After Ultimate, will the next Smash be a complete reboot?

[BridgesWithTurtles]

I'm totally fine with going back to basics and starting fresh, with the condition that there are major overhauls, either to the game mechanics or character movesets and presentation. Only the bare essential, A-list Nintendo stars. Redo all the classic fighters like Mario, DK, Samus, Pikachu, etc. with new movesets that provide a different interpretation of their characters while still pulling faithfully from their source material. Have a new stage list, basing the new stages off of games that haven't been represented before. Go in a new art direction (cel-shaded, maybe?) and compose all-new music and sound effects to give the game a fully new feel to it. If they ever intend to do a reboot, I'd want them to go out of their way to make it feel as fresh as possible in order to justify that. I'd want it to feel like a reimagining of the series overall, and not like just another sequel but this time with less content. To me, Ultimate truly seems like the perfect Smash game as it is, so I'm not even sure if they could realistically improve on it if they continue on with the series as-is, and honestly, I think that's the intention on the part of the developers anyway.

However, rather than merely rebooting and starting from scratch, after Ultimate, I'd actually be more interested in seeing them take the Smash brand into new territories with different types of games and genres. I'd love to have a Nintendo all-stars racing game, or an RPG, or something else entirely. They can do a lot more with the Nintendo crossover concept than just a fighting game, and there's so much untapped potential there that I'd like to see explored.

 

[Wiziliz]

Shower thought. Imagine if instead of Assist Trophies, there were now Assist Characters, working the same way they do in J-Stars Victory VS? (For anyone who's not aware on how they work, you can summon the selected Assist at any time, and then need to wait a minute or so until they're ready again.) I think this would be a plus, and I'd definitely be all for including them in my matches! It'd be better if you could choose three Assists per fighter, that you could cycle through.

 

[LunarWingCloud]

Honestly I hope they do reboot it. like don't get me wrong: I'm super hyped for all the content Ultimate is going to have. I'm sure it's going to be the best Smash Bros. game to date for most people. All the characters, stages, the likelihood of a story mode, all the wonderful additions mechanically and content-wise, it's looking awesome. But after this I actually want the next game to gut half the roster, get back to basics, and have very different feel to it from the previous Smash games. Brawl, Smash 4, and Ultimate while different in many ways have fairly similar physics to each other, just for an example of something I'd like Smash 6 to try and be very different from. I think while it'd be sad for a lot of people, a lot of the lesser popular characters in Smash Bros. can safely be retired for at least one game. Same goes for items and Assist Trophies and Pokémon from Poké Balls: get rid of a lot of the fluff and focus on just a small but very good selection.

 

[Alsyght]

Oh most definitely. What else could there possibly be to do? I’m actually hoping for them to do a reboot and give a whole new complete cast of characters. We could vote for our top 20/30 favorite characters and they base the game around that.

That way Bayonetta won’t ever be allowed back in :v

 

[Nonno Umby]

To be honest I don't know were the series will go after Ultimate.

The reboot idea might seem interesting, but what's the point of a game with the same gameplay but just a smaller roster and overall less content? Who would be appealed to a game like that when Ultimate is around? The competitive scene is still a minority among the people who buy Smash Bros, so it would be hard to sell them a game with less content from what they already own. And it doesn't even help that a smaller roster equals a great amount of cuts, and not just among the clones/semi clones. Seeing a Smash game without Captain Falcon, Ness or Ice Climbers (because there is no way they would be kept for a reboot since they are irrelevant now) would just feel wrong.

And changing the gameplay might also be very risky, considering that Smash gameplay is designed to be easy to understand. Changing it, like bringing it to 3D or similar, might alienate the previous fans and not convince new players to join in, making it a financial blow. It might be interesting but it might also fail badly, which isn't something that you would want to do with one of your biggest IP.


I surely don't want to be in Sakurai's shoes when the time comes for a new Smash, and personally I belive that just updating Ultimate with new content might be the only solution for keepeing on appealing to the wider demographic.

