Character Discussion Thread

[Scoliosis Jones]

Probably the straw man fallacy. That MIGHT have been a part of it. Albeit, I am not entirely certain myself.

If you had read, you would find that I never insinuated that sales matter more than game-play (NEVER), I was merely asserting that sales are material to some extent (as there is a direct correlation between relative sales and prominence/requests). I even offered that it might not be something he is consciously aware of. I am not sure how many times I made those disclaimers.

My main point is that there are several aspects of inclusion. Game-play is probably the most important, but it is erroneous to blatantly disregard "sales" even if the notion is negligible.

What i've been saying this entire time, is that when I see people on here saying "this character should get in because their game sold well!", I take that as one of the worst reasons ever to include somebody in the game. That's literally where all of this came from.

I cannot understand how sales alone should push a character past one with more potential. It's not a valid reason as to why a character should be in over another. I see it all the time, and it's just not exactly relevant. If you want a character, talk about what they can do and how they'd be implemented. Not about how their game made money. Nobody cares about that. We play as these characters in the game. Not the money they made.

I'd like to preface this with Chrom. "Awakening sold well! It should be represented with Chrom as an Awakening Rep!". Here's what's wrong with this statement. This character is being supported because of some idea that sales are going to propel him into the game. He, as Sakurai said, might have ended up just being a boring swordsman. However, Robin was picked instead, and look at how awesome he looks. Sure, Chrom is the lord of the best selling game in the series. But I don't want to play as money. I want to play as a character who is different.

 

[Johnknight1]

Remember when people talked gameplay and how cool playing smash games is on the Smash 4 boards=???

Me neither.

This is what happens when the Smash 4 boards by and large follow people who spend more time talking about non-gameplay stuff than actually thinking about the gameplay and the gameplay side of characters.

Y'all need to follow me to the valley of peace and gameplay and out of the shadows of death and sales.

Trust me, once the game comes out, we'll see who's left years from now. Those left are the real smash fans, regardless of which games they like/play/prefer.

Regardless, all that matters with characters to me is how excited I am to play as or against them 10 years plus later.

So far, only 64 and Melee are over 10 years old, so going off that...

...I cannot tell you how EXCITED I get about playing as Mario, Ness, Fox, and Captain Falcon in both games, Marth in Melee, Dr. Mario in Melee, Kirby in 64, and facing against characters like Jigglypuff, Pikachu, Yoshi, and DK in both games, as well as characters like Sheik, Ganondorf, Link, The Ice Climbers, and Mr. Game & Watch in Melee.

I want that with characters. I want characters that are different and each bring something new.

None of that has to do with sales, reps, or any of that.

It's all about the gameplay and character design. That's the only argument that really holds any weight for anything.

Programmers and game designers when programming and designing games don't care about sales of outside series. No, they care about making the best game possible and making a character work.

 

[Moon Monkey]

....

These arguments.

No wonder I stopped coming here after 2013.

Source: http://kotaku.com/pac-man-almost-got-into-super-smash-bros-brawl-1599610742

As Sakurai explains, coming up with an idea and actually making it a reality are very different beasts. While it's easy to imagine a character in a Smash Bros. game, on the dev side, there's a lot more to consider. "How to give the character their own individuality as a fighter and how they'll move. Should the game system maintain a consistent form or not. What other fighters are there and how will the new character differ in strategy? Does the new idea fit with the original game? Most importantly, is it entertaining?"

Factors

1. Character individuality.
   1. What strategic options can they have to set them apart from the cast.
2. Does their playstyle reference and/or call back to their respective games.
3. Are they fun to play.

There is no sales at all in his criteria. Guys at least take what the dude is saying into consideration. He's making THE GAME.

 

[Morbi]

Remember when people talked gameplay and how cool playing smash games is on the Smash 4 boards=???

Me neither.

This is what happens when the Smash 4 boards by and large follow people who spend more time talking about non-gameplay stuff than actually thinking about the gameplay and the gameplay side of characters.

Y'all need to follow me to the valley of peace and gameplay and out of the shadows of death and sales.

