Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
It appears that you are using ad block :'(
Hey, we get it. However this website is run by and for the community... and it needs ads in order to keep running.
Please disable your adblock on Smashboards, or go premium to hide all advertisements and this notice. Alternatively, this ad may have just failed to load. Woops!
First: DLC characters are a lower priority in the hierarchy of information than on-board characters. Second: It's still easier to navigate a pure-DLC menu versus scrolling through everything. If you know you want to play a DLC character, why would you think scrolling through the entire cast is easier?
It could also be done via the L and R buttons, and it could move over multiple columns at a time. That would not require many button presses. I specifically mentioned that earlier, but you ignored it apparently.
How long does it take for you to get to the column that the character would be in, and then get to the row, and then select? Because I'm positive I can tap a single button on the 3DS touchscreen just a wee bit faster.
How doesn't it pertain to the subject at hand? You're introducing more and needless elements to a UI. I'm for simplifying and making the process more direct. It's almost like, gasp, I KNOW HOW TO DESIGN THINGS.
Because the columns maintain the same width from top to bottom?
You're saying I can't look at the width of the column separately from the height of the rows?
Each column is made up of 4 fighters' cells. Not sure how you think columns are part of a cell within that column.
School time! Negative space is 'unused' space commonly found in margins and between blocks of other elements, such as photos, text, or other items present in the design. The borders are negative space, and are incorporated into the design(note the larger bar at the bottom giving each cell gravity).
That would be a sensible thing to say, if anyone had suggested making the cells be a 16:9 width-to-height ratio. Which they didn't...
The 3DS is the weaker and smaller of the two. It makes SENSE to use that as the metric after Sakurai SPECIFICALLY said that both rosters will be IDENTICAL. If there is a bottleneck, it will be the 3DS. So why the HELL are we even looking at the Wii U for ANY kind of metric?!
If you think that Sakurai put in the number of characters he wanted and then designed the CSS, then no.
Math adds up. I'm not even talking in the display sense! Lemme break it down for you(and this is going to go off-topic but hey I've gotta defend myself somehow):
We have 33 known characters.
There are three characters remaining to be confirmed on the Gematsu leak.
There are 15 unaccounted-for veterans.
33 + 3 + 15 = 51. Oh, wait, I'm wrong.
WAIT A SECOND! There's very strong evidence to suggest that there are four cuts to be made.
51 - 4 =... Wait for it... WAIT FOR IT.... 47!
Wow. It's almost like I designed this with the idea that I HAD 48 cells to put on the screen. And whaddya know, IT ALL FITS CLEANLY.
Your whole thing basically rests on Sakurai being constrained to 47 characters by the 3DS. If he chose to put in 50 characters, or 55, he would just find a way to make it work on the 3DS.
Your entire idea hinges on the hope and prayer Sakurai didn't just make 47 characters. My mockup is here, and everything fits. Where's yours?
You're saying if he was at 49 characters, he would cut two of them? In order to maintain what is, in your view, the perfect 3DS menu? Because the menus are more important than the content, apparently?
I'm saying he arrived at 47 characters, and found that, happily, it fit cleanly into the display. What a shocker. It's almost like, as you said, he's a designer.
That 8x6 layout is readable for me but 1. fitting player tokens on cells becomes a lot harder 2. some character names are longer in different languages and 3. not everyone has as good eyesight and 4. Sakurai likes menu design and the 3DS poses a challenge - either make the boxes too small to look great, or make it scroll. I think he would prefer scrolling. Horizontal scrolling would be easy and intuitive to do using the L & R buttons, it would keep the character boxes looking nice, and it would allow the exact same layout as the Wii U.
Allowing the same layout as the Wii U is something that would appeal to Sakurai as well, since if he puts as much thought into the position of characters as the people in here are doing, it's a lot easier to not have to do it twice or come up with a unified character order that works on both.
I don't even need to type anything to make my point.
Do you like, read people's posts and just assume they're saying the most idiotic thing, or do you consider that maybe people who aren't you aren't all idiots... and therefore they may have meant something different from that? Because what I said did not mean what you interpreted it to mean.
Read what I said again:
Now, read it again, while assuming that I'm not an idiot.
It should be quite obvious by context that when I said "layout", I meant positions of the characters relative to each other.
See where I said "position of characters" and "character order" in the same sentence where I use the word "layout" again, making it clear that they are referring to the same thing?
So maybe you should use proper terms then. So, rather than layout, which is the composition of a design or area, you mean character order. I see. They're so alike! So easy to misinterpret.
And yet, Brawl didn't. You think he chose 35 SPECIFICALLY for that nice rectangle? Oh man, are these the echoes of past design repeating themselves?!
Probably because you can't come up with something different to say. I hope you won't mind me skipping over your tiresome repetition.
Maybe because your opinions are not the obvious truth you clearly think them to be. Most people with theory of mind understand how others can have differing opinions.
So you're pipedreaming. Good to know you're dismissing any and all fact for that. Confirmed terrified of 47 + Random.
For example, I would prefer a larger roster to a perfectly rectangular CSS that fits everyone on the same 3DS screen. I am perfectly willing to scroll in exchange for more content. I also happen to think that Sakurai might agree, and pick the roster based on what content he would like to include, not based on what allows the ideal CSS on the 3DS.
to the 3DS's display. It does not work. There's no structure to it. What're your rules for UI design? 3 to a row? 4? 5? Where does it end and begin? It would be, no joke, at 52 characters, a 4 x 13 roster you'd have to scroll through. Do you not realize how dumb that sounds? And that's before DLC!
You realize I can still read the struck through text, right?
Just gonna preface my thoughts with the fact that I am in absolute terror at what I'm about to read. At least you're not an engineer, because someone would die.
I went to a magnet school for science. I have two master degrees, one in linguistics and one in computer science. I have multiple published papers in academic journals.
My advice for you regarding science is that you won't be able to write a publishable journal article or convince anyone to collaborate with you if this is how you argue your case.
And another science tip: sample size is important. How many do we have here? Three previous games. You think there's something scientific about your argument?
Your entire scientific experiment doesn't matter because you're not providing any control to the experiment! The 3DS offers a fixed place that can be evenly divided and speculated upon. The Wii U's CSS will be morphic and ever changing. They both have the same roster. WHICH WOULD BE EASIER TO SPECULATE ON, HMM. Let's all think for a sec!
You're right, I'd not mind to have a tornado off to the side while I work with experiments on balloons totally unrelated to tornadoes.
That depends entirely on the question.
