Character Discussion Thread

[Deathlightning21]

Since when could you say you wanted Ghirahim as DLC without being ridiculed in that same way?
I'm completely open to Lyndis being a DLC fighter, but I want Ghirahim more.

Hence why I talk about Ghirahim. If you want Lyndis, you are completely welcome to talk about her.

Not talking about you man, just talking about a few people I know not on smashboards/ on smash boards. live the dream *thumbs up*

 

[N3ON]

Yeah I think Snake was simply never planned this time around, despite Sakurai saying he hoped to bring everyone back or whatever it was he said. Kojima didn't ask, Sakurai didn't offer.

I don't think it had anything to do with the other third-parties though.

 

[Diddy Kong]

If Project M would add Isaac and King K.Rool I'd play that instantly.

 

[ZeldaFan01]

The roster would feel complete to me with GS, Wars, and RH characters to round out the unrepresented series, another DK character because it really should have one, Ridley because obviously, and Wolf and ICs returning. Also Toad because he's as iconic as most of the roster.

Since you brought up , how do you feel about them being Wii U exclusive? I don't think they'd be worked on again to make them work on 3DS. And if they are gonna do exclusive characters, Isaac would be perfect for 3DS because he's never been on a platform game except for Brawl AT. I dont know, that's what I can see that would work if they were ever considering having exclusive characters for the Wii U and 3DS separately

 

[Diddy Kong]

Since you brought up , how do you feel about them being Wii U exclusive? I don't think they'd be worked on again to make them work on 3DS. And if they are gonna do exclusive characters, Isaac would be perfect for 3DS because he's never been on a platform game except for Brawl AT. I dont know, that's what I can see that would work if they were ever considering having exclusive characters for the Wii U and 3DS separately

But why would the superiour version have the worst character?

Give me Isaac for Wii U and Ice Climbers for 3DS please.

 

[Deathlightning21]

But why would the superiour version have the worst character?

Give me Isaac for Wii U and Ice Climbers for 3DS please.

But then they wouldn't work and thus making your game not work

 

[Kenith]

I think Ice Climbers being Wii U exclusive is BS. It's unfair to 3DS players.
Plus we don't know if they can work in 8-player Smash anyway. They said they could barely get it to work...without Ice Climbers.

Maybe they can work in 8-player Smash, and maybe they can run on the New 3DS...
But in regards to the Ice Climbers as we know them...we'll probably never know.

 

[N3ON]

Since you brought up , how do you feel about them being Wii U exclusive? I don't think they'd be worked on again to make them work on 3DS. And if they are gonna do exclusive characters, Isaac would be perfect for 3DS because he's never been on a platform game except for Brawl AT. I dont know, that's what I can see that would work if they were ever considering having exclusive characters for the Wii U and 3DS separately

I think exclusive characters should only exist if either there is some way to download/transfer them to the other system, or if the inferior of the two (the 3DS) can't manage the implementation of a character but the Wii U can. It's unfortunate the 3DS can't do the ICs or potentially the Chorus Kids, but I think cutting them on that basis when they can presumably run fine on the Wii U was ridiculous and entirely overly dogmatic on Sakurai's part. If Sakurai hadn't been so adamant about equal rosters I don't think many would've been surprised or complained if the Wii U had a larger roster compared to the 3DS, they're not systems of equal capability.

So I'd be fine with Wii U exclusives if that's the only way we'd get them. However regardless of what character it was, Isaac or anyone, I wouldn't be for 3DS exclusives (unless you could transfer them).

 

[ZeldaFan01]

But why would the superiour version have the worst character?

Give me Isaac for Wii U and Ice Climbers for 3DS please.

I think Ice Climbers being Wii U exclusive is BS. It's unfair to 3DS players.
Plus we don't know if they can work in 8-player Smash anyway. They said they could barely get it to work...without Ice Climbers.

Maybe they can work in 8-player Smash, and maybe they can run on the New 3DS...
But in regards to the Ice Climbers as we know them...we'll probably never know.