 

[SmashBro99]

Ultimate will be ultimate, I dont see us getting everyone returning again on top of adding more characters.

I'd love a reboot, cut all the clones and echos and characters that we straight up dont need ( being the biggest offenders), give us a smaller roster sure, as long as they update characters movesets.

Mario with cappy moves
Luigi with luigi's mansion stuff
GANONDORF PLEASE FIX HIM ALREADY

Among others.

I'd also like a fresh start on stages, in Ultimate we will have so many, but so few are actually new. I love that most of the stages are returning for the ultimate game but I'd like some new ones.

 

[Wiziliz]

I think a modernized Link would be cool, too. The Link in Smash Ultimate does take elements from the current Link, but still feels mostly like the Link from the past Smash games.
An Olimar with more Pikmin on the stage, and of course Rock Pikmin, whatever Pikmin are introduced in the next Pikmin and possibly (rare) Bulbmin.
Mega Man with some of his newer abilities.
Inkling with Splatoon 3 specials and weapons.
Mii to represent Mii games better.

 

[soviet prince]

if having a sequel means changing how smash is played then I am out, defiantly if it's 3d we have so many of those already

 

[Wiziliz]

Shower idea.

Next Smash game decides to represent every generation of Pokémon with playable fighters, any generation previously unrepresented is given a playable Legendary/Ultra Beast as well as a non-Legendary Pokémon.
Kanto - Pikachu
Johto - Scizor
Hoenn - Gardevoir, Deoxys
Sinnoh - Empolion
Unova - Mienshao, Victini
Kalos - Delphox
Alola - Decidueye

The Pokémon I'd be most happy to see in Smash would be Garchomp and Deoxys, though. Sceptile or Decidueye would be great too.

 

[Alsyght]

I give it 5 years minimum beforeseeing a new Smash game though. Or when Nintendo releases a new console. No Smash game has been a port, so why would they start with the next one?

 

[DeltaSceptile]

I give it 5 years minimum beforeseeing a new Smash game though. Or when Nintendo releases a new console. No Smash game has been a port, so why would they start with the next one?

The next one could just be a port of ultimate with more content, so people wouldn’t complain about the next game feeling lackluster in comparison to ultimate.

 

[Wiziliz]

I definitely don't agree with the port idea, especially given that Sakurai has discussed the next game, a little bit.
"I’m sure there are a lot of people who have questions like “What about the next entry in the series!?” No matter how I think about it, the number of fighters will probably decrease – I can’t foresee another title having absolutely everybody appear. Despite the immense reaction we received in response to the “Everyone is Here!” reveal, we may have just opened a Pandora’s box that has messed with the future of the series."
I'm expecting a reboot.

 

[Wiziliz]

Imagine if the next game's message was "Nobody is here!" because every single playable character was a unique newcomer.

 

[RouffWestie]

"Rebooting" Smash is not possible. That implies that a series is returning to it's roots.
But... there are no roots for Smash to return to because it never left its roots.
Next Smash will just be business as usual. At most we'll lose a third-party that was too difficult to work with and a handful of veterans they just didn't prioritze.

Actually Ultimate is closer to a reboot than anything I could imagine since it removed Trophies, which was one of the few consistent elements of the franchise from Melee up to Smash for WiiU.

 

[Blackwolf666]

The only way I can see something like a reboot happening is if they go the route of making the smash’s adventure mode incredibly story heavy. Like something that’d treat them like they’ve never met before and telling a story about them coming together to defeat X antagonist.

 

[RileyXY1]

I could see them trimming down the roster. Sakurai did say that "Everyone Is Here" is something that's unlikely to ever happen again, especially considering how many 3rd parties they would have to get the licenses to use. I also think that "Everyone Is Here" spoiled the fanbase and made a lot of people here unable to accept characters being cut.

 

[Crystanium]

I could see them trimming down the roster. Sakurai did say that "Everyone Is Here" is something that's unlikely to ever happen again, especially considering how many 3rd parties they would have to get the licenses to use. I also think that "Everyone Is Here" spoiled the fanbase and made a lot of people here unable to accept characters being cut.

