What exactly will SH double fair fix?
What even needs to be fixed?
Why do I need to care about what this non Marth player is saying about Marth that clearly doesn't even know.
This has me wondering now, especially the fact that ZeRo specifically mentioned that Falco doesn't play similarly in each game with Smash 4 being the most different. I wonder if people really are hung up on not being able to play Falco, Marth, and *insert character's name here* like in Melee, Brawl, or PM.
Some characters are pretty similar in each game, though. Take Link who pretty much uses his projectiles in each game, but how he uses them and how they affect people depends on each game, but Link still feels similar in each game. He's a slow, powerful walking armory whose moves haven't really changed much other than Smash 4 giving him his Jump Attack from Ocarina of Time and onwards. Mario's always been that jack of all trades, Captain Falcon that all in or nothing fighter, and Fox was pretty much a good character in every game except in Brawl where the game pretty much screwed him over, but didn't stop him from being a decent mid tier. Even Marth is kind of similar where he plays a strong spacing game, but Smash 4 has been trying to figure him out with the recent patch about getting there.
Then you have Falco. In Melee, he was a combo machine with good zoning, in Brawl he was a monster zoner with disgusting setups, and in Smash 4, he's kind of like an anti-zoner with a good combo game. In each game, he's different. He's much, much more different than say, Mario who keeps his "core game plan" in each game, but still functions differently because of how each game works. Or Meta Knight where Smash 4 Meta Knight is just a toned down Brawl Meta Knight. Still a strong character, still has his "core game plan", but not as ridiculous and not functioning like in Brawl because that would be impossible with how this game functions.
Here's the thing, does it really matter? What if a character's play style took a 180, but they functioned much better than before or functioned just as well, but differently? So, let's say in some crazy universe, Captain Falcon lost his power, but he hits faster and safer than Sheik and lands with less landing lag than Kirby. He retains his insane combos, but they're longer and faster. Essentially, you'd have The Flash if he was holding back his punches. Now, let's say that somehow the Capt. still retains his viability and whatever standing with his MU charting... thing. Would it matter now that the Capt. functions differently, but is still a strong character? For those who liked his old style, I can see why people would be irked, but for people who just like the Capt. or like this kind of play, it wouldn't matter, right?
Look at Roy. Plays and functions differently than in Melee. Is he a better character? Can't really say, but does he function well? Absolutely. So, what if Marth (and Lucina) end up after a couple of patches, a monster spacing fighter? Marth could be considered that already, but let's say Marth is an even better spacer than now. Marth won't combo like in Melee or wall you with Fairs, but now, if he spaces correctly, you're screwed no matter what. He's going to knock you back like a bird constantly flying into a window. He's not going to combo you a lot, but he has setups like his current jab to whatever. His new play style, however, rewards him greatly and he would function differently, but is still a strong character. So, does it matter now if he's not Melee Marth or Brawl Marth if he's just as or even more powerful, but plays differently?
Do you all get what I'm say after that wall of text? I can't seem to find the right words to shorten this...
Edit: Forgot about the whole SFV Ken thing. Er... So, Ken's the "same" in pretty much all the games, except for SFV where he's designed to be more offensive. If he's still good and functions well, would it matter if he's not the "old Ken"?