Character Discussion Thread

[SmashChu]

Does ANYBODY here know how the deals to get characters not owned by Nintendo into Smash go down? What the contracts entail, how long it takes, how DLC would even apply to it?

Of course not, unless one of you is actually a member of the Smash Bros development team, all we have to go off of are the few things that have been said about it in the past, and that was in regards to the base game, not DLC. The only things that we have to go off of for 3rd parties in relation to DLC is that A) A ton of companies want their characters in, and B) A Nintendo representative reassured that we can vote for any video game character, not just Nintendo ones.

For all we know, adding in third party characters via DLC might be desirable by Nintendo. Character DLC is, after all, based on the character, adding in a popular protagonist owned by another company that millions of people would recognize certainly wouldn't hurt Nintendo or the profits they could make from said character.

Or maybe they don't want any third party DLC characters at all. I dunno, and nobody else here does either. But speaking in absolutes that "There is no possibility of Banjo happening cause MICROSOFT" or "Indie characters could never happen, they aren't iconic enough to be in Smash" is rather shortsighted. It's DLC, a completely new possibility that Sakurai hasn't said much on. He's been adamant about 3rd party characters having to basically be gaming icons in order to get into the base game, but DLC? Maybe that's OK in his book.

This this is an issue of burden of proof. Just because no one here knows all the specifics does not mean that their claims are untrue.

Whether you want to believe it or not, there are significant issues adding most of these characters into Smash. The point of this thread is to discuss these things, which is what people are doing. If they can't bring up these issues, then this thread ceases to have any meaning.

This is an example of this. People keep saying that it's much harder for Banjo because Banjo is from a different First Party developer. How exactly does that change the agreements and processes? The implications are bigger, obviously, but do you have any actual proof that the process changes? Them taking away Rare is valid, but I'd argue that a certain blue hedgehog had quite a bit of bad history with Nintendo as well, and look how that turned out. Banjo isn't involved with Nintendo consoles anymore, but neither was Snake.

How about putting Banjo in Smash is advertising a competitor's IP. Banjo is a Microsoft property, plain and simple.

 

[Deleted member]

Enough of a competitor that, to my knowledge, a Microsoft IP has never shown up on a Nintendo home console, or vice versa.

Actually, with DK64 this now no longer true. Microsoft owns the rights to Jetpac, and that has now made its way to WiiU.

I know I'm grasping at straws, but this is something that was not possible before. I'll elaborate in a bit.

Metal Gear may heavily favour the Sony platforms, but at least they're not exclusive to them. At least they support Nintendo to some extent, even if that extent is small. Metal Gear does show up from time to time on Nintendo platforms, and after Snake was in Brawl, probably sold better than it would've otherwise. Weren't there rumors about MGSV being planned for the Wii U before all the third-parties got cold feet and ran away?

AFAIK the rumors were for Metal Gear Rising, and that was canned by Konami until "they saw enough demand to justify making a port." They felt that the WiiU simply didn't have a big enough install base to make it worth the investment.

In the same vein however. Rare IP does also occasionally show up on Nintendo consoles, even if it's to a small extent. How is that any different from Snake?

I would agree anyone willing to buy an XB1 for Banjo would buy all that other stuff as well, but what about all those people who already own an XB1 or are planning to get it for reasons other than Banjo, yet will buy the Banjo game? XB1 fans might not buy the system for cartoony platformers, but a lot of them probably grew up with Banjo and the 64, so they might feel inclined to pick the game up regardless.

The thing is, people who would buy an XB1 for Banjo probably already own a Wii U... it's not like Banjo's fanbase is mostly made up of Xbox owners. Hell, most people still in Banjo's fanbase who have kept up with gaming probably own Smash too. Sure Nintendo would make a good profit on the DLC (as would Microsoft), and it would entice a few people into picking up the game maybe (dunno about a Wii U), but the overall benefits would weigh much more heavily in Microsoft's favour.

I feel this is impossible to prove Katie, but lets look at the majority of the install base. Most Banjo fans are Nintendo fans. Hell, I'd say 99% are. With the 1% being people who like the Xbox, and then played Banjo on the Live Arcade. The majority of those people have expressed interest in seeing the Bear and Bird in Smash, and we can assume a large chunk would buy a WiiU.