Oh it's BS. Huh. Well i cant say its not really the kind of thing they would do. But it's also something that is possible, I'm betting. I wish I could say Isaac and ICs for both versions but its kind of hard to, knowing the circumstances, For me at least

 

[Diddy Kong]

The 3DS should have our current roster, Wii U version would have get rid of and have given us Isaac, King K.Rool, Ridley, Mewtwo, Impa, Ganondorf with new moveset, Wolf, Lucas and Dixie Kong.

 

[Kenith]

The 3DS should have our current roster, Wii U version would have get rid of and have given us Isaac, King K.Rool, Ridley, Mewtwo, Impa, Ganondorf with new moveset, Wolf, Lucas and Dixie Kong.

Ew...no.
Why can't both version just have all of these characters?
EDIT: Were you being facetious? I think you were. XP

 

[N3ON]

Oh it's BS. Huh. Well i cant say its not really the kind of thing they would do. But it's also something that is possible, I'm betting. I wish I could say Isaac and ICs for both versions but its kind of hard to, knowing the circumstances, For me at least

If WFT can be on both versions Isaac can too.

 

[[Obnoxshush/Dasshizer]]

Yeah they can be in both versions.

 

[Curious Villager]

I think Ice Climbers being Wii U exclusive is BS. It's unfair to 3DS players.
Plus we don't know if they can work in 8-player Smash anyway. They said they could barely get it to work...without Ice Climbers.

Maybe they can work in 8-player Smash, and maybe they can run on the New 3DS...
But in regards to the Ice Climbers as we know them...we'll probably never know.

Come to think of it, wasn't the Mirror removed on the Wii Fit Stage for 8 player Smash? I recall some lag on the Fountain of Dreams stage if you had 4 Ice Climbers on back in Melee. Not sure if that's at all comparable but oh well. *Shrugs*

 

[ZeldaFan01]

If WFT can be on both versions Isaac can too.

I knoww. I'm absolutely not opposed to him being on both versions, it was just an idea.
And you are so right about Sakurai being so adamant about the equal rosters!

 

[SmashChu]

I think exclusive characters should only exist if either there is some way to download/transfer them to the other system, or if the inferior of the two (the 3DS) can't manage the implementation of a character but the Wii U can. It's unfortunate the 3DS can't do the ICs or potentially the Chorus Kids, but I think cutting them on that basis when they can presumably run fine on the Wii U was ridiculous and entirely overly dogmatic on Sakurai's part. If Sakurai hadn't been so adamant about equal rosters I don't think many would've been surprised or complained if the Wii U had a larger roster compared to the 3DS, they're not systems of equal capability.

So I'd be fine with Wii U exclusives if that's the only way we'd get them. However regardless of what character it was, Isaac or anyone, I wouldn't be for 3DS exclusives (unless you could transfer them).

I'm soap boxing here, but I personally feel like having two versions was a disservice to everyone. Rather than make one big game like Brawl, they made two smaller games that weren't as strong individually. Brawl added more new music and more stages than either version individually and had a story mode. We also lost Ice Climbers specifically for the 3DS version. And, of course, the 3DS has pretty weak wireless play overall (I've had local games lag right next to someone. This shouldn't happen). Now, most people will play the Wii U version because it better suits what Smash is designed to do. All the 3DS version did was suck resources and tide us over for about 3 months.

 

[BKupa666]

At least Sakurai was an equal opportunity offender with the Ice Climbers. #SilverLining

"It might upset some fans that they can't play as a unique two-game veteran on one system? Alright, then, I'll cut them entirely so that no one can play as them on any system and everyone is upset!"

It's still vague what role, if any, 8-Player Smash played in their removal, but the 3DS was what truly sunk them.

 

[NonSpecificGuy]

At least Sakurai was an equal opportunity offender with the Ice Climbers. #SilverLining

"It might upset some fans that they can't play as a unique two-game veteran on one system? Alright, then, I'll cut them entirely so that no one can play as them on any system and everyone is upset!"

It's still vague what role, if any, 8-Player Smash played in their removal, but the 3DS was what truly sunk them.

If Sakurai it's too be believed, it played no part. He started they worked fine on Wii U and I highly doubt 8-player Smash was a last minute addition.