Do you think "fewer variables is better" is some scientific principle? Because it's not. There are many models that I'm aware of (in my field anyway) which get cutting edge performance using positively enormous feature sets.
One must, of course, accurately estimate statistical significance and performance when doing so. If you look at, say, predicting presidential elections and pick out 40 variables, and 3 of them are significant at the 5% level... well, you checked 40 things, at a 5% p-value, you'd already expect two of them to appear to be significant by chance. Without a theoretical grounding behind your choices, just throwing all the variables you can think of, you must adjust your significance calculations to take that into account.
And when you use large feature sets, you must take care to ensure that you are not simply overfitting your training set. The use of dev and test sets, and procedures like multi-fold cross-validation are useful checks against overfitting.
Is that what you meant? Because that has nothing to do with what we're talking about. We have a sample size of 3 Smash games and a demo. None of these things are applicable. Nothing we do will reach statistical significance.
This isn't statistics, we're not trying to project political races or long-term climate evaluations, we're trying to get an idea of whether the fact that 48 cells of 50x40 px large fit cleanly onto the primary display of a console is important(protip: it is). Lemme guess, not someone who applies Occam's Razor all that much, huh?
Ummm, well... I would say that rectangles can have infinitely many ratios between their widths and heights, but there are pixels in this case, so it's not quite infinite. But suffice it to say, there are more options than 16:9 and 4:3, including many options between those two values.
I imagine that they would pick the proportions so as to attractively display the roster they created, whatever size that might be.
But also I measured the box, and it was 4:3. Now, in Brawl the proportions changed, so it's possible it might, you know, be slightly different from 4:3 on the full roster screen.
Which would be 5:4 per cell on the 3DS screen, because everything fits into place.
I wasn't comparing scrolling and hitting a button. I was just pointing out, given how much importance you put on everything be displayed on one screen, that it was incongruous that you were portraying the ease of adding a second screen for DLC as a positive. In that case, why not display all the characters, including DLC, on one screen?
Because that is unfeasible, scrolling or no. With scrolling, it also becomes a pain in the ass to navigate past 50+ characters to get to the one you want. Whereas if you know you want DLC, a quick tap of the DLC CSS bottom means you can navigate another single-screen CSS. No scrolling.
Copypasta does not make you more persuasive, you know.
Requiring effort to physically see things is not the same as requiring effort to understand.
It's like saying printing the same story on two pages is harder to decipher than a printing the whole thing on one sheet. They have nothing to do with each other. They are just as easy to understand. Or do you understand books differently depending on whether they're printed in paperback or hardback (which usually comes with a different page count)?
I've seen multiple, blatant misreadings of my posts in your replies. I hope you can infer what I'm getting at.
Printing information on two pages is not analogous to reversing the letters in a sentence.
Would you like to attempt to explain why they are?
No, no, no no no no nononononononononononononoooooooooooooooooooooo
Be smarter! BE SMARTER!
This is a stupid semantic argument. The meaning applies to the text itself. If written well, it's easier to decipher than if written poorly or unusually. If I printed each letter of this sentence on a separate page, it would be much harder to decipher than if I'd printed it on a single line. This theory applies to the CSS as well.
The menu is a rather minor part of development compared to the content.
You're saying the path of least resistance is to limit their content in order to fit with the menu screen, rather than to create the content the way they want it and then adapt the menu screen to fit it.
I'm saying the path of least resistance is to organize their roster's information on a single screen. YOU are assuming there are more than 47 characters in the face of math that suggests otherwise.
You realize that the 3DS and Wii U home menus work kinda like this, right?
Tell me, what happens when you download something new on your 3DS? Are you incapable of finding it later?
YOU CAN ZOOM OUT TO DISPLAY EVERYTHING ON YOUR MENU. You may then zoom in to particular parts of interest. The spaces fit the space for the narrower lower screen.
The CSS does not display tokens for people you are playing online.
It displays them for computers, if you have the option to choose the computer players. As you will be selecting the computer player yourself, and it will be visible on the lower screen, it's hard to see how the screen scrolling would make it hard to see who picked who. Is it in case you forgot in the ten seconds since you picked the computer's character and are incapable of looking at the lower screen?
So if I picked Mario, and set my CPU opponent/ally as a Mii Fighter(assuming they're next to Random), and realize "wait, should probably practice against Bowser", I'd have to scroll ALL the way across the CSS to Mii Fighter, collect the token, and drag it back? Truly intuitive UI design, truly. And that's just 1v1. FFA would take a while..
Get your eyes worked on. Maybe a darker outline would serve to aid the token's visibility, but it's unmistakable which belongs to which. By the way, check THIS out:
Man, who IS that the tokens are smothering? So mean...
Really, though, this just says that as the roster begins to fill up the top 3DS screen, they can increase the size of the icons and let the CSS scroll left/right as the cursor does. It solves two problems:
1. You can see the characters easier that way.
2. It allows them to fill in as much space as they need to, which means DLC characters won't be an issue.
I mean, people are complaining that the scrolling CSS is a pain, but you'll have memorized where the icons are over time, anyway. Not to mention, the series are organized - the major ones, anyway - so it seems like it should be a temporary problem at best.
I know this was a few pages back, but I wanted to back this up. The leaker said it was greedy, not disappointing, 'cause he's one of those people who has that opinion of 'All DLC is bad, and if anyone does it they're greedy!'. Which is a sad way to look at it, but hey, some people are strange and have a hard time having an open mind about things.
Similarly, we don't know for sure that there's even going to be DLC. That might've just been fluff, or filler.
I know this was a few pages back, but I wanted to back this up. The leaker said it was greedy, not disappointing, 'cause he's one of those people who has that opinion of 'All DLC is bad, and if anyone does it they're greedy!'. Which is a sad way to look at it, but hey, some people are strange and have a hard time having an open mind about things.
Similarly, we don't know for sure that there's even going to be DLC. That might've just been fluff, or filler.
I seriously hope that there isn't DLC for a character I would play, unless it's less than 5 bucks(which I always could use the Deluxe Digital Promotion), the problem is that I don't have an american credit card to use on my Wii U
Anyway, roster, 50-51 characters, you know the drill
Because the CSS only fits so many characters, and Sakurai decided how many characters there would be, based on the size of the CSS in a demo, which is BTW set in stone forever.
Because once I've downloaded the character who I presumably want to play as... something something information about them is not important to me.
Second: It's still easier to navigate a pure-DLC menu versus scrolling through everything. If you know you want to play a DLC character, why would you think scrolling through the entire cast is easier?
And if someone else plays the game, who hasn't memorized which characters are DLC and which ones are not?