I agree. SSB6 might not generate the same excitement as SSBU has, and it probably won't sell as many copies as SSBU has. Players only care about characters. Meanwhile, I will be happy to have a small roster again. I'd like to see Sakurai go with a protagonist-antagonist concept to cut the roster. Hell, perhaps create a Smash game like Justice League Dark and only have the villains. (Justice League Dark isn't really like that, but well-known heroes like Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman aren't part of this Justice League. Bye, Mario, Link, and Samus. Hello, Bowser, Ganondorf, and Ridley.)

 

[Kokiden]

What is there to reboot exactly?

It’s a fighting/party game, not a single player game with story and varying degrees of gameplay.

If you mean changing up every characters moveset, I don’t think that will go down well.

Looking at Tekken, Street Fighter, etc, those games didn’t change all that much in terms of movesets. Ryu still has hadoken, shoryuken, etc and imagine changing that up just to “reboot” street fighter.

No reboot necessary imo.

Unless you mean a change in art direction? Like how SF4 adopted the new (ugly) art direction and character models to replace the character sprites.

 

[RileyXY1]

What is there to reboot exactly?

It’s a fighting/party game, not a single player game with story and varying degrees of gameplay.

If you mean changing up every characters moveset, I don’t think that will go down well.

Looking at Tekken, Street Fighter, etc, those games didn’t change all that much in terms of movesets. Ryu still has hadoken, shoryuken, etc and imagine changing that up just to “reboot” street fighter.

No reboot necessary imo.

Unless you mean a change in art direction? Like how SF4 adopted the new (ugly) art direction and character models to replace the character sprites.

When people talk about a Smash reboot, they mean cutting the roster down to a smaller size and change up the movesets of the characters that already exist.

 

[Oddball]

When people talk about a Smash reboot, they mean cutting the roster down to a smaller size and change up the movesets of the characters that already exist.

That is not what a reboot is. Those people calling it a reboot are using the wrong word and shouldn't be encouraged.

 

[Super Flygon]

I know Sakurai says that it might not be possible to bring all these characters back, but I feel like that is similar to him calling each new game the last one.

 

[RileyXY1]

I know Sakurai says that it might not be possible to bring all these characters back, but I feel like that is similar to him calling each new game the last one.

Except the roster may get to the point where it would get too big to the point where balancing is downright impossible. Sooner or later, they would have to downsize the roster.

 

[CrusherMania1592]

I give it 5 years minimum beforeseeing a new Smash game though. Or when Nintendo releases a new console. No Smash game has been a port, so why would they start with the next one?

Melee and Brawl took 7 years-is between the games

 

[Kokiden]

When people talk about a Smash reboot, they mean cutting the roster down to a smaller size and change up the movesets of the characters that already exist.

Cutting the roster down I get, since licensing some characters again, like Banjo, might be difficult.

As I said when it comes to changing movesets of characters that already exist, not a good idea. Don’t think it’s necessary and might not go down well.

Other fighting games don’t do this, so I don’t think smash should either.

 

[Ckirby7]

I would prefer a remake instead of a reboot. I love smash ultimate and where it is going, so I think it would be great to keep this roster and move forward on technology aspects with gaming hardware, graphics, physics engine etc. Also introduce quality of life updates such as modes, options, and customizations.

A few moves could use minor changes, but that's a matter of my own opinion. Smash ultimate is an excellent game and it's the best one in the series by far.

 

[RileyXY1]

I don't think that the next game will surpass Ultimate. Ultimate pretty much set a high benchmark already.

 

[Khao]

The reason I want a reboot is because right now, as amazing as Ultimate was, Smash reached the point where just throwing more and more characters is not going to make the game better.

No, honestly, it's not.