 

[JaidynReiman]

I'm soap boxing here, but I personally feel like having two versions was a disservice to everyone. Rather than make one big game like Brawl, they made two smaller games that weren't as strong individually. Brawl added more new music and more stages than either version individually and had a story mode. We also lost Ice Climbers specifically for the 3DS version. And, of course, the 3DS has pretty weak wireless play overall (I've had local games lag right next to someone. This shouldn't happen). Now, most people will play the Wii U version because it better suits what Smash is designed to do. All the 3DS version did was suck resources and tide us over for about 3 months.

I think this is what makes me dislike Smash Wii U more than Brawl. Smash Tour doesn't help, though, since its a horrible clusterf*** of a mode that stole development time away from potential other game modes.

At least Sakurai was an equal opportunity offender with the Ice Climbers. #SilverLining

"It might upset some fans that they can't play as a unique two-game veteran on one system? Alright, then, I'll cut them entirely so that no one can play as them on any system and everyone is upset!"

It's still vague what role, if any, 8-Player Smash played in their removal, but the 3DS was what truly sunk them.

I'm sure Ice Climbers worked perfectly fine on 8-player Smash, honestly.

 

[Deathlightning21]

I think this is what makes me dislike Smash Wii U more than Brawl. Smash Tour doesn't help, though, since its a horrible clusterf*** of a mode that stole development time away from potential other game modes.



I'm sure Ice Climbers worked perfectly fine on 8-player Smash, honestly.

Yes, such game modes as....and....that one....don't forget.....

 

[N3ON]

All the 3DS version did was suck resources and tide over for about 3 months... and sell significantly better than the Wii U version.

The two together have already sold better than Melee and will likely overcome Brawl eventually too.

Developing both together hindered everything but profit. Which is a big part of what those who run the business care about.

 

[JaidynReiman]

Yes, such game modes as....and....that one....don't forget.....

Adventure Mode. Or something similar to Smash Run. Honestly, I really liked the idea of Tower of Smash. That would've been amazing; way better than this stupid Smash Tour mode.

Smash Tour is just a ****ty mode, though. I know I've seen a few people who like it, but that's about it. Smash Tour isn't fun, its random crap on top of random crap on top of random crap and you can't do jack crap because more random crap piles on top of anything you try to do and you can never get anywhere you want to go.


If it was Mario Party with Smash battles replacing minigames and trophies as items, sure, that'd have been fun. None of this "everyone place at once" and "all items activate at once," preventing you from doing anything worth of substance. This is basically the anti-Mario Party.

All the 3DS version did was suck resources and tide over for about 3 months... and sell significantly better than the Wii U version.

The two together have already sold better than Melee and will likely overcome Brawl eventually too.

Developing both together hindered everything but profit. Which is a big part of what those who run the business care about.

Of course, this is more of a reason to EXPECT DLC to happen. Because they are profiting, you'd think they'd want to capitalize on that and add more content that all the people who now have the game will just eat up so they make even more profit.


This allows them to finish a few things they planned but couldn't complete because they had to make two games. Which may be frustrating to some, but doesn't bother me any really.

 

[Ura]

Their was a lot of people that complained about the SSE in Brawl but you honestly can't tell me that the Smash Run/Tour modes or even the Master/Crazy orders was better than it.

We need a SSE adventure mode as DLC somehow. Really, I got bored of both versions of SSB4 within a month or 2 because theirs hardly anything I can do in it.

 

[BKupa666]

Hypothetical: A Subspace Emissary sequel happens. It takes up the same 60 percent (??) of development time, but along the way, it fixes all of the flaws from Brawl's SSE. . .so, no more boring original enemies, vague plot points, generic locations, over/under-utilization of certain characters, relative lack of NPCs, mediocre bosses or Great Maze. Are you happy?

I think my happiness would depend on how well they used the remaining 40 percent (??) of development time, but if the main content was as good as Brawl's, I think it'd probably become the best Smash game to date.

 

[Bowserlick]

Instead of tacking on a Nintendo All-Star story onto Smash, Nintendo can simply make a separate game which would be another BIG hit series like Mariokart, Zelda, Mario, Smash, ect.

The Smash fighting style is great, but does not necessarily offer the best environment for an adventure game, in my opinion.

 

[Pazzo.]