Trust me, once the game comes out, we'll see who's left years from now. Those left are the real smash fans, regardless of which games they like/play/prefer.

Regardless, all that matters with characters to me is how excited I am to play as or against them 10 years plus later.

So far, only 64 and Melee are over 10 years old, so going off that...

...I cannot tell you how EXCITED I get about playing as Mario, Ness, Fox, and Captain Falcon in both games, Marth in Melee, Dr. Mario in Melee, Kirby in 64, and facing against characters like Jigglypuff, Pikachu, Yoshi, and DK in both games, as well as characters like Sheik, Ganondorf, Link, The Ice Climbers, and Mr. Game & Watch in Melee.

I want that with characters. I want characters that are different and each bring something new.

None of that has to do with sales, reps, or any of that.

It's all about the gameplay and character design. That's the only argument that really holds any weight for anything.

Programmers and game designers when programming and designing games don't care about sales of outside series. No, they care about making the best game possible and making a character work.

I suppose I am a "real" Smash fan as I intend to stick around and I probably play the game just as much, if not more, than you... wait a minute. Never-mind, I speculate with logic and maintain an objective perspective! I suppose that means that I am a demon that desecrates everything that Smash stands for!

 

[Maxilian]

Remember when people talked gameplay and how cool playing smash games is on the Smash 4 boards=???

Me neither.

This is what happens when the Smash 4 boards by and large follow people who spend more time talking about non-gameplay stuff than actually thinking about the gameplay and the gameplay side of characters.

Y'all need to follow me to the valley of peace and gameplay and out of the shadows of death and sales.

Trust me, once the game comes out, we'll see who's left years from now. Those left are the real smash fans, regardless of which games they like/play/prefer.

Regardless, all that matters with characters to me is how excited I am to play as or against them 10 years plus later.

So far, only 64 and Melee are over 10 years old, so going off that...

...I cannot tell you how EXCITED I get about playing as Mario, Ness, Fox, and Captain Falcon in both games, Marth in Melee, Dr. Mario in Melee, Kirby in 64, and facing against characters like Jigglypuff, Pikachu, Yoshi, and DK in both games, as well as characters like Sheik, Ganondorf, Link, The Ice Climbers, and Mr. Game & Watch in Melee.

I want that with characters. I want characters that are different and each bring something new.

None of that has to do with sales, reps, or any of that.

It's all about the gameplay and character design. That's the only argument that really holds any weight for anything.

Programmers and game designers when programming and designing games don't care about sales of outside series. No, they care about making the best game possible and making a character work.

Well let me tell you why people talk about anything else but gameplay here...

BECAUSE IS EASIER! Is way harder to think in an effective and unique way a character could play

But i agree with you that these's the best way to talk about X character

 

[G0LD3N L0TUS]

Let's talk about Isaac and how he could be different than Robin.

If Robin is a long range-close range character, maybe Isaac could be a midrange-close range character with his earth psynergys and his sword.

I don't see why we need to compare them. I think Isaac's most iconic abilities are his out-of-battle ones, like Move. I think those should make his sepcial moveset (granted, I've never actually played Golden Sun). That said, I think all they share is sword + magic.

 

[Johnknight1]

I think it's a bit of both honestly. I think Sakurai just kinda gets a list of notable/popular/successful characters and then ponders what they could do.

If he deems the moveset or gimmick as good, he uses it.

Popularity in smash doesn't equal sales.

If it did, Samus, Zero Suit Samus, Captain Falcon, Ness, Lucas, The Ice Climbers, Marth, Roy, Ike, Robin, Lucina, Wolf, Pit, Palutena, Olimar, R.OB., Little Mac, etc. would never be in smash.

If sales matter as much as people think they did, we'd have Electrode as a playable character in Smash 64, Waluigi playable in Melee, 7 different Mii Fighters playable in Brawl, and Baby Rosalina playable in Smash 4.

 

[Maxilian]

If sales matter as much as people think they did, we'd have Electrode as a playable character in Smash 64, Waluigi playable in Melee, 7 different Mii Fighters playable in Brawl, and Baby Rosalina playable in Smash 4.