How long does it take for you to get to the column that the character would be in, and then get to the row, and then select? Because I'm positive I can tap a single button on the 3DS touchscreen just a wee bit faster.
I'm pretty sure you have to move your cursor to the correct square using the circle pad, actually, so it's not just a single button press. And since you can use the L/R buttons and the circle pad simultaneously, it might not be much of a difference. If it moves the screen 2 or 3 columns at a time, it might be quite minimal.
And yes, a "wee" bit faster is accurate. Believe it or not, spending an extra one or two seconds to pick a character for a 5 minute match is not a huge burden to normal people.
Protip: Having to scroll means you don't have instant information.
When I said "I never said that" I meant I never said that scrolling results in instant information. Try to follow along.
I was replying to the part where you implied I said something that I didn't say. That's how you can figure out what was meant.
How doesn't it pertain to the subject at hand? You're introducing more and needless elements to a UI. I'm for simplifying and making the process more direct. It's almost like, gasp, I KNOW HOW TO DESIGN THINGS.
They're only needless elements if you assume that you're right about 1. how many characters are on the roster and 2. how big each character's cell should be.
Which is just circular.
Repeating aphorisms is not an argument.
What the hell are you on about? Elaborate, because I really can't DECIPHER what you're saying from that blurb.
Here, I color coded my response for you so you can follow along. If you want to explain how your initial question made sense in the first place, go ahead.
School time! Negative space is 'unused' space commonly found in margins and between blocks of other elements, such as photos, text, or other items present in the design. The borders are negative space, and are incorporated into the design(note the larger bar at the bottom giving each cell gravity).
I know what negative space means. You see, what I said was I didn't see the relevance, not that I don't know what negative space is. Please read more carefully in the future.
The 3DS is the weaker and smaller of the two. It makes SENSE to use that as the metric after Sakurai SPECIFICALLY said that both rosters will be IDENTICAL. If there is a bottleneck, it will be the 3DS. So why the HELL are we even looking at the Wii U for ANY kind of metric?!
But the 3DS won't necessarily be a bottleneck at all.
It has more than enough memory to handle a large roster (cf. Pokemon X & Y has hundreds of Pokemon). You're saying that the display on the 3DS is the only restriction that matters, because Sakurai values a rectangular, non-scrolling CSS over putting in whatever content he wants. Your evidence for this is... *crickets*
WAIT A SECOND! There's very strong evidence to suggest that there are four cuts to be made.
51 - 4 =... Wait for it... WAIT FOR IT.... 47!
Wow. It's almost like I designed this with the idea that I HAD 48 cells to put on the screen. And whaddya know, IT ALL FITS CLEANLY.
Except there isn't much particular evidence that Snake is cut (other than a vague statement from Kojima... but considering he would not be allowed to confirm Snake's inclusion before Sakurai, it hardly qualifies as "strong" evidence), and the Ness/Lucas thing was only a possibility that you are assuming is a definite.
So the main evidence that Snake is cut is that you assume we'll get 47 characters.
I'm saying he arrived at 47 characters, and found that, happily, it fit cleanly into the display. What a shocker. It's almost like, as you said, he's a designer.
So he independently "arrives" at 47 and discovers it fits on the display perfectly, and that's evidence of being a "designer"? That's actually called "luck". Like I said before, do you even notice when you're putting contradictory statements next to each other?
If that's the case, then what you're saying is that the roster size preceded CSS design, and it just happens to fit on the 3DS - in which case your argument for 47 characters should have nothing to do with the 3DS CSS because of the direction of causality you propose.
So maybe you should use proper terms then. So, rather than layout, which is the composition of a design or area, you mean character order. I see. They're so alike! So easy to misinterpret.
Since you like to quote the dictionary... I see nothing in the definition of layout that suggests I used it incorrectly. It's a word with multiple meanings. You could've used very clear and obvious context (you know, reading comprehension) to disambiguate my meaning. If you want "layout" to have a specific, restricted meaning that differs from the usual range of meanings, you're going to be disappointed (except in situations where this is an accepted jargon... which would not apply to video game fan forums, for the record).
The fact that you choose to jump to conclusions and make incorrect and uncharitable assumptions is no fault of mine. The fact that you are so insulting in response to your easily corrected misreadings says a lot more about you than me,
Pro-tip: It doesn't reveal flattering things about your personality.
Yeah. Brawl didn't. What's your point? He is constrained to follow the example of Brawl forever, because of a long streak of one game doing that?
Because SCIENCE! Extrapolate from a pattern of one!
Just gonna preface my thoughts with the fact that I am in absolute terror at what I'm about to read. At least you're not an engineer, because someone would die.
This is not an experiment. You know, I never said those exact words, because I never conceived that you would think that anything we're discussing could be called "a scientific experiment." Apparently such basic concepts must be explained. I can understand that a graphic designer (I assume) wouldn't understand such things.
See the thing is, an experiment requires that I control the conditions under which the observations are being made. Like, I picked Sakurai and some other game designers and had them design some CSS's under certain conditions I decided upon. That would be an experiment. If we're being quite generous, we could describe this as an "observational study". Because, you see, we have no control over any of the variables, as we're simply observing Sakurai/the dev team's behavior.
The 3DS's constraints vs. the Wii U's are irrelevant to this. There is nothing more scientific about looking at one vs. the other because neither is scientific.
The point that I was making is that given that the team wants to use all of the 3DS's real estate, that removes most choices. If they're not making choices, they cannot reflect as much information about the roster.
Let me explain it to you with a simple example. Say you're observing Sakurai getting ice cream, and you would like to figure out what his favorite flavor is. If he goes to a shop with just chocolate and vanilla one day, and another day he goes somewhere with a dozen flavors, including chocolate and vanilla... Which choice are you going to take as stronger evidence of his preferences?
In your mind, it should be the former. Because you've eliminated the variables! Why, that shop with many flavors is just a tornado of chaos that tells us nothing! I controlled the variables by looking at the smaller ice cream shop! That's what control and experiment and variable mean! I hope nobody who looked at the larger shop is doing science! Cuz they'd be idiots!
Since they have so many options on the Wii U (and assuming that, like Melee and Brawl, they will avoid radically changing the shape of the CSS boxes), the shape of the Wii U CSS grid tells us more. They had many options and chose that shape specifically, which is a stronger indication that they chose it not because of the Wii U's limitations, but because it fits with their overall plan.
You may disagree, but you should at least be able to comprehend an argument before you argue against it. I have yet to see you demonstrate an understanding of what I'm saying.