Hypothetical: A Subspace Emissary sequel happens. It takes up the same 60 percent (??) of development time, but along the way, it fixes all of the flaws from Brawl's SSE. . .so, no more boring original enemies, vague plot points, generic locations, over/under-utilization of certain characters, relative lack of NPCs, mediocre bosses or Great Maze. Are you happy?

I think my happiness would depend on how well they used the remaining 40 percent (??) of development time, but if the main content was as good as Brawl's, I think it'd probably become the best Smash game to date.

Oh, we're talking game mode DLC?

Because as unlikely as that is, I'd love to see it. Maybe even more than character DLC.

 

[ZeldaFan01]

I liked the idea of the original SSE as in the storyline of how there were segments exclusive to each Universe and how at the end everyone came together to defeat the final boss. So SSE 2 would be even more fun because of all these new added characters!, Especially Universes like KI. The only problem I had was how it was the enemies were repetitive and it sometimes got old but that's it.

 

[Ura]

I was okay with the environments of SSE personally. I'm in the minority that was pleased with the Adventure mode.

On another note, I produced my own hypothetical list if I had control of every character that made it to Smash 5.

Spoiler

- Johto Trainer would use a unique set of Gen 2 PKMN that doesn't consist of starters.
- Pichu would be buffed and would only hurt itself if it's attacks miss.
- Daisy, Dark Pit, Raichu, Lucina, Robin Female, and Sami are alts to their respective characters to the left of them.
- Goku would be his child self from the original Dragon Ball.

 

[JaidynReiman]

I would've preferred the SSE if we fought all the main antagonists of the series and they remained antagonists throughout the whole thing rather than some random villain popping up at the end. The final boss should've been something the Nintendo villains created or something instead of some random entity from somewhere else. And the random new enemies were an annoyance as well.


However, this whole issue with all these Kid Icarus enemies dominating Smash Run? I don't see it as being any better than new enemies dominating the game. The problem is that there's a huge lack of variety. Most franchises have one or two enemies as is, and most of the Kid Icarus enemies are from one game as well. Its not really much better than the SSE having mostly brand new enemies.

 

[N3ON]

People complain about the SSE and Smash Tour and everything but I didn't even think Melee's adventure mode was all that great. It was fine... but nothing special.

 

[PSIBoy]

I was okay with the environments of SSE personally. I'm in the minority that was pleased with the Adventure mode.

Same with me. Most of the story was bad, but I liked the gameplay, the original enemies instead of all the enemies already existing, though they could've used more of them, I liked the twist with Tabuu, I liked that we didn't have to fight the Nintendo villains at the end (seriously, it's so overused by the fanbase in my opinion, and predictable with no twist), and I liked the gameplay. Sure, it was fairly easy, didn't get you into good habits for smashes, and you could get KO'ed really easily on Intense, but I found it quite enjoyable. Hope it is brought back and improved on.

 

[Ura]

Story was good IMO. Dialogue or Voice Acting would have made the story the story to anime-esque and cheesy. Not having the characters talk gave a lot of room for interpretation for the player.

I just wish they explained things better in the story so the players can understand what's going on. The deleted scene of Meta Knight losing his ship should have never been cut and we should have known what Dedede was planning to do with the trophies he had.

 

[Substitution]

I'll be honest, SSE could have been worse. As really, trying to bring a story into a game that really had no premise outside of "Bunch of Nintendo characters fight." isn't the easiest thing to do. And personally the gameplay wasn't that bad.

 

[Deleted member]

we should have known what Dedede was planning to do with the trophies he had.

The whole point about Dedede is that we're supposed to think he's doing something bad (stealing trophies) but he's actually doing something good (preparing a resistance).

Knowing his plan ahead of time would defeat the purpose.

 

[pupNapoleon]

I will simply agree to disagree. I'm not going to force you to support Snake or anything like that. But a lot of these points are either flat out incorrect or not really proving anything imo.