You're wrong! We wouldn't have gotten Baby Rosalina... ALL KNEEL TO OUR QUEEN! PINK GOLD PEACH!

 

[Morbi]

....

These arguments.

No wonder I stopped coming here after 2013.

Source: http://kotaku.com/pac-man-almost-got-into-super-smash-bros-brawl-1599610742

Factors

1. Character individuality.
   1. What strategic options can they have to set them apart from the cast.
2. Does their playstyle reference and/or call back to their respective games.
3. Are they fun to play.

There is no sales at all in his criteria. Guys at least take what the dude is saying into consideration. He's making THE GAME.

Sales are not listed in his arbitrary PR statment? I suppose that means he just blatantly disregards that aspect of inclusion! Also, you forgot to list his fourth criteria, "female" characters. Also, his fifth criteria, "clone" characters. I AM ASSERTING THAT IT IS SOMETHING THAT HE CONSIDERS AS IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO NOT CONSIDER.

 

[Johnknight1]

Well let me tell you why people talk about anything else but gameplay here...

BECAUSE IS EASIER! Is way harder to think in an effective and unique way a character could play

But i agree with you that these's the best way to talk about X character

No, it's easier to talk about gameplay once you understand game design.

Seriously, just talk about one potential move. Talk about it's properties.

Talk about it's hitstun, it's startup lag, it's cooldown lag, it's sweetspot, it's sourspot, or perhaps instead of the latter 2 it has a tipper mechanic (no move has both a tipper and a a sweetspot and sourspot in smash because that's too much work). Then, talk about it's hitboxes, and perhaps how it's hitboxes change during the move's duration.

You can literally have a 10 paragraph statement on a single theoretical move just going off that.

I once had such a statement with my proposed claw move for Ridley's forward air, with it being a combination of Bowser's Brawl forward air, Mewtwo's Melee forward air/Charizard's Smash 4 poverty Mewtwo forward air, and Fox's Melee back air.

BTW, that's just moveset talk on specific moves. You could talk overall moveset functionality, skillset, and playstyle all in as much or greater detail from a micro (small and specific) and macro (big picture) level.

Once you start getting your brain rolling, you get some insane ideas with popular, unpopular, and largely unknown characters that stand a realistic shot at being playable (ie: Ganondorf, not Ralph in the Zelda franchise).

 

[Big-Cat]

I suppose I am a "real" Smash fan as I intend to stick around and I probably play the game just as much, if not more, than you... wait a minute. Never-mind, I speculate with logic and maintain an objective perspective! I suppose that means that I am a demon that desecrates everything that Smash stands for!

Do you even know what you just said?

Again, do you play the games and to what level? John has been playing Smash competitively for years and has probably done more for his local community than you ever will.

Are you just gonna like this post for no reason and ignore it otherwise?

 

[Morbi]

No, it's easier to talk about gameplay once you understand game design.

Seriously, just talk about one potential move. Talk about it's properties.

Talk about it's hitstun, it's startup lag, it's cooldown lag, it's sweetspot, it's sourspot, or perhaps instead of the latter 2 it has a tipper mechanic (no move has both a tipper and a a sweetspot and sourspot in smash because that's too much work). Then, talk about it's hitboxes, and perhaps how it's hitboxes change during the move's duration.

You can literally have a 10 paragraph statement on a single theoretical move just going off that.

I once had such a statement with my proposed claw move for Ridley's forward air, with it being a combination of Bowser's Brawl forward air, Mewtwo's Melee forward air/Charizard's Smash 4 poverty Mewtwo forward air, and Fox's Melee back air.

Perhaps you could attempt to lead by example if that is what you wish to discuss? I am certain that others would join if it was a pertinent topic at the current.

Do you even know what you just said?

Again, do you play the games and to what level? John has been playing Smash competitively for years and has probably done more for his local community than you ever will.

Are you just gonna like this post for no reason and ignore it otherwise?