We currently have 81 characters. When DLC is done we'll likely have around somewhere around 85. What's the next Smash Bros game going to offer? Will it just increase that number while changing as little as possible about the formula? Even if we get a grand total of 100 characters, that's just something we could've gotten that with extra DLC. Like cool, the roster is like 20% larger, but what's new?

I don't want Smash to become a predictable series that doesn't offer anything new with each release other than multiplying its content. I don't want every new game to just make previous games obsolete. I want each new game to feel fresh. "Everyone is Here" doesn't need to happen again. The next Smash will need something unique, and throwing more characters at this point is just not going to do it. Especially when the trend right now is that we're losing features in each new game to accomodate for the humongous task of recreating and balancing so many characters.

I saw talk in some of the previous pages that a reboot should only happen when a series is stagnated and can't possibly keep going on in its current path. That it should only happen when the current direction already went way past the peak of what it can offer and developers have already tried everything.

But... Do you want Smash to reach that state at some point? Because I'd rather avoid such a thing entirely. Reboot it now that the current format is at its peak, and we'll never have to know what it's like for the Smash series to go downhill. Of course, that the current format is at its peak is an assumption, but its hard to argue otherwise. Yes, they can continue adding to it eternally and in that sense the next game will be "better" by just offering more things. But it'll likely never offer something truly new by going down that path, no when they're always going to have to start with the previous game as a base.

I don't think it's necessary to completely rework every character or anything drastic like that, but I do want to see new **** done to the basic gameplay. While it's seen plenty of changes and adjustments, Smash has not truly evolved from a mechanical standpoint since Melee, where we got pretty much all of the modern basic mechanics. I want to see a true next step.

 

[lucasla]

I just expect a decent online experience, a better campaign mode that doesnt relies in event matches all the time and characters with updated movesets. I dont think the series need a reboot in the way that the core gameplay is heavily affected.

I can easily see a next game being better than ultimate. If not by the number of characters, by the possibility of better modes and better online.

 

[lucasla]

I don't think that the next game will surpass Ultimate. Ultimate pretty much set a high benchmark already.

I dont think so. It does that only in characters numbers. Everything around it can be better. Better campaign, better online, better and more secondary modes, theres a lot of things that can be done.

 

[RileyXY1]

The reason I want a reboot is because right now, as amazing as Ultimate was, Smash reached the point where just throwing more and more characters is not going to make the game better.

No, honestly, it's not.

We currently have 81 characters. When DLC is done we'll likely have around somewhere around 85. What's the next Smash Bros game going to offer? Will it just increase that number while changing as little as possible about the formula? Even if we get a grand total of 100 characters, that's just something we could've gotten that with extra DLC. Like cool, the roster is like 20% larger, but what's new?

I don't want Smash to become a predictable series that doesn't offer anything new with each release other than multiplying its content. I don't want every new game to just make previous games obsolete. I want each new game to feel fresh. "Everyone is Here" doesn't need to happen again. The next Smash will need something unique, and throwing more characters at this point is just not going to do it. Especially when the trend right now is that we're losing features in each new game to accomodate for the humongous task of recreating and balancing so many characters.

I saw talk in some of the previous pages that a reboot should only happen when a series is stagnated and can't possibly keep going on in its current path. That it should only happen when the current direction already went way past the peak of what it can offer and developers have already tried everything.

But... Do you want Smash to reach that state at some point? Because I'd rather avoid such a thing entirely. Reboot it now that the current format is at its peak, and we'll never have to know what it's like for the Smash series to go downhill. Of course, that the current format is at its peak is an assumption, but its hard to argue otherwise. Yes, they can continue adding to it eternally and in that sense the next game will be "better" by just offering more things. But it'll likely never offer something truly new by going down that path, no when they're always going to have to start with the previous game as a base.

I don't think it's necessary to completely rework every character or anything drastic like that, but I do want to see new **** done to the basic gameplay. While it's seen plenty of changes and adjustments, Smash has not truly evolved from a mechanical standpoint since Melee, where we got pretty much all of the modern basic mechanics. I want to see a true next step.