This isn't statistics, we're not trying to project political races or long-term climate evaluations,
No ****, Sherlock. That's why I said this sort of argument wasn't applicable to our discussion. I was pointing out that your blathering about the number of choices available to the designers as somehow relevant to feature selection is simply wrong and reflects ignorance about science.
we're trying to get an idea of whether the fact that 48 cells of 50x40 px large fit cleanly onto the primary display of a console is important(protip: it is).
Tell me what you think Occam's Razor is, because I have a feeling you don't know what it is other than a vague notion that it means "the simplest explanation is correct."
Pro-tip 1: That's not what it means.
Pro-tip 2: Occam's Razor is not a law of logic.
Because that is unfeasible, scrolling or no. With scrolling, it also becomes a pain in the *** to navigate past 50+ characters to get to the one you want. Whereas if you know you want DLC, a quick tap of the DLC CSS bottom means you can navigate another single-screen CSS. No scrolling.
You made it into one when you quoted the definition of "decipher" at me. You could simply have said "You're right, but it is harder to find all the information quickly if it's on two pages."
But I knew you would not be able to resist trying to argue (ineffectively) that I was wrong about even something as simple as that.
The meaning applies to the text itself. If written well, it's easier to decipher than if written poorly or unusually. If I printed each letter of this sentence on a separate page, it would be much harder to decipher than if I'd printed it on a single line. This theory applies to the CSS as well.
"This theory apples to the CSS as well." No... no, it doesn't. I guess you forgot I have a degree in linguistics and I actually know something about how language works. The reason it's harder to get the meaning of the sentence in that case is because of how our brains process language. For one, we read words as whole units, not as single letters. We expect the words to come at an even rate and must hold the previous words in working memory in order to fully parse the sentence. This is why we often lose the thread when someone makes a long, run-on sentence with multiple embedded clauses. The words at the beginning of the sentence may need to be interpreted differently depending on what words later in the sentence mean. It can even happen that a sentence appears to mean one thing until you reach the final word, which causes you to reinterpret the entire sentence. This is called a "garden path" sentence.
For example:
"The horse ran past the barn fell."
If that's hard to parse, this is rephrased to make it clearer: "The horse, which was caused to run past the barn, fell."
This is why it's harder to understand a sentence when you don't get all the words at once. If you forget the words at the beginning of the sentence, you won't be able to make sense of the whole thing. But you don't need to know who's on the left side/first page of the roster to understand who's on the right side/second page.
Now, explain to me how looking at the CSS has the same processing requirements. I'm interested to hear you "school" me on my field of study. Tell me how looking over the CSS is like reading a sentence.
It's cute to see the graphic designer's theories of cognition though. "Visual and linguistic processing are totally analogous! If you can do one thing with language, visual processing works the same way!"
It's too bad I don't understand science /sarcasm
I'm saying the path of least resistance is to organize their roster's information on a single screen. YOU are assuming there are more than 47 characters in the face of math that suggests otherwise.
Because 47 characters fit on one screen the way I want, there must be 47 characters. If there are 47 characters, then the way I propose is the most sensible way to arrange the CSS.
But if you take out the assumption that there are 47 characters, this argument makes no sense.
Wait for it.. Wait for it...
YOU CAN ZOOM OUT TO DISPLAY EVERYTHING ON YOUR MENU. You may then zoom in to particular parts of interest. The spaces fit the space for the narrower lower screen.
1. I know that. You are not paying close enough attention, because
2. I also mentioned the Wii U menu... specifically because it does not work that way. You can't zoom out on the Wii U. You can only ever display 3 x 5 icons. Read more carefully in the future, please.
3. The point of the question was how you deal with getting something new on your 3DS. Are you saying you need to zoom out every time you need to find something on your 3DS? When you download something new, it moves to the screen with the new item and highlights it. And that's how you know where it went. For me personally, that is good enough and I do not need to use the zoom function to find things.
Perhaps you do not have as good of a memory as I do.
So if I picked Mario, and set my CPU opponent/ally as a Mii Fighter(assuming they're next to Random), and realize "wait, should probably practice against Bowser", I'd have to scroll ALL the way across the CSS to Mii Fighter, collect the token, and drag it back? Truly intuitive UI design, truly. And that's just 1v1. FFA would take a while..
1. How slow do you think the scrolling would be? You're like those As Seen On TV commercials where the actors can't cut a tomato, or sit down while holding a plate, or pour milk without spilling, etc.
2. You could click on the CPU you want to change and then press B to collect the token, or double tap it (the same way you do in previous Smashes) to deactivate and reactivate the CPU. There are multiple solutions to this problem that fit with the way Smash has worked in the past, you're not making your point more convincing by pretending there's only one way.
3. You know, it could just be a separate page, the same way you think it would be convenient, if say, you chose DLC Bowser Jr as your initial opponent, then changed your mind and wanted Dedede. You'd have to go all the way over to the DLC character menu and retrieve the token and drag it back. Ugh, it's just the worst, especially if you assume the designers are idiots when they're designing any menu other than the one you favor!
Goodness. I leave this thread for 2 days, and it has turned into tl;dr wars. I agree with Cpt. Spoiler brackets would be very nice so the rest of us don't have to scroll so much.
Goodness. I leave this thread for 2 days, and it has turned into tl;dr wars. I agree with Cpt. Spoiler brackets would be very nice so the rest of us don't have to scroll so much.
It can scroll only on the top screen, as the bottom screen isn't usable. Let alone the fact it could scroll left to right. The problem with a 9x6 grid, as I've pointed out 6 times by now, is that it doesn't allow for DLC space, which is something we're getting if Sal's leak is correct.
Or because, you know, there's more than what he gave. There's really no reason to believe he is leaking the whole set of newcomers. Not getting one means he didn't bother to leak them all or want to.
I'm slightly confused by what you want to be true, actually. I couldn't pick up the context of what you mean. Do you mean more newcomers than what was listed, or just for the leak to be true?
It seems odd that Rosalina would be the only exception though; very odd. I suppose she could have been one of the only last minute additions (albeit that is curious because she was ready for the E3 demo).
It doesn't talk about the Wii U screen or a TV because those aren't really a problem. Size isn't an issue there. It DOES discuss the 3DS screen, because it's currently all about the limitations of the thing right now.
Figure out how many characters can comfortably fit onto the 3DS screen while still being aesthetically pleasing and you essentially unlock Pandora's Box.
I'll go ahead and do it, because the posts are getting huge and unreadable. So I'm going to chop it into bits. Response, part one, if I can't trim it down to something reasonable!