I never asserted that I have done more for my local community; that is not relevant to the amount of time that I play the game, that is not material to what the games mean to me as an individual or my devotion to "Smash". If you must know, I do not play at the competitive level, as I see where you are going with this.

 

[Swamp Sensei]

Popularity in smash doesn't equal sales.

If it did, Samus, Zero Suit Samus, Captain Falcon, Ness, Lucas, The Ice Climbers, Marth, Roy, Ike, Robin, Lucina, Wolf, Pit, Palutena, Olimar, R.OB., Little Mac, etc. would never be in smash.

If sales matter as much as people think they did, we'd have Electrode as a playable character in Smash 64, Waluigi playable in Melee, 7 different Mii Fighters playable in Brawl, and Baby Rosalina playable in Smash 4.

When did I say that popularity equalled sales?

 

[Big-Cat]

No because then someone wants to talk characters and the gameplay topic is killed. It happens all the time.

 

[Morbi]

When did I say that popularity equalled sales?

You did not; however, if you even insinuate that "sales" are relevant to even the slightest extent, a straw-man is going to be slammed in your face. If you failed to notice, that has happened for the last 30 minutes.

 

[Johnknight1]

Perhaps you could attempt to lead by example if that is what you wish to discuss? I am certain that others would join if it was a pertinent topic at the current.

I once had such a statement with my proposed claw move for Ridley's forward air, with it being a combination of Bowser's Brawl forward air, Mewtwo's Melee forward air/Charizard's Smash 4 poverty Mewtwo forward air, and Fox's Melee back air.

That sounds like "leading by example" to me.

I'm literally daring the person who made that Isaac statement to make some similar statement for his Isaac/Robin comparison (mid-range vs. long-range) just with one move there.

With my post as a whole, I am baiting them to talk about skillsets, moveset, and playstyles at both a small and detailed and very specific level and a big picture level.

I'm baiting them into doing this because I want to hear their thoughts. I love the idea of Isaac, but honestly, the totality of the character is so deep with possibilities that my mind has troubles "wrapping it all together" in one burrito. I find listening to other's opinions on the gameplay matter helps.

Plus, it's never a bad idea to have new perspective(s) on things influence you. I only ever had good ideas because I listened to others, adopted what I liked, ignored what I didn't like, and evolved ideas from there.

There are a handful at best of truly original ideas in life. Everything is influenced or partially copied by something.

In Smash that is true as well, seeing as how Mario and Luigi are essentially Ryu and Ken from Street Fighter.

 

[Big-Cat]

When did I say that popularity equalled sales?

To some extent it can because sales are the closest to a physical indicator of popularity you can get going by numbers.

Popularity does come in other forms though.

 

[Maxilian]

No, it's easier to talk about gameplay once you understand game design.

Seriously, just talk about one potential move. Talk about it's properties.

Talk about it's hitstun, it's startup lag, it's cooldown lag, it's sweetspot, it's sourspot, or perhaps instead of the latter 2 it has a tipper mechanic (no move has both a tipper and a a sweetspot and sourspot in smash because that's too much work). Then, talk about it's hitboxes, and perhaps how it's hitboxes change during the move's duration.

You can literally have a 10 paragraph statement on a single theoretical move just going off that.

I once had such a statement with my proposed claw move for Ridley's forward air, with it being a combination of Bowser's Brawl forward air, Mewtwo's Melee forward air/Charizard's Smash 4 poverty Mewtwo forward air, and Fox's Melee back air.

BTW, that's just moveset talk on specific moves. You could talk overall moveset functionality, skillset, and playstyle all in as much or greater detail from a micro (small and specific) and macro (big picture) level.

Once you start getting your brain rolling, you get some insane ideas with popular, unpopular, and largely unknown characters that stand a realistic shot at being playable (ie: Ganondorf, not Ralph in the Zelda franchise).