I happen to agree with you, and there will come a time when they will have to cut the roster down in size.

 

[meleebrawler]

Yes, it is likely the next new Smash game will have less characters. But there's not much more to be said about that because cuts rarely happen based on fan wants. Actually hoping for there to be less just feels wrong and a selfish desire any way you cut it. There is a rather low chance whatever additional modes come from it will feel worth it. How many of those did we only begrudgingly touch to unlock something or clear an achievement?

 

[KayaMarley]

Super Smash Bros. Ultimate is shaping up to be Sakurai's Ultimate vision for Smash Bros. Every character in series history, plus new ones, new gameplay tweaks additions for casual and competitive play, more than 100 stages, and 28 hours worth of music. It really does feel like this was what Smash Bros. was envisioned to be. But, what comes next? With Sakurai putting all his effort into making the Ultimate version of this legendary series, where does Smash go from here?

Specifically, we'll we be seeing the game after be a completely fresh start? That being a smaller first-party exclusive roster, heavily redone gameplay, and generally being a reboot of sorts. Sakurai has said he's willing to make more Smash games if there's demand, but during Ultimate's development, he pondered doing a BotW style reboot of the series, but felt it'd be faster to simply improve on and refine what Smash 4 started. But after Ultimate, could we see a completely fresh Direction for the series? Some changes to Ultimate do veer into reboot territory, and could potentially influence this potential reboot.

Thats an interesting idea, but i feel like doing that is risky. Anything less than what is already here would be a step backwards in many peoples eyes and as such they most likely wont want that. Sakurai is also a very tired man, and this series has been a lot of work for him, this one being the hardest. This really is the worthy of title Ultimate, and since thats the case i dont really see it being outdone. Obviously smash will continue to exist since its such a major game for nintendo, but i do think this is the last major installment in the series. Im betting that we will just get ports of this one to later systems with slightly more content, sort of like what Mario Kart 8 Deluxe was.

 

[lucasla]

Yes, it is likely the next new Smash game will have less characters. But there's not much more to be said about that because cuts rarely happen based on fan wants. Actually hoping for there to be less just feels wrong and a selfish desire any way you cut it. There is a rather low chance whatever additional modes come from it will feel worth it. How many of those did we only begrudgingly touch to unlock something or clear an achievement?

Well, that's because most of the single player modes they do for smash are like glorified minigames that we could play on a web browser. They are all too short, or rely their content and replay value in replay the same level with the dozens of different characters, instead of provide deep levels.

The points that out of the curve are Subspace Emissary, that is just a draft of what could be a decent campaign mode, and World of Light, that is just a glorified Events mode. With both of them never achieving satisfying quality and content.

We still never had a proper, well done, campaign mode like Subspace Emissary, but with good quality, and with the size of maybe WoL.

Even some modes that could easily be a lot better, they aren't for some reason. I see for example Mob Smash, that could be a full horde mode with different levels and challenges, but is always the same thing, the same fight, the only difference being the fighter you select.

Smash has these modes that are wide in the possibilities of characters youc an choose to play them, but after some matches they are already super repetitive cause they dont change, no matter which character you take, and then you never touch the mode again.

 

[meleebrawler]

Well, that's because most of the single player modes they do for smash are like glorified minigames that we could play on a web browser. They are all too short, or rely their content and replay value in replay the same level with the dozens of different characters, instead of provide deep levels.

The points that out of the curve are Subspace Emissary, that is just a draft of what could be a decent campaign mode, and World of Light, that is just a glorified Events mode. With both of them never achieving satisfying quality and content.

We still never had a proper, well done, campaign mode like Subspace Emissary, but with good quality, and with the size of maybe WoL.

Even some modes that could easily be a lot better, they aren't for some reason. I see for example Mob Smash, that could be a full horde mode with different levels and challenges, but is always the same thing, the same fight, the only difference being the fighter you select.

Smash has these modes that are wide in the possibilities of characters youc an choose to play them, but after some matches they are already super repetitive cause they dont change, no matter which character you take, and then you never touch the mode again.