"Well, I wanna play as Mii Fighters/R.O.B./G&W, but I've gotta scroll all the way across the CSS in order to get to them. Stupid Mario, why's he get to be more important?"
There's such a thing as a hierarchy of information. On-board characters are prioritized because they're available now. DLC characters may OR MAY NOT exist on your game, so affording them equal priority is ridiculous! Logic!
And if someone else plays the game, who hasn't memorized which characters are DLC and which ones are not?
Then my method is still faster and easier to use. If the entire roster is visible on one screen, guess what, you can ascertain that said character is not on the primary CSS very quickly. The DLC button may then catch your eye, you click it, and BAM. There's Ridley. Exactly how long do you think someone looks at an advertisement? You have less than a second to get your point across. Good and straightforward design accomplishes this. Bad and cluttered design obfuscates this under the guise of providing more content!
You don't NEED Mario's picture to be 80x60 for me to recognize him. No one does, because with proper placement of the character, you can tell it's Mario because his key features are immediately recognizable. THIS IS A PROCESS INHERENT IN GOOD DESIGN. Yet, your minimum resolution would blow him up uselessly. Wow, good thing the hat's 240% bigger, I'd have never guessed that was Nintendo's famous Italian plumber, Mario!
I'm pretty sure you have to move your cursor to the correct square using the circle pad, actually, so it's not just a single button press. And since you can use the L/R buttons and the circle pad simultaneously, it might not be much of a difference. If it moves the screen 2 or 3 columns at a time, it might be quite minimal.
Then there is still less work because I don't have to fiddle with page-up/page-down equivalents to find my character. I already know where they are, because I can see them. Less button presses = better menu design!
And yes, a "wee" bit faster is accurate. Believe it or not, spending an extra one or two seconds to pick a character for a 5 minute match is not a huge burden to normal people.
The hell are you on about? If your eye can scan over the entire roster in less than a second, then yes, you have instant information. You literally cannot do that in a scrolling environment. You have to work with your hands, and that dulls the process of proper identification. It'd be like if MK9's CSS decided to scroll, it'd be useless for information(WAIT A SEC, the DLC spot in that CSS did scroll, and was useless! Holy crap, I'm scared guys. Guise? Plz hlp)
When I said "I never said that" I meant I never said that scrolling results in instant information. Try to follow along.
Then what is the benefit of scrollng? Just more characters? THAT'S IT?
This isn't goddamn MUGEN, we have standards to hold here, and Sakurai is a hypocrite if he calls himself a designer and then ****s out garbage menu design! Melee's was solid because it showed you what was behind the menu choice in the BG. Brawl's was solid because it used size and space to help you find the main modes of the game and lended itself to predictive design. So let's toss ALL of that in the trash just because.. Uh.. I'll explain later guys!
I was replying to the part where you implied I said something that I didn't say. That's how you can figure out what was meant.
They're only needless elements if you assume that you're right about 1. how many characters are on the roster and 2. how big each character's cell should be.
We have all of the evidence in the world pointing at 47 + Random. You're right, it's not absolute fact, but here's the thing, you're also completely bull**** on 51 + random too. My assumption can at least be backed up by design methodology and visual logic. Yours is just a pipedream you're terrified won't come to pass!
"Your words."
Here, I color coded my response for you so you can follow along. If you want to explain how your initial question made sense in the first place, go ahead.
There aren't any columns in the design! Those are parts of the cell that make the appearance of columns. You DO know what the gestalt effect is, right?
I know what negative space means. You see, what I said was I didn't see the relevance, not that I don't know what negative space is. Please read more carefully in the future.
It's relevant because it's incoporated into the design of the individual cells to prevent a problem with distribution of cells. Don't tell me you think the black is, like, a background layer or something.
But the 3DS won't necessarily be a bottleneck at all.
You heard it here, folks! Full HD uncompressed textures and full sound options as well as full-detail models, all on the 3DS! So then why's the Wii U look a little different, then?
Oh, wait, the 3DS is a bit less capable than the Wii U? Then guess what, that's a bottleneck.
It has more than enough memory to handle a large roster (cf. Pokemon X & Y has hundreds of Pokemon). You're saying that the display on the 3DS is the only restriction that matters, because Sakurai values a rectangular, non-scrolling CSS over putting in whatever content he wants. Your evidence for this is... *crickets*
So Sakurai's Brawl roster totaling nicely to 36, and allowing that design was.. Happy coincidence?
Except there isn't much particular evidence that Snake is cut (other than a vague statement from Kojima... but considering he would not be allowed to confirm Snake's inclusion before Sakurai, it hardly qualifies as "strong" evidence), and the Ness/Lucas thing was only a possibility that you are assuming is a definite.
So the main evidence that Snake is cut is that you assume we'll get 47 characters.
Ah, I see, you're one of those that hates the crap out of Gematsu. Tell me, how hard did you rail against the 35-character roster leak when the signs were pointing at it to be true? How loudly did you bellow that Mewtwo was just a hidden character before finding out he was GONE? All of the evidence points at Gematsu being true. Math then supports a 47-character roster. Yet it's totally wrong 'cause he'd never forget K.Rool guys!
So he independently "arrives" at 47 and discovers it fits on the display perfectly, and that's evidence of being a "designer"? That's actually called "luck". Like I said before, do you even notice when you're putting contradictory statements next to each other?
Just like he arrived at 35 and happened to discover he can make a nice rectangle out of it.
If that's the case, then what you're saying is that the roster size preceded CSS design, and it just happens to fit on the 3DS - in which case your argument for 47 characters should have nothing to do with the 3DS CSS because of the direction of causality you propose.
Gematsu suggests 47 characters. The math is there. The fact that it fits on the layout so perfectly is just icing on the cake, and suggests a proper awareness of the mediums upon which he's working. Where's your evidence for 51? Hope and dreams?
Since you like to quote the dictionary... I see nothing in the definition of layout that suggests I used it incorrectly. It's a word with multiple meanings. You could've used very clear and obvious context (you know, reading comprehension) to disambiguate my meaning. If you want "layout" to have a specific, restricted meaning that differs from the usual range of meanings, you're going to be disappointed (except in situations where this is an accepted jargon... which would not apply to video game fan forums, for the record).
This coming from the guy who can't decipher the meaning of decipher. :D
The fact that you choose to jump to conclusions and make incorrect and uncharitable assumptions is no fault of mine. The fact that you are so insulting in response to your easily corrected misreadings says a lot more about you than me,
Pro-tip: It doesn't reveal flattering things about your personality.