Are you sure is easier? what do you think is easier to say? "Ridley is too big or Vaati is not irrelevant and is also popular" or say all the things you said? i'm not saying that i don't agree with you when it comes to gameplay but that doesn't change that... is easier to talk about sells, popularity, etc... why? cause you don't have to think to much about it, you don't have to sit and imagine how X character could play while being unique and fun, also having in mind that you will have to plan what that character is going to do in general... soooo yeah is not easier

 

[Oracle_Summon]

This is where this thread is going to end up if nobody stops:

 

[Moon Monkey]

Sales are not listed in his arbitrary PR statment? I suppose that means he just blatantly disregards that aspect of inclusion!

The mere fact that he didn't even bring it up in the discussion about "What Makes Characters Candidates to be Playable" means it isn't as important to him as it is to you. It may play a role but it isn't as important if it can't be bothered to be mentioned.

Also, you forgot to list his fourth criteria, "female" characters. Also, his fifth criteria, "clone" characters.

noun, plural cri·te·ri·a [krahy-teer-ee-uh] , cri·te·ri·ons.
A standard of judgment or criticism; a rule or principle for evaluating or testing something.

Simply saying "female" and "clone" isn't what a criteria is... What about them? These aren't rules...

I AM ASSERTING THAT IT IS SOMETHING THAT HE CONSIDERS AS IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO NOT CONSIDER.

I'm not entirely sure what you are even saying here. Please simplify. I'm a simple man.

 

[toobladooblasdfghtkdjdhfngj]

Like I say, you people would suffer hard if you were in any other fighting game community. Mainly because the prospect of sales isn't brought up, and for good reasons too.

Don't get why Super Smash Bros. should be the exception.

 

[Big-Cat]

Isaac, I think, would have an edge guarding emphasis with psynergy like Move doing his kills rather than sheer ko power.

 

[Swamp Sensei]

To some extent it can because sales are the closest to a physical indicator of popularity you can get going by numbers.

Popularity does come in other forms though.

I agree but I never stated popularity = sales or anything like it which is why I'm confused John quoted me saying that.

I'm just saying that Popularity/notability makes the initial list and gameplay narrows it down to the final choices.

 

[Johnknight1]

When did I say that popularity equalled sales?

You didn't. Of course I know you don't believe that, lol. used your point as a tool.

I quoted your post as (lol that was an inappropriate typo) a conduit for saying that people overrate the "sales" argument.

The only ways "sales" effect anything if they even do is if the development staff is even aware of characters, and even then, popularity of said games said characters are from and the popularity of said characters are still vastly more important.

 

[Big-Cat]

Like I say, you people would suffer hard if you were in any other fighting game community. Mainly because the prospect of sales isn't brought up, and for good reasons too.

Don't get why Super Smash Bros. should be the exception.

Thank you. I've been meaning to bring this up and I forget to.

 

[Frostwraith]

Popularity and sales help certain characters to be considered, but whether they make into the game or not is an entirely different story.

I have no doubt that Rosalina, Palutena and Robin owe their appearances in Smash 4 thanks to the success of their games. At the same time, Sakurai saw potential in them and it shows. If Sakurai hadn't, they wouldn't have gotten in the game, no matter how popular they could be.

 

[KageJuin]

This thread is garbage. So much Bias against the obvious FACT that smash Is an allstar game.

Nobody predocted Miis or WFT BECAUSE their only merit being in the game is their massive sales/popularity!

Sakurai explaining his process AFTER picking a character still does not explain his choice process.

Man.

I can see nobody here has what it takes to be a game designer.

I am sorry but what?


On a lighter note: Mr Saturn is playable. CONFIRMED

 

[Gold_Jacobson]

You guys think that sales have no bearing in a consideration for what characters to put into the game?

Quit being so extreme people. Morbid was saying it is a factor of consideration. It is. Even if Sakurai doesn't say it is. No developer would say that "sales" is a factor. But that doesn't matter, because it will always be there in some consideration.


It's not an extreme point of view. It's actually the default assumption in business. Sales is highly correlated with popularity.

 

[Johnknight1]

Are you sure is easier? what do you think is easier to say? "Ridley is too big or Vaati is not irrelevant and is also popular" or say all the things you said? i'm not saying that i don't agree with you when it comes to gameplay but that doesn't change that... is easier to talk about sells, popularity, etc... why? cause you don't have to think to much about it, you don't have to sit and imagine how X character could play while being unique and fun, also having in mind that you will have to plan what that character is going to do in general... soooo yeah is not easier

Alright, tell you what.