Now, for the people who'd get a Xbox who already own a WiiU, again, I don't feel it's so many either. The number are not very clear either way, and in the end it's a personal opinion no matter which side you take. However, this I think we can agree on. 99% of Xbox owners probably wouldn't buy a new Banjo game if it was released. A lot of Xbox and PS4 owners are "hardcore gamers who play mature games for mature gamers such as myself" AKA edgy teens who only play CoD, Halo, and scream over the mic. I would know, I used to own a 360.

Nintendo and M$ messing with Rare IP mainly appeal to Rare fans, the majority of which are loyal to Nintendo in one way or another (even if they might not like the WiiU), and would in fact support whatever content Nintendo put out over M$. If a good Banjo game came out they'd probably buy an Xbone for it, but most would also buy a WiiU if they don't already have one.

You think people wouldn't have supported Goldeneye on VC? It was one of the most popular games on the platform, Nintendo knows that. All the parties involved knew that. But Nintendo decided to deny themselves profit for the sake of denying their competitor profit. Trust me, if they weren't competitors, that's not a move Nintendo would've made.

And it doesn't matter what is going to come of Banjo's actual series, that's not in Nintendo's hands, and the profits from that wouldn't effect them. It's no incentive for them.

I don't really want to rag on Banjo's chances any more, they're still my most wanted character and defending why they might not make it bums me out, but it is what I believe.

Well I got some things on that:

During November 2006, Nintendo of America president Reggie Fils-Aime announced that Nintendo was exploring the possibility of adding the Nintendo 64 classic GoldenEye 007to the Virtual Console, despite a complicated situation in which the game's developer Rare is owned by Microsoft (producers of the rival Xbox 360 console) and the video game rights to the James Bond franchise are held by Activision. He stated, "We would love to see it [on the Virtual Console], so we're exploring all the rights issues. On January 7, 2008, Xbox Evolved reported that an updated version of GoldenEye 007 would be released on Xbox Live Arcade. However on January 11, 2008, 1UP.com reported that a GoldenEye port (as opposed to a remake) had been in development at Rare for several months, but stated that the title would not be released on the Xbox Live Arcade since "Microsoft and Nintendo couldn't agree on the financial side of things". Perfect Dark, a Nintendo 64 title which used the same engine as GoldenEye would later make it to Xbox Live Arcade, however. As of August 2013, Microsoft has made no comment on further effort to acquire the rights to the game and release GoldenEye 007 on XBLA.[11][12] It was revealed at E3 2010 that a new Goldeneye video game would be released for the Wii in November 2010.

Also, this:

http://spong.com/article/14592/Goldeneye-007-Saga-Who-Owns-What

Key part I wanna highlight is:

"despite a proposed deal from Microsoft that would have seen not only GoldenEye released on the Virtual Console but other, unspecified Rare games... as well".

Apparently the reason why Rare games like Banjo and DK64 were not on VC during the Wii are cause negotiations for 007 fell through.

However, just last week we saw DK64 get announced for WiiU VC. Something before impossible. So, it's clear negotiations between Spencer and Nintendo are more smooth.

It seems we were on the verge of seeing more Rare IP on Nintendo VC, and Spencer has gone on record to say that he's open to make negotiations for Banjo with Nintendo. So, chances are better than you might think.

I'd say given the hype, if the support is there Nintendo will be inclined to make negotiations, since it seems they've tried in the past. If all goes well, we might just get what we want. No just Banjo in Smash, but more Rare IP on VC. And if DK64 is to serve as an indicator, perhaps chances are higher than people give credit.


It basically all comes down to fan demand, and negotiations. That's all. I suppose we can ultimately blame Iwata if it doesn't happen.

 

[Kalimdori]

This this is an issue of burden of proof. Just because no one here knows all the specifics does not mean that their claims are untrue.

Whether you want to believe it or not, there are significant issues adding most of these characters into Smash. The point of this thread is to discuss these things, which is what people are doing. If they can't bring up these issues, then this thread ceases to have any meaning.

I am not trying to pretend issues don't exist, that isn't my issue here. My issue is that, even though their claims may not be untrue, doesn't suddenly mean their claims ARE true. I'm not saying to the discussion altogether, I'm saying to stop treating assumptions as facts.

How about putting Banjo in Smash is advertising a competitor's IP. Banjo is a Microsoft property, plain and simple.

And this hurts Nintendo... how?