Can you name one fighting game that isn't like this?

 

[lucasla]

Can you name one fighting game that isn't like this?

I can't because I dont play fighting games, only Smash. I really dont care about them. Also, Smash is not on the same spectrum of them. And if I was a person that liked fighting games and playing some of them made me want a good singleplayer modes, I would complain about them too. If other games have the same problem, it's their problem, they can pretty much be the one to change that, instead of point to other games and defend itself by saying "the others are not doing this too".

They are already different from the classic fighting game experience, and they already showed in Subspace and even a bit on Ultimate that a campaign mode is possible. They just need to do it. Also, even Sakurai said that WoL exists and has bunchs of quick event matches just because lack of time for development of a proper campaign for Ultimate, so, is not like it was a thing that exists or not exists because what other titles are doing, or what is possible or not.

 

[meleebrawler]

I can't because I dont play fighting games, only Smash. I really dont care about them. Also, Smash is not on the same spectrum of them. And if I was a person that liked fighting games and playing some of them made me want a good singleplayer modes, I would complain about them too. If other games have the same problem, it's their problem, they can pretty much be the one to change that, instead of point to other games and defend itself by saying "the others are not doing this too".

They are already different from the classic fighting game experience, and they already showed in Subspace and even a bit on Ultimate that a campaign mode is possible. They just need to do it. Also, even Sakurai said that WoL exists and has bunchs of quick event matches just because lack of time for development of a proper campaign for Ultimate, so, is not like it was a thing that exists or not exists because what other titles are doing, or what is possible or not.

They made lengthy Smash single player campaigns long before Smash was a thing.

It's called ''Kirby''. And when they made one with a large roster of characters to play with plus co-op, mostly everyone could see the level design took a hit. This even though everyone has the same base mobility such that everyone can clear any given stage.

The only non-regular mode I ended up truly enjoying for what it is was Smash Run. That mode would also be negatively impacted by a smaller roster due to limiting the enemy choices available within it. Everything else was mostly only played because they had unlockables or goodies attached, including Subspace; fun for a while but then becomes a drag, and I don't see how you can fix that without making the game play so differently it may as well be a spin-off.

You can argue Smash isn't like other fighters, but it doesn't change the fact that it was born multiplayer-centric like they are, were advertised that way and as such the majority of people buying know what to expect and what they really like from the games. You can only do so much with content designed to be played with others all by yourself, but what you can do with others is limitless and enduring.

 

[lucasla]

They made lengthy Smash single player campaigns long before Smash was a thing.

It's called ''Kirby''. And when they made one with a large roster of characters to play with plus co-op, mostly everyone could see the level design took a hit. This even though everyone has the same base mobility such that everyone can clear any given stage.

The only non-regular mode I ended up truly enjoying for what it is was Smash Run. That mode would also be negatively impacted by a smaller roster due to limiting the enemy choices available within it. Everything else was mostly only played because they had unlockables or goodies attached, including Subspace; fun for a while but then becomes a drag, and I don't see how you can fix that without making the game play so differently it may as well be a spin-off.

You can argue Smash isn't like other fighters, but it doesn't change the fact that it was born multiplayer-centric like they are, were advertised that way and as such the majority of people buying know what to expect and what they really like from the games. You can only do so much with content designed to be played with others all by yourself, but what you can do with others is limitless and enduring.

Well, you dont see it, I can easily see a full campaign of the style of Subspace, but with quality. Inclusive with content based in many modes the game already had, including Smash Run, Break the Targets, Mob Smash, Events/WoL (in the sense of having enemies with different properties and maybe a map, skill tree, and other elements), and much more, but of course, organized in levels like Subspace Emissary.

