaking of Fate, Saber always seemed to me like something that could be relevant in the future of Smash, pending the series fate (no pun intended) after the success of FGO. While I personally can say that I am very uninvested in if Saber does join smash, I would not personally be too opposed since Fate at least has a solid history behind it.

The lore in Fate is what initially raised my curiosity about it. Saber is playable in the new Melty Blood if you are interested in fighting games.

 

[Chuderz]

I fundamentally agree with TCT~Phantom about the supposed merits of cuts, which I often feel are very exaggerated. So much work is being thrown away for practically no gain, like so little if any at all, that it's really functionally a pointless measure. You really have only lost something with it and gotten basically nothing in return.

I think it also stands to reason that Nintendo is gonna take notice what made this franchise double in sales growth just as much as they've taken notice of its unique DLC attachment rate that they've officially noted at those shareholder meetings before.

What people love about Smash is its grandiose nature. Gaming's biggest crossover, the first-ever platform fighter, and that roster size. I feel like Ultimate really established this as a core feature of Smash's brand identity like no entry before it and to turn around now would be an absolute blunder like no other.

I may have a low opinion of Nintendo as an organization but even I think they have no reason to turn away from what's working with this franchise. Like sure licensing may be expensive for this game compared to Nintendo's usual rate zero dollars for most of their games but is it really that much of an ask for an obvious system seller like Smash? That's before we even get to the fact that they've negotiated these rates before and now have these contracts to work as a base from when negotiations restart. Even if Sakurai and team aren't working on Smash-6/Ultimate-DX right now the legal team can still get a headstart on negotiating the 3rd party veterans. It's already been laid out why most companies will stay at this point (to be short, Bamco works on the game, Capcom and SEGA are fairly relaxed about licensing their IP, Konami's literal aim these days is to license our their IP, Square has literally done it 4 times now more than any other 3rd party company and Microsoft has financial interest in maintaining a working relationship with Nintendo) and even Sakurai's made note of how much easier it's become over time to convince companies to loan out their intellectual property to the game.

I personally really like Everyone is Here as a concept because it makes entry into Smash soooooooooo special. It's a huge acknowledgment of the 3rd party characters and the guarantee makes for nice assurances of both the characters' place in gaming history and the potentially ever-expanding grandiosity of Smash as a franchise.

If anything I'd really just like for at least Smash 6 to build off of Ultimate. I'd really like to see what Sakurai and team could do with Ultimate + DLC as a day 0 base with years of developmental time for more powerful hardware and a AAA budget that'd more than satisfy Massive Hero Soccer Guy himself. It's legitimately my dream game and if Nintendo won't do then the modders will but that'd still be a damn shameful waste of potential that it'd be heartbreaking.

 

[DarthEnderX]

I am curious If you had to add 1 newcomer from each decade for smash who you would pick?

1970s: pass
1980s: Ryu Hayabusa [Ninja Gaiden]
1990s: SV-001 Metal Slug [Metal Slug]
2000s: Kazuma Kiryu [Yakuza]
2010s: Shovel Knight [Shovel Knight]
2020s: Impa [Age of Calamity]

 

[Swamp Sensei]

Here's a question that isn't cut related.

What franchises already in Smash do you feel really missed the opportunity for a new stage in Ultimate?

I mean, for returning franchises we only got New Donk City and Great Plateau Tower. DLC added Garreg Mach Monastery, Cloud Sea of Alrest and Northern Cave.

We never got a Sun and Moon Stage or a Tropical Freeze stage. I would have loved a Samus Returns stage or a Star Allies stage. Heck R.O.B. still doesn't have a stage.

We could have gotten a cool Sonic stage. I imagine it would probably have been Sunset Heights but **** I'd have taken it.

 

[dream1ng]

While I love the Super Mario Bros movie from 93 it's not for everyone or even every 1 in 4 apparently lol but I love a good video game movie myself even when they flop (never seen alone in the dark but I've heard it's terrible)... so a new one is certainly exciting... Odd choice for Mario but ok lol I think I'm just tired of Star-Lord. But Jack Black as Bowser ha that'll be nuts. And Seth Rogan as DK lol!

I'm not sure there is any casting announcement for Mario people would've been happy with, other than Charles Martinet or, the internet's first choice for every role, Danny DeVito.

2010s: Geralt of Rivia (I know I know)

You know the first Witcher game is from 2007, right?

2010s: pass
2020s: Impa [Age of Calamity]

 

[Diddy Kong]

I am curious If you had to add 1 newcomer from each decade for smash who you would pick?

Mine would be
1970s: Space Invaders
1980s: Bomberman
1990s: Geno
2000s: Penguin (Club Penguin)
2010s: Diancie
2020s: E.M.M.I.

1970: ???
1980: Impa
1990: Dixie
2000: Isaac
2010: Dimitri (Fire Emblem)
2020: Raven Beak

 

[Arcanir]

Here's a question that isn't cut related.

What franchises already in Smash do you feel really missed the opportunity for a new stage in Ultimate?

I mean, for returning franchises we only got New Donk City and Great Plateau Tower. DLC added Garreg Mach Monastery, Cloud Sea of Alrest and Northern Cave.

We never got a Sun and Moon Stage or a Tropical Freeze stage. I would have loved a Samus Returns stage or a Star Allies stage. Heck R.O.B. still doesn't have a stage.

We could have gotten a cool Sonic stage. I imagine it would probably have been Sunset Heights but **** I'd have taken it.

Along with those, Ancestral Steppe from Monster Hunter immediately comes to mind for me as they had the assets used for Rathalos' boss stage, so I imagine if they had more time they could've upgraded it to a full stage even if they didn't include a character. Also, Xenoblade Chronicles X I feel could've gotten a stage as well as say what you will about the game, but it has many amazing locales that would've been perfect for a new arena to fight in like Sylvalum or Noctilum.

 

[DarthEnderX]

Seriously though, I don't know what is wrong with you people picking EMMI over Raven Beak.