I want you to do some homework for me right now.

I want you to describe your favorite attack in smash. It could be specifically in one game or just in multiple games overall.

Description could be anywhere, and could include the following details of the move:
-Pre- and post-move lag.
-The move duration.
-Hitboxes or hurtboxes.
-Sweetspots and sourspots of the move, or if it's a tipper-move (see: all of Marth's and Roy's moves), you could talk about the tipper and non-tipper (or as we know it in competitive circles the "wet noodle" of the move) of said move.

Then, try to think how all this above stuff you posted effects some of the following:
-The move itself.
-Your enjoyment of the move.
-The usefulness of the move.
-How useful other moves are.
-Defense of other plays after you use the move.
-Your moveset overall of the move.
-Lead in attacks or followup attacks you use with the move.
-How the move effects how you play.
-How you play when you have minimal troubles landing this move.
-How you play when you have maximum troubles landing this move.
-How this moves makes you think.
-How this move works in regards to stage defense/edge hogging/edge guarding from both as a move to help you recover/stay on the stage and as a move to help prevent that for your opponent.
-The usefulness of the move in 1v1's vs. its' usefulness in 2v2's vs. its' usefulness in FFA's.
-What characters, match ups, stages, situations, or players you like to use this move on.

If you want to add or subtract whatever from this, that's cool, but overall, I think you should do it. Oh, and anyone else who is curious about it should do it as well.

I'm telling you, it seriously makes you think about things at a microscopic and gigantic view of things differently. It makes you appreciate them. It also makes gameplay ideas at such levels come so much easier, it's crazy.

It's essentially in a gameplay perspective like mental weight lifting while you've got like 100 times as much normal testosterone as an average person during the workout, except unlike then this isn't unhealthy for you!!!

On top of that, this is LITERALLY what the people CHOOSING THE ROSTER DO!!! They do this all the time for EVERY SINGLE MOVE OF EVERY SINGLE CHARACTER!!!

Don't you think that if you wanna think like you're in their shoes you should think like you're in their shoes=???

 

[Con0rrrr]

Come back to this thread

 

[KageJuin]

Thank you. I've been meaning to bring this up and I forget to.

Maybe you should stop comparing smash to other fighters as it's clearly not the same.
It has more to do with character and series popularity and marketing than you want to admit.

Why?

It would shatter your dreams.

Miis, wft and lucina probably make you feel sour because you are blind to the reason these characters were included in the first place

 

[Scoliosis Jones]

This thread is garbage. So much Bias against the obvious FACT that smash Is an allstar game.

Nobody predocted Miis or WFT BECAUSE their only merit being in the game is their massive sales/popularity!

Sakurai explaining his process AFTER picking a character still does not explain his choice process.

Man.

I can see nobody here has what it takes to be a game designer.

I am sorry but what?


On a lighter note: Mr Saturn is playable. CONFIRMED

Not really.

Wii Fit Trainer and the Mii Fighters both add something to the game that nobody else could. That statement @ Moon Monkey used in his posts? That was made after Brawl, and before this game started development.

Sales do matter. But not to the extent people are making it out to be.

Maybe you should stop comparing smash to other fighters as it's clearly not the same.
It has more to do with character and series popularity and marketing than you want to admit.

Why?

It would shatter your dreams.

Miis, wft and lucina probably make you feel sour because you are blind to the reason these characters were included in the first place

Again, no. Wii Fit Trainer is fun to think about because of the potential combos she can string with Deep Breathing and Sun Salutations. Lucina is probably going to play like Old Marth, so that's got a lot of people excited to play as her.

 

[Con0rrrr]

Sakurai picks Nintendo All Stars to be in the game.

Are they an all star? Sakurai Decides.

/topic

 

[Frostwraith]

Think about it, Wii Fit Trainer might be unexpected, but she brings a quite unique, even if quirky, moveset. Who else would use yoga poses as attacks?