We also had in Ultimate the last level of World of Light. It works very well and is the best level of the campaign. As I played it, I was imagining if the mode had levels like that during the entire experience. Too bad that it was just the final level. It shows that it is possible, and you just dont see that because it wasnt done yet with great quality, but portions of brilliance are sparsed in the many modes Smash already had in all the games, they just need to organize it properly. If you also keep saying that multiplayer games dont need campaign because just a minority will care in comparison to most people, you may be right, but I still want campaigns in games.

Also, at this point, I dont see what else they can do to Smash to improve the experience of the core gameplay, for anyone to be against them to try new things, new big modes around what is already very polished. They have the online multiplayer and the singleplayer modes to make better. The core gameplay will never change too much from what it is, and characters and stages are not really impressive features.

 

[meleebrawler]

You consider a spiritual successor to two of some of the most disliked Smash stages ever (Icicle Mountain and Rumble Falls), a level that has to spawn jetpacks as a handicap for weak jumpers a great stage? It was a great spectacle, but not very engaging to play until the bosses.

 

[Wigglerman]

Ultimate will be ultimate, I dont see us getting everyone returning again on top of adding more characters.

I'd love a reboot, cut all the clones and echos and characters that we straight up dont need ( being the biggest offenders), give us a smaller roster sure, as long as they update characters movesets.

Mario with cappy moves
Luigi with luigi's mansion stuff
GANONDORF PLEASE FIX HIM ALREADY

Among others.

I'd also like a fresh start on stages, in Ultimate we will have so many, but so few are actually new. I love that most of the stages are returning for the ultimate game but I'd like some new ones.

If they did a reboot, the entire original roster would stay IMO. You may think we don't 'need' any character, such as Puff. The fact is we don't 'neeeeeed' anything but to remove the original stars who started the entire phenomenon? That would be bad. VERY bad. Look at how Street Fighter fans reacted SF3 all those years ago when the original core roster was GONE and even then in the future reiterations only a very small handful even came back. You don't mess with the original casts if you give even an inkling of a care. Third Strike is lucky the gameplay was astounding and the sprites and music are some of the best to ever be achieved in its respective field. It took years for the game to garner the appreciation it has. I doubt Smash would be so lucky if they made a tone deaf misstep like that.

 

[meleebrawler]

When people suggest that devs should do a reboot, I see it as them selfishly telling them to throw away everything they've worked for and accomplished so far, burn the foundations and demolish what they've managed to built out of it for no discernible reason other that they just decided for them that they can't handle future projects. Go back to zero, because reasons. Let Nintendo and their devs decide what they can do with Smash and if they can handle it when the time comes.
Reboots tend to happen when there is a lock out in continuity that makes it difficult for a writer or creator to follow through, when a work has deteriorated so badly that they need to start over, or when you want to take a very old work and reimagine it for newer generations. Smash isn't currently in need for any of that.

And rebooting just for the chance of giving Ganon a more fleshed out moveset or cutting a couple of characters for looking at you the wrong way is a very, very small mindset and not a good reason to start over with a clean slate. Add to that most veterans aren't in need for such a desperate change as some might claim; how would you retool some like DK? His moveset is referential and reflective of his strength, and he hasn't gained any notorious new abilities. Most you could do is give him is Coconut Gun which is outdated by almost 20 years. And how about Fox and Falcon whose moveset were made up? Or Yoshi who can do almost everything he does in his platform games? Or Kirby who has a mesh of his abilities? We have a topic discussing why most of this movesets are fine the way they are. I can almost guarantee that if a reboot was done, Mario would still have his Fireball and his Mario 64 punch and kicks moves because of how easy they are to translate into a fighting game.
Sorry, but even though we could a more unique Dorf that doesn't quite make up for losing 60% of the roster. Any way you look at it, having a massive cut of characters is objectively going to be a downgrade in every way.

For some it's less about the characters and more the modes. Because Break the Targets and classic All-Star were super essential apparently. Like they want Melee or Brawl 2 in terms of modes.

If anyone wants a more fleshed out SSE, maybe shift focus to a spin-off built from the ground up to be a fun platformer like Kirby instead of a fighter, instead of implicitly telling others they're not having fun the right way.