Why not? It's call an evolution of design. Besides, it's not the first time he's worked with a rectangular CSS. See 64. He just went back to what worked well. Plus, yeah I'll say it, Melee's CSS wasn't as well-designed as it could be. But then, he arrived at a very strange number(25) to set easily without overwhelming the middle of the space with essentially a square. So he tried to make it as rectangular as possible. Wow, observable design methodology!
Because SCIENCE! Extrapolate from a pattern of one!
Do continue demonstrating your ignorance of science while arrogantly proclaiming yourself an expert. It makes you look really smart.
It's a good thing that nobody's... well, anything really... depends on your graphic design.
This is not an experiment. You know, I never said those exact words, because I never conceived that you would think that anything we're discussing could be called "a scientific experiment." Apparently such basic concepts must be explained. I can understand that a graphic designer (I assume) wouldn't understand such things.
See the thing is, an experiment requires that I control the conditions under which the observations are being made. Like, I picked Sakurai and some other game designers and had them design some CSS's under certain conditions I decided upon. That would be an experiment. If we're being quite generous, we could describe this as an "observational study". Because, you see, we have no control over any of the variables, as we're simply observing Sakurai/the dev team's behavior.
The 3DS's constraints vs. the Wii U's are irrelevant to this. There is nothing more scientific about looking at one vs. the other because neither is scientific.
The experiment is 'gee, can 48 cells fit on this screen?' The result is 'why yes, they can, and do so with no fuss.' Information such as the Gematsu leak suggest that 47 is the correct number as well. Unless you think that's just a coincidence too. Scientific method in action! I've applied a control(a single screen that fits 48 characters, and must maintain legibility), performed the experiment(made the 48 cells), and got my result. What, do you need a lab coat and test tubes in order to make it scientific or use the jargon?
The point that I was making is that given that the team wants to use all of the 3DS's real estate, that removes most choices. If they're not making choices, they cannot reflect as much information about the roster.
Let me explain it to you with a simple example. Say you're observing Sakurai getting ice cream, and you would like to figure out what his favorite flavor is. If he goes to a shop with just chocolate and vanilla one day, and another day he goes somewhere with a dozen flavors, including chocolate and vanilla... Which choice are you going to take as stronger evidence of his preferences?
In your mind, it should be the former. Because you've eliminated the variables! Why, that shop with many flavors is just a tornado of chaos that tells us nothing! I controlled the variables by looking at the smaller ice cream shop! That's what control and experiment and variable mean! I hope nobody who looked at the larger shop is doing science! Cuz they'd be idiots!
Since they have so many options on the Wii U (and assuming that, like Melee and Brawl, they will avoid radically changing the shape of the CSS boxes), the shape of the Wii U CSS grid tells us more. They had many options and chose that shape specifically, which is a stronger indication that they chose it not because of the Wii U's limitations, but because it fits with their overall plan.
Your example leaves out critical information, such as if I'd then had a reputable person saying, "Oh, hey I hear Sakurai enjoys that(smaller) ice cream shop's selection." At which point, I could reasonably assume that his favorite flavor is either chocolate or vanilla, because I have the smaller variable to limit uncertainty!
How the **** does the Wii U CSS tell you anything? Tell me, please. Explain it, because your mind is alien to me. Like, dedicate a whole post to it, because I cannot fathom this. Mods, please, spare him infractions/warnings/whatever you do, I need to read this. I have to know how a layout that YOU YOURSELF admitted can be changed and altered on the designer's whim tells you anything about the final design based on current information. I NEED to know how this thought process works.
Pro-tip: It really isn't. This entire discussion is trivial as hell.
Then why even bother adhering to landscape design anyway? We could have portrait CSSes that scroll up and down! Left and right! Chaos and anarchy! Who needs informational flow, not me sirree!
Tell me what you think Occam's Razor is, because I have a feeling you don't know what it is other than a vague notion that it means "the simplest explanation is correct."
If I see a dude with a fresh bite wound on his arm and see a dog with a bloody muzzle relatively nearby, I can probably safely assume that this particular dog bit the dude. Even if there's no blood trail leading straight to the dog. I can likely discard the notion that the dog that's three blocks out that just happened to wash his teeth off and dry himself off before anyone could notice and likely has to be able to run at 60+MPH to get out of sight after biting the dude. It was this dog, right here. If the evidence itself isn't completely conclusive, you have to make assumptions from logic, and the more complicated things get, the more difficult the assumption is to make and to prove or disprove.
Oh, so you mean that they could simply make the regular CSS be two pages that you switch between with a single button.
So you agree that this would be a convenient and easy way to navigate the menu.
HOLY HELL HE GETS IT. One 48-cell page for on-board CSS, one X-cell page for DLC(I can't speculate an amount).
You made it into one when you quoted the definition of "decipher" at me. You could simply have said "You're right, but it is harder to find all the information quickly if it's on two pages."
CHRIST I have never wanted to be able to punch someone through the Internet so much before, and I deal with Free Republic on a daily basis! How is READING(a process where you interpret information from written characters) and SEEING(a process where you interpret information from visual media) at all dissimilar from DECIPHERING(a process where you interpret information from arbitrary circumstances)?
"This theory apples to the CSS as well." No... no, it doesn't. I guess you forgot I have a degree in linguistics and I actually know something about how language works. The reason it's harder to get the meaning of the sentence in that case is because of how our brains process language. For one, we read words as whole units, not as single letters. We expect the words to come at an even rate and must hold the previous words in working memory in order to fully parse the sentence. This is why we often lose the thread when someone makes a long, run-on sentence with multiple embedded clauses. The words at the beginning of the sentence may need to be interpreted differently depending on what words later in the sentence mean. It can even happen that a sentence appears to mean one thing until you reach the final word, which causes you to reinterpret the entire sentence. This is called a "garden path" sentence.
For example:
"The horse ran past the barn fell."
If that's hard to parse, this is rephrased to make it clearer: "The horse, which was caused to run past the barn, fell."
This is why it's harder to understand a sentence when you don't get all the words at once. If you forget the words at the beginning of the sentence, you won't be able to make sense of the whole thing. But you don't need to know who's on the left side/first page of the roster to understand who's on the right side/second page.
Now, explain to me how looking at the CSS has the same processing requirements. I'm interested to hear you "school" me on my field of study. Tell me how looking over the CSS is like reading a sentence.
Person who has never before seen/played Smash: "Oh, there's Mario, Luigi, Peach, Bowser.. Oh, and then the Starfox guys show up. Guess there's only four Mario characters in, that's cool." *scrolls around seeing what other characters are available* ".. Wait, Rosalina? Isn't she a Mario character? Oh, I guess there're more than I thought. Wonder where the rest of them are." *scroll scroll scroll* "Huh. Guess that's all of them. Kinda weird they didn't set her with the rest, though."