Let's consider the possibilities:

Let's say Banjo is added into Smash Bros, he get's an Amiibo, maybe Virtual Console versions of his games, and Microsoft capitalizes on this by announcing a new Banjo and Kazooie game. People are excited, they buy the DLC and the game, maybe even an Xbox One just to play it, Microsoft easily benefits more then Nintendo in the long run. So it would be smart not to include Banjo in Smash, right?

Thing is, that will happen regardless of whether Banjo is in Smash Bros or not. If a Banjo Threeie (No Nuts and Bolts nonsense, an actual sequel) is in development, it will gain massive attention and people will buy it.

But if Nintendo does include Banjo in Smash, they could make a profit off of a Microsoft owned IP, something that a Microsoft bigwig is apparently OK with. Would it be a greater profit then if they simply used a different character? I don't know, and you don't either, too many unknown variables to know that. But it would gain a massive amount of attention, just look at how the very MENTION of the possibility exploded. If that profit is worth it for Nintendo, what exactly is the issue? Is it really that for Nintendo and Microsoft to make a deal that would benefit both parties?

 

[DJ3DS]

Regarding a couple of questions in earlier pages:

Pre-release, I supported K Rool and Pac Man. The former as a character I still think would be extremely fun, and the latter because he is legendary.

In terms of other 3rd parties, there are none I'm massively worried about getting, and none will quite match the hype the current three give. If I had to choose one I'd go with Simon Belmont though, as he just fits.

 

[Deleted member]

Let's consider the possibilities:

Let's say Banjo is added into Smash Bros, he get's an Amiibo, maybe Virtual Console versions of his games, and Microsoft capitalizes on this by announcing a new Banjo and Kazooie game. People are excited, they buy the DLC and the game, maybe even an Xbox One just to play it, Microsoft easily benefits more then Nintendo in the long run. So it would be smart not to include Banjo in Smash, right?

Thing is, that will happen regardless of whether Banjo is in Smash Bros or not. If a Banjo Threeie (No Nuts and Bolts nonsense, an actual sequel) is in development, it will gain massive attention and people will buy it.

But if Nintendo does include Banjo in Smash, they could make a profit off of a Microsoft owned IP, something that a Microsoft bigwig is apparently OK with. Would it be a greater profit then if they simply used a different character? I don't know, and you don't either, too many unknown variables to know that. But it would gain a massive amount of attention, just look at how the very MENTION of the possibility exploded. If that profit is worth it for Nintendo, what exactly is the issue? Is it really that for Nintendo and Microsoft to make a deal that would benefit both parties?

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Banjo already promotes itself. Whether people buy it or not depends on people's faith in current Rare products. Nintendo capitalizing on that hype COULD prove to be more beneficial for them than otherwise.

 

[Sid-cada]

Whatever plans Nintendo has for that won't interfere with them trying to make profit of their current console. They're making DLC, time or not, your argument applies to ALL DLC characters, NOT just Banjo or 3rd parties. So if what you were saying is true, then this ballot wouldn't even exist.

The point I think you missed is creator permissions.

Compared to getting some new character from, say, Nintendo EAD, HAL, or even The Pokemon Company (and Creatures Inc.) to approve of content isn't as difficult as it is getting something from a third party. A character closer to Nintendo likely has less bureaucracy to jump through than a third party character.

Nintendo pretty much owns every non-third party character on the lineup, so they can do what they want with them. A third party is more likely to have more restrictions, and bigger ones. Hence, at least months worth of dealing with lawyers explaining what they must, can, and cannot do are necessary.

Chances are that most third parties would not want another company touching their property without some consultation, so chances are the work that can be done without any sort of consent would be minimal. What's worse is that if there is some sort of disagreement, then it could be weeks of back and forth before work can resume. Properties closer to Nintendo have more freedom of movement in that respect.


Heck, take a look at the joke-filled trophies. Notice how the closer the trophy is with the main house of Nintendo, the more silly they tend to be?
Also, did you note how much shilling there is about how Mega Man's move set has moves from throughout his history, to the point where a large number of tips just point out "This move came from this game?" Who do you think made this reinforcement?


How much time do you think it would take to make all the necessary arrangements, before they can even start a move set? At the very least, they won't hand over their character on a silver platter, and spend a good amount of time and money working out kinks, while also watching over the back during development.

 

[Kalimdori]

The point I think you missed is creator permissions.

Compared to getting some new character from, say, Nintendo EAD, HAL, or even The Pokemon Company (and Creatures Inc.) to approve of content isn't as difficult as it is getting something from a third party. A character closer to Nintendo likely has less bureaucracy to jump through than a third party character.