Funny, because I've felt the same thing reading your responses.
The thing is, you quite bluntly refuse to believe certain indisputable things that I say, particularly about my OWN opinion. Despite my statements, you seem to have this imperial opinion that I do not like Snake, though I've stated very clearly the opposite of this. Additionally, I have played his games- though that is irrelevant to a truly legendary character, who supercedes not only his games but the entire video game industry. The fact that you seem to fall back onto that point makes me think your definition of a legendary character is merely just a great character, or some quite minor lessening of the gravitas the word truly carries. That being the case, I will concede that, I'm sure by some of the remedial standards set forth for what 'legendary' means to a few, that he must, in fact, be considered 'legendary' to that sub par definition.

You can go on and on all you want that Metal Gear is legendary (Not Snake), but can you tell me how Metal Gear would be WITHOUT the character? Pray tell, would the story be as epic? Would it be as meaningful? No, it wouldn't be. Because Snake's story is what drives the entire plot. However, since I'm assuming you've never played the series, you wouldn't know that. In turn, because you wouldn't know that, you can't really make that claim. If Metal Gear is legendary, what makes it legendary? The gameplay...AND the story...AND the characters...

Also, here you claim to not "hate Snake". Hate is a strong word. But when you openly come out and say how worthless a character is, and that you are "not a fan", I'm assuming you don't like him much.

While the Pokemon probably aren't that big a deal (even though Pokemon is ridiculously popular), 3rd Party characters and Assist Trophies premiered in Brawl. It wasn't the Nintendog itself, nor Kyogre or Groudon they were advertising, but the features of the game. Just like Snake and Sonic. "Play as 3rtd party characters Solid Snake and Sonic the Hedgehog!" That's basically what it's saying. It's a tad different.

Exactly. The point is that it is an expanded universe of play, not the specific characters themselves.

There's no evidence that he was "kicked out". Kojima and Sakurai never communicated. They can always discuss it and make things happen.

We can debate the word all you wish- but the bottom line is that Snake is not in Smash 4. He may have been the first into the game as third party, but he was also the first third party to be considered expendable. If one is a point, then the other is just as much a point. If you honestly did not understand that was the point that I made, then no wonder we are on different wavelengths. However, I attribute it to the diehard nature of the fanaticism, which is what I criticized in the first place

Actually, Snake is VERY vital to his home series. As the clone of Big Boss, he is symbolically set upon a journey to continue the legacy of Big Boss. To become the ultimate soldier. During the events of Metal Gear Solid (Twin Snakes), Snake has issues with staying the course, and ultimately goes rogue with Otacon. By the end of Snake's story, he goes a different path than Big Boss had, showing the light at the end of the tunnel. As someone who has played the whole series, I don't think you know exactly what you're talking about here.

If his core games can exist just as easily without him in it, then he is obviously not vital. I will admit that having not played every game in the series, I am not an expert on this. However, if he is not used in every core game, then by definition, he is not vital to the game.

You're not looking at the gameplay aspect of it.
With Snake's moveset, the best way to use him is as a trap setter. You put C4 down, throw grenades and what have you to control the space your opponent has to maneuver around the stage, thus trapping them into doing what you want them to. Similar to how sneaking through various locales is done in MGS. You make a noise around a wall, lead a soldier over to said noise, and take them. Essentially setting a trap. How exactly would you incorporate stealth anyway? This is a strawman reason if I ever saw one.

I pointed out the one, SINGLE, trap move that he has, actually. If you think that translates into his gameplay, then I don't think you've got a grasp on how much gameplay a single character can have.
How would you incorporate stealth into gameplay? That isn't something that I bother to think about because when I do tend to create a moveset for a character, I get upset that I prefer my ideas to Sakurai.
That said, to again reference PSASBR, Sly is a very stealthy character. Even Nathan Drake is to a better extent than Snake in Smash.
You are so gun-ho with this OPINION that he is 'one of the most unique characters in the game,' but I stress opinion, because that is a soundless claim you make. He is no more unique than at least half the roster, and is another big example of your fanaticism taking lead. I'd like to hear what it is about him that you think IS so unique, as far as gameplay goes.

Simply saying, "He doesn't represent stealth. FAIL!" is constricting, and not the purpose of every character in Smash Bros. Snake represents his series through the weapons he uses, and the tactics one must use within the game. If we're going to talk about how a character doesn't represent a game to a T, how does Captain Falcon perfectly represent F-Zero, Marth for FE, or any of the Star Fox characters perfectly represent Star Fox? They don't. They don't have to either to be fun. You know, the purpose of the game?