The portraits on the CSS are the exact same thing as the words of a sentence. The term is "Visual Literacy" for a reason. The CSS tells us about itself with its presentation. So when that presentation STOPS mid-sentence(in the case of a scrolling CSS or perhaps a misplaced portrait), the 'reader' is jarred out of comfort and forced to take action beyond merely 'reading' the CSS.
It's cute to see the graphic designer's theories of cognition though. "Visual and linguistic processing are totally analogous! If you can do one thing with language, visual processing works the same way!"
It's people like you that infect visual media with the cancer that is modern design. "Sure, just toss it in, there's no need for organization or flow! Who cares where it goes! Design isn't like an art medium or anything. People totally love getting HALF AN IMAGE and having to scroll to see the rest. Why's everyone so mad at 640x480 and bullseye design?"
This is a circular argument.
Because 47 characters fit on one screen the way I want, there must be 47 characters. If there are 47 characters, then the way I propose is the most sensible way to arrange the CSS.
But if you take out the assumption that there are 47 characters, this argument makes no sense.
I have this information here(Gematsu Leak) that tells me there is a strong likelihood of 47 characters. This information has been proven correct eight times in a row. Should totally discount it though, because it's completely unreliable to begin building a sample with.
Where's your evidence that 51 + Random's gonna happen? How many times was that correct?
1. I know that. You are not paying close enough attention, because
2. I also mentioned the Wii U menu... specifically because it does not work that way. You can't zoom out on the Wii U. You can only ever display 3 x 5 icons. Read more carefully in the future, please.
3. The point of the question was how you deal with getting something new on your 3DS. Are you saying you need to zoom out every time you need to find something on your 3DS? When you download something new, it moves to the screen with the new item and highlights it. And that's how you know where it went. For me personally, that is good enough and I do not need to use the zoom function to find things.
You have terrible taste in design. You also have no idea what it takes to make a good design. What is 'good enough' for you is probably standard formatting down the page in Times New Roman without regard to the weight or feel or the font or the circumstances around which you're designing. Or maybe you just use Wingdings or some WACKY CRAZY FONTS! 100+ in THIS BUNDLE! Drive designers cuckoo with these unworkable and unreadable fonts!
You have to design for the medium upon which you are working. If there is too much information to feasibly display on a single screen, then AND ONLY THEN do you scroll. NOTHING suggests that there is that much information for Smash that it would overwhelm a single-screen display on the 3DS, and my mockup shows the more likely occurance, 47 + random, fitting perfectly. Your move.
1. How slow do you think the scrolling would be? You're like those As Seen On TV commercials where the actors can't cut a tomato, or sit down while holding a plate, or pour milk without spilling, etc.
It won't be faster than just reading, that's for sure. I want to know where the characters are when I boot up a CSS, I don't want to spend 3-5 seconds looking around and playing hide-and-seek with a scrolling menu.
2. You could click on the CPU you want to change and then press B to collect the token, or double tap it (the same way you do in previous Smashes) to deactivate and reactivate the CPU. There are multiple solutions to this problem that fit with the way Smash has worked in the past, you're not making your point more convincing by pretending there's only one way.
Deactivating and reactivating just re-selects the CPU's initial character. Plus, the nonscrolling method is STILL FASTER by virtue of covering more effective 'space' per pixel than a higher-resolution display. If I scroll 120 pixels on MY mockup(8x6, 50x40px cells), I have effectively passed over three characters. If I scroll 120 pixels on YOUR suggested bit(I'll be nice and assume 5x4 rows which would be 80x60px cells), I have only passed two characters. It will always take longer when you're forced to scroll. So why force that?
3. You know, it could just be a separate page, the same way you think it would be convenient, if say, you chose DLC Bowser Jr as your initial opponent, then changed your mind and wanted Dedede. You'd have to go all the way over to the DLC character menu and retrieve the token and drag it back. Ugh, it's just the worst, especially if you assume the designers are idiots when they're designing any menu other than the one you favor!
"Have you ever designed a game before?" If he does that to fans, imagine how he works with his team. Not saying he's a taskmaster, but he has a vision and stubbornness.
Goodness. I leave this thread for 2 days, and it has turned into tl;dr wars. I agree with Cpt. Spoiler brackets would be very nice so the rest of us don't have to scroll so much.
MY POINT IS PROVEN. Nothing against you Seth, but you pretty much just hammered home why a scrolling roster is functionally worse than a static one. Thanks!
It doesn't talk about the Wii U screen or a TV because those aren't really a problem. Size isn't an issue there. It DOES discuss the 3DS screen, because it's currently all about the limitations of the thing right now.
Figure out how many characters can comfortably fit onto the 3DS screen while still being aesthetically pleasing and you essentially unlock Pandora's Box.
Anyone else appreciating the irony that a dude arguing so vehemently against a scrolling CSS because it creates a poor flow of information is writing behemoth posts that are causing us to have to scroll way too much to get past them and are therefor creating a poor flow of information of sorts on the boards? Because I sure am.
Breaking up your posts really doesn't mean anything if they're still individually huge. Might I suggest spoiler tags? They'll be like an alternate DLC screen for those of us who aren't interested in interested in reading circular arguments using DLC characters
It could also just be missing the random icon and just have the bottom row with an icon missing on either side, but I didn't want people to throw a fit over their missing random icon
Or it could go 14x4 across with 2 missing on the bottom, maybe I'll try that next just for kicks.
Anyone else appreciating the irony that a dude arguing so vehemently against a scrolling CSS because it creates a poor flow of information is writing behemoth posts that are causing us to have to scroll way too much to get past them and are therefor creating a poor flow of information of sorts on the boards? Because I sure am.
Breaking up your posts really doesn't mean anything if they're still individually huge. Might I suggest spoiler tags? They'll be like an alternate DLC screen for those of us who aren't interested in interested in reading circular arguments using DLC characters
I've come up with this on the fly:
It could also just be missing the random icon and just have the bottom row with an icon missing on either side, but I didn't want people to throw a fit over their missing random icon
Anyone else appreciating the irony that a dude arguing so vehemently against a scrolling CSS because it creates a poor flow of information is writing behemoth posts that are causing us to have to scroll way too much to get past them and are therefor creating a poor flow of information of sorts on the boards? Because I sure am.