Nintendo pretty much owns every non-third party character on the lineup, so they can do what they want with them. A third party is more likely to have more restrictions, and bigger ones. Hence, at least months worth of dealing with lawyers explaining what they must, can, and cannot do are necessary.

Chances are that most third parties would not want another company touching their property without some consultation, so chances are the work that can be done without any sort of consent would be minimal. What's worse is that if there is some sort of disagreement, then it could be weeks of back and forth before work can resume. Properties closer to Nintendo have more freedom of movement in that respect.


Heck, take a look at the joke-filled trophies. Notice how the closer the trophy is with the main house of Nintendo, the more silly they tend to be?
Also, did you note how much shilling there is about how Mega Man's move set has moves from throughout his history, to the point where a large number of tips just point out "This move came from this game?" Who do you think made this reinforcement?


How much time do you think it would take to make all the necessary arrangements, before they can even start a move set? At the very least, they won't hand over their character on a silver platter, and spend a good amount of time and money working out kinks, while also watching over the back during development.

Months?!

I'm no law student, nowhere near it, but... MONTHS?! Unless you actually have some sort of inside information on how these kind of meetings work, this is probably a hilarious over exaggeration.

This isn't the 1900's, it's not like they have to mail responses to and fro, with weeks worth of waiting in between. Schedule a press conference, online if needed, get everybody who needs to be involved present, discuss the details of what can and cannot be done. Again, I don't know how these kind of things go down, but if negotiations in total took even a SINGLE months worth of time I'd be shocked.

 

[Sid-cada]

Months?!

I'm no law student, nowhere near it, but... MONTHS?! Unless you actually have some sort of inside information on how these kind of meetings work, this is probably a hilarious over exaggeration.

This isn't the 1900's, it's not like they have to mail responses to and fro, with weeks worth of waiting in between. Schedule a press conference, online if needed, get everybody who needs to be involved present, discuss the details of what can and cannot be done. Again, I don't know how these kind of things go down, but if negotiations in total took even a SINGLE months worth of time I'd be shocked.

I'll admit, I don't have any information on this. I'm just basing this on what I'm thinking, and that as far as I know everything legal has to have some sort of documentation. Otherwise, problems could arise.

Of course, it's probably not that simple as talking face to face, as a translator may be necessary as Rare is currently stated somewhere in England, and someone on both sides has to take notes, then put it through the lawyers and the superiors (assuming they are not involved), before sending ti to the other and cross checking.

Also this still doesn't take into account the looming over-lookers, who would suddenly say "Nope, don't like that, change it," mid-development and could cost lost time that starts to add up, especially if it was on something going on for a while.


Eh, for all I know you could be right. Still, I remember something about how Japan is still fairly old-fashioned and how some companies still don't even have fax machines or something? I dunno, but something like that was posted somewhere on the previous character discussion boards that I read.

Really, this is just my pessimism getting in the way.

 

[Arcanir]

Actually, with DK64 this now no longer true. Microsoft owns the rights to Jetpac, and that has now made its way to WiiU.

Nintendo still owns the rights for DK64, Rare even said as much. That doesn't necessarily mean that there weren't any issues to work out, but there would probably a lot less to deal with then there would be with getting completely Microsoft-owned games on like Goldeneye or Banjo-Kazooie.

 

[SmashChu]

I am not trying to pretend issues don't exist, that isn't my issue here. My issue is that, even though their claims may not be untrue, doesn't suddenly mean their claims ARE true. I'm not saying to the discussion altogether, I'm saying to stop treating assumptions as facts.

What your saying holds no water. By the same logic," the claims may be true, doesn't suddenly mean their claim ARE untrue.

If you don't agree with their standpoint, then make a counter argument. Otherwise, you're wasting everyone's time.

And this hurts Nintendo... how?

You're kidding right?

Banjo is a Microsoft IP. By putting Banjo in the game, you are advertising for the competition. Lets say Banjo is in Smash. If fans want more Banjo, the only way to get it is to go out and get a Microsoft console. Oh, and the agreement to use Banjo will probably stipulate that Nintendo will have to pay Microsoft to do this. Let's not forget the inevitable Banjo amiibo which will be a legal nightmare. This mean the opportunity cost is INCREDIBLY high. Nintendo could just as easily add K Rool, Wolf, or Inkling and achieve the same result, earn the same profit, and not have to use a competitors IP.