I didn't make the claim that any of them did represent their series very well, though certainly Marth does. My claim is that to a true fan of Snake in Metal Gear, I find it funny that he is considered to be well done, because he doesn't have a playstyle that reflects much anything of his games, particularly any unique factor. The fact is, Snake's moveset could be given a visual overhaul, and it could apply to dozens of other characters, and is not indicative of his franchise because you don't have to be stealthy to pull any of it off. I'm sorry that you, as a fan of the genre, think that if he played as such, he would not be fun as a character.

 

[Kenith]

People complain about the SSE and Smash Tour and everything but I didn't even think Melee's adventure mode was all that great. It was fine... but nothing special.

Well, I like both Melee and Brawl's Adventure Mode, but hate Smash Tour. What does that say about me?

 

[Deathlightning21]

Well, I like both Melee and Brawl's Adventure Mode, but hate Smash Tour. What does that say about me?

You don't like board games?

 

[Kenith]

Who's ready for Ubisoft to announce that grass is green tomorrow?
Or tell us about a fake rumour two days late?

 

[pupNapoleon]

Snake certainly isn't a legend when it comes to Nintendo, but video games in general? Oh hell yeah. Not thinking so is just the ignorance of a Nintendo fan. When people think of iconic characters of the PS1 era the ones that come to mind are Crash, Cloud, Lara Croft, Spyro, and Snake. For the PS2 the ones that come to mind are Kratos, Sora, Jak, Ratchet, and Snake. And I'd say that the biggest characters on the PS3 were Nathan Drake, Sackboy, Kratos, and you guessed it, Sanke. So what I'm getting at is is that Sakurai should make Playstation All-Stars 2 and put Snake in it.

I want to again state that, the more qualifiers we add to 'legendary,' the more caveats we add.
To me, a legendary character from a video game is known to people who don't play video games, and quite frankly, has been transformed to being explored in other mediums. The character itself transcends the very home it comes from.

Now, saying someone is merely 'well known, associated with a series which was renound in its way to gaming,' sure. Snake is that. But I don't think that is what a legendary character is. A legendary character doesn't even need to be given a frame of being a video game character.

"Weapons and Assist Trophies that boggle the mind!"

"Solid Snake and Sonic join the Brawl!"

Whilst Kyogre and Nintendog were shown as examples of "Weapons and Assist Trophies" they themselves were clearly not themselves major selling points, otherwise it would have specifically been "Weapons and Assist Trophies like Kyogre and Nintendog that boggle the mind!"

With Snake he got his own specific section in said cover, being named-dropped, with the cover making a big deal out of him joining the Brawl. If it was merely just the concept of third-party characters that was advertised with Solid Snake's fame being irrelevant or unfounded, it would have been "Sonic and other third-party character join the battle." But it doesn't.... almost as if Nintendo recognizes he is popular enough to help sell the game to a wider audience... which, of course they do.

Of course Nintendo recognizes he is popular to a wider audience. No question. However, what I disagree with so vehemently is that he was, as you claimed, a major selling point to the game. I'm not even sure 3rd party characters as a whole are a major selling point, but certainly not Snake, individually.

It's funny... because this claim keeps being brought up that Snake ushered in all third party characters. I personally think it is the other way around... Sakurai allowed Snake to be in despite being a third party character, because he was asked. Upon further thought and request, he decided to add in Sonic, because he viewed that as being in aesthetic of Smash, and of a similar mind in the fun. Then, in this game, he expanded that populous of third party with characters that specifically fit the idea of what he wanted third parties to be. After strengthening this idea of what he wanted from third party characters, he then realized that Snake did not fit the bill, and was thusly, not brought back.

Who's ready for Ubisoft to announce that grass is green tomorrow?
Or tell us about a fake rumour two days late?

Considering we only were told through Screwattack, and the only thing he seems to screw is his reputation, I doubt Ubisoft ever said they were speaking tomorrow.

 

[MYU2]

Who's ready for Ubisoft to announce that grass is green tomorrow?
Or tell us about a fake rumour two days late?

Statement from Ubisoft
"The leak is fake, thank you for your time."