Her A-A-A combo is pretty unique with the third hit burying foes like DK's Headbutt.

Her Deep Breath special is something unique that fits her character too and can be devastating combined with a full charged Sun Salutation moves. It could help her give an extra impact with her Smash attacks that can make a difference between KOing foes or not.

I'm not a competitive player, but I can identify what moves do and when should they be used.

 

[Moon Monkey]

Sales do matter. But not to the extent people are making it out to be.

This in a nutshell. If sales were really as important as you guys made it out to be we wouldn't have gotten Ice Climbers at all.

In the end guys when it comes to characters:
Fun Gameplay > Every other factor

Look at Sakurai's most recent interview on Chrom, Robin and Lucina:

In the end, if a game isn't fun, then there's no point.

 

[Johnknight1]

Like I say, you people would suffer hard if you were in any other fighting game community. Mainly because the prospect of sales isn't brought up, and for good reasons too.

Don't get why Super Smash Bros. should be the exception.

Thank you.

Maybe you should stop comparing smash to other fighters as it's clearly not the same.
It has more to do with character and series popularity and marketing than you want to admit.

Why?

It would shatter your dreams.

Miis, wft and lucina probably make you feel sour because you are blind to the reason these characters were included in the first place

Your argument would hold weight if:
-The Mii Swordwielder wasn't inspired by the Soul Calibur create-a-character.

-The Mii Brawler wasn't a lot like a Tekken character.

-The Mii Gunner wasn't a Contra/arcade shoot 'em up copy.

-The Wii Fit Trainer wasn't the power up gimmick mixed in with a lot of Virtua Fighter character mechanics

-Lucina wasn't a spacie (in regards to sweetspot vs. sourspot rather than tipper vs. non-tipper) take on Marth.

-Mario and Luigi weren't inspired by Ryu and Ken, and Dr. Mario wasn't like Dark Ryu/LOL Dan. Seriously, they all have used Shoryuken, Haduken, a spinning kick, and a bounce throw off the ground that originate from Ryu, Ken, and Dark Ryu.

-Characters that happen to be major characters in their franchises are chosen for their movesets, skillsets, and playstyles, not sales.

-Newcomers like Mega Man, Little Mac, Robin, and Palutena that a lot of people wanted have movesets, skillsets, and playstyles that aren't hard to imagine.

-Smash didn't copy other fighting games at every turn it has.

-HAL Laboratories didn't have staff that made other fighting games before.

-The development teams of Tekken and Soul Calibur, aka the 2 best-selling fighting game franchises of all-time weren't working Smash for the 3DS and WiiU.

The only major difference from Smash and other fighting games is that Smash has an off the stage game, Smash has bubble shields instead of blocking or guards, and Smash is more of a platformer than a fighting game in a game build and movement sense.

 

[Second Power]

Isaac, I think, would have an edge guarding emphasis with psynergy like Move doing his kills rather than sheer ko power.

That's interesting idea. I imagine he'll have to rely on mostly on stage edge guard tactics for thematic reasons, right? If so, a tool like Yoshi's UpB would make sense for him in addition to the Move.

 

[Big-Cat]

Maybe you should stop comparing smash to other fighters as it's clearly not the same.
It has more to do with character and series popularity and marketing than you want to admit.

Why?

It would shatter your dreams.

Miis, wft and lucina probably make you feel sour because you are blind to the reason these characters were included in the first place

So what does Smash, a crossover, fighter have that another crossover fighter like Marvel vs. Capcom doesn't?

 

[TeenGirlSquad]

Sakurai picks Nintendo All Stars to be in the game.

Are they an all star? Sakurai Decides.

/topic

Lolno. There is a clear difference between adding a character like Diddy Kong and adding a character like Robin. Both of them are great characters, but there is a clear difference.

 

[G0LD3N L0TUS]

Man, who thought it'd be sales that plummets this thread to madness?

Anyhow, I do think that they play some role in deciding characters, but I also think that in influence is indirect. For example, more sales would mean more people are familiar with the character.