Breaking up your posts really doesn't mean anything if they're still individually huge. Might I suggest spoiler tags? They'll be like an alternate DLC screen for those of us who aren't interested in interested in reading circular arguments using DLC characters
I've come up with this on the fly:
It could also just be missing the random icon and just have the bottom row with an icon missing on either side, but I didn't want people to throw a fit over their missing random icon
It could also go 14x4 across with 2 missing on the bottom, maybe I'll try that next just for kicks.
Well, I kept them in an order that made sense to me - we've seen the CSS group characters by series both horizontally and vertically in the past, and we have also seen series/characters switch around between the Melee and Brawl CSS's, so I'm not subscribing to the theory that there is any absolute, rigid order that must be followed. I will try my hand at that layout with series grouped horizontally, though.
54 cells would be difficult to fit. You'd have to add a row to the CSS, which results in very unclean math(240 / 6 = 40px per cell. 240 / 7 = ~34.285px per cell)
EDIT: I'm stupid. It'd be a column off to the side. But even then, it introduces another finicky division. 8 colums divided among 400 pixels is 50px per cell, a nice round number. 9 columns among 400px is ~44.44.
Alright, here's 54 in 2 different ways using the horizontal grouping format that everyone is married to:
It should be noted, I do NOT think 54 characters is likely... I honestly didn't even think we had a chance of reaching 50 not too long ago. I just did these out of sheer boredom/because I don't sleep oh god why don't I just sleep what is wrong with me D8
54 cells would be difficult to fit. You'd have to add a row to the CSS, which results in very unclean math(240 / 6 = 40px per cell. 240 / 7 = ~34.285px per cell)
EDIT: I'm stupid. It'd be a column off to the side. But even then, it introduces another finicky division. 8 colums divided among 400 pixels is 50px per cell, a nice round number. 9 columns among 400px is ~44.44.
I... Suppose, but that starts to get kind of small, don't you think(44.44x40px)? It's almost a square, which isn't very good for text displays. Plus, the clean division is very important. It allows for a much easier time with symmetrical design.
The text displays are already very stretched in the 3DS demo, narrowing them a bit will only make it look better, except for long names like Donkey Kong and Rosalina & Luma of course, but that was also a problem with the Brawl CSS.
I... Suppose, but that starts to get kind of small, don't you think(44.44x40px)? It's almost a square, which isn't very good for text displays. Plus, the clean division is very important. It allows for a much easier time with symmetrical design.
But they're not too small with 47 + Random. They're quite readable, and can scale perfectly fine with the resolution in the case of zooming in and out. You haven't lost any visual clarity.
The text displays are already very stretched in the 3DS demo, narrowing them a bit will only make it look better, except for long names like Donkey Kong and Rosalina & Luma of course, but that was also a problem with the Brawl CSS.
I... Suppose, but that starts to get kind of small, don't you think(44.44x40px)? It's almost a square, which isn't very good for text displays. Plus, the clean division is very important. It allows for a much easier time with symmetrical design.
Except the design is still perfectly symmetrical, and just leaves 2 extra empty columns of pixels on either side of the screen - nearly the narrowest possible bits of blank space that nobody would even notice if they weren't pointed out. Which the demo build must have also had, given the proportions of the icons calculated from the screen resolution.
Except the design is still perfectly symmetrical, and just leaves 2 extra columns of pixels of space on either side of the screen - nearly the narrowest possible bits of blank space that nobody would even notice if they weren't pointed out. Which the demo build must have also had, given the proportions of the icons calculated from the screen resolution.
The 3DS demo roster didn't maximize the display of the top screen, that's blatantly obvious by the gaps in the corners. With 48 cells, the screen is maximally used, division is clean, and information is preserved.
The 3DS demo roster didn't maximize the display of the top screen, that's blatantly obvious by the gaps in the corners. With 48 cells, the screen is maximally used, division is clean, and information is preserved.
I like this thread! The reasoning behind the groupings seems sound, but the roster is obviously 47, not 51. Those extra four characters require an assumption that isn't based in logic.
I'm pretty happy with the result, it's a really good mix of characters. Hope it turns out to be real.
It can't just be a coincidence that not only to the multiple leaks that exist point toward 47 + random but that it also cleanly divides into the resolution of the platform upon which it's being made. You're really reaching, just as hard as people are reaching to try and deconfirm Gematsu.
The 3DS demo roster didn't maximize the display of the top screen, that's blatantly obvious by the gaps in the corners. With 48 cells, the screen is maximally used, division is clean, and information is preserved.
Well, that would seem to throw off that guy's calculations, then. And of course now I can't find a good pic to check. Still, 2 columns of empty pixels on either side does not render the design asymmetrical. And 54 icons as opposed to 48 only makes them slightly more narrow, I can't see it making the characters any more difficult to make out. The only way I can see it posing slightly more of a challenge is with the text, but they've always had issues with that. They can find a way around it like they have before, it's hardly going to inhibit the entire CSS.
All that said, I do think we'll probably get closer to 47-48 characters, I'm just not going to base my argument on how minorly it affects the CSS. I base it on pessimism and feelings of desolation :D
RosalinaX states there are four cuts to be made from Brawl. Gematsu states that Lucas is likely gone. We know PT is gone, taking Squirtle and Ivysaur with him. Snake is likely gone due to Sakurai's own words of having finalized the roster years ago, yet Kojima still hasn't apparently been contacted regarding Snake's participation.
Characters we know now: 33.
Characters Gematsu has which have yet to be confirmed: 3
Brawl Veterans still MIA: 13
With Snake and Lucas gone, that number drops to 11.
I brought up the RosalinaX leak earlier in this thread - it says 4 cuts and 48 characters. Granted, it said it could change, but if it were to drop down to 47 characters, that would mean 5 cuts, so you're either missing a character or missing a cut. Unless they just scrap Mewtwo again at the last moment for the lulz, I guess that's a possibility... *shakes an angry fist at no-one in particular*
Looking at the post right now, it says characters. And that would be a very loose interpretation. I'd like to think nobody would be stupid enough to count the random slot as a character. Could have been a miscommunication between the leaker and their informant, but still, it definitely says 48 characters.
RosalinaX states there are four cuts to be made from Brawl. Gematsu states that Lucas is likely gone. We know PT is gone, taking Squirtle and Ivysaur with him. Snake is likely gone due to Sakurai's own words of having finalized the roster years ago, yet Kojima still hasn't apparently been contacted regarding Snake's participation.
Characters we know now: 33.
Characters Gematsu has which have yet to be confirmed: 3
Brawl Veterans still MIA: 13
With Snake and Lucas gone, that number drops to 11.