 

[Arcadenik]

As much as I want Banjo in Smash, I seriously cannot see him getting an amiibo if it is only going to work on Smash and nothing else?

I mean, the selling point of amiibos is to use them in many different games. So why would a Microsoft amiibo work on Nintendo games? Do we expect it to work on future games beyond Smash?

 

[Kalimdori]

What your saying holds no water. By the same logic," the claims may be true, doesn't suddenly mean their claim ARE untrue.

If you don't agree with their standpoint, then make a counter argument. Otherwise, you're wasting everyone's time.

Are we having the same argument? I'm arguing that an assumption shouldn't be considered a fact, because many are treating as such, and not even considering the point because of it. What the hell are you even talking about?

You're kidding right?

Banjo is a Microsoft IP. By putting Banjo in the game, you are advertising for the competition. Lets say Banjo is in Smash. If fans want more Banjo, the only way to get it is to go out and get a Microsoft console. Oh, and the agreement to use Banjo will probably stipulate that Nintendo will have to pay Microsoft to do this. Let's not forget the inevitable Banjo amiibo which will be a legal nightmare. This mean the opportunity cost is INCREDIBLY high. Nintendo could just as easily add K Rool, Wolf, or Inkling and achieve the same result, earn the same profit, and not have to use a competitors IP.

Let's say Banjo is added into Smash Bros, he get's an Amiibo, maybe Virtual Console versions of his games, and Microsoft capitalizes on this by announcing a new Banjo and Kazooie game. People are excited, they buy the DLC and the game, maybe even an Xbox One just to play it, Microsoft easily benefits more then Nintendo in the long run. So it would be smart not to include Banjo in Smash, right?

Thing is, that will happen regardless of whether Banjo is in Smash Bros or not. If a Banjo Threeie (No Nuts and Bolts nonsense, an actual sequel) is in development, it will gain massive attention and people will buy it.

But if Nintendo does include Banjo in Smash, they could make a profit off of a Microsoft owned IP, something that a Microsoft bigwig is apparently OK with. Would it be a greater profit then if they simply used a different character? I don't know, and you don't either, too many unknown variables to know that. But it would gain a massive amount of attention, just look at how the very MENTION of the possibility exploded. If that profit is worth it for Nintendo, what exactly is the issue? Is it really that for Nintendo and Microsoft to make a deal that would benefit both parties?

Do you just single out certain parts of messages in your mind, happily glazing over anything that might disagree with what you are saying? If so, please teach me your ways, I'd love to tunnel vision my way through Youtube comments.

If fans want a Banjo platformer, they'll buy an Xbox One and play a Banjo platformer, having Banjo in Smash won't change a thing about that, as Microsoft would advertise a new Banjo game to death with or without Smash Bros. Yes, they'd probably have to pay for the character, but said character is much more popular then the others you have listed, and as such, could possibly earn enough profit to justify his inclusion. (Inklings would earn the same profit as Banjo? Are you being serious?)

You're talking as if you're reading directly out of a book, listing standard procedures that work in most cases, but lacking specifics and any actual evidence as to why this situation won't happen. How much would this HIGH opportunity cost be? How much profit would Nintendo possibly make off of other characters in comparison? How much of a legal nightmare would a Banjo Amiibo be, how much more so then the Sonic/Pacman/Megaman Amiibos? Is it impossible for the scenario I listed to happen? Do you have any answers to these questions?

Of course not, nobody here does. With the response to the possibility of Banjo in Smash I'd be willing to bet that Microsoft will at least attempt to open negotiations with Nintendo for his inclusion. What kind of deal they will/will not make is up in the air, but the fact of the matter is the possibility and the demand is there, and you are listing only one possible deal that they could make, and a very shortsighted one at that. Generally when you want to negotiate something, you, well, NEGOTIATE, so the other party agrees to said negotiation. Say they add in Banjo, Nintendo pays a large amount of money for use of the IP, but keeps profits from Amiibo and DLC? Or Nintendo pays a small amount of money, but share a split of profits for the Amiibo/DLC. Maybe Microsoft throws in Banjo virtual console games, how those profits are split is up could go several ways.

There are many, many different ways this could go down, and writing them all off because IT'S MICROSOFT is incredibly shortsighted.

As much as I want Banjo in Smash, I seriously cannot see him getting an amiibo if it is only going to work on Smash and nothing else?

I mean, the selling point of amiibos is to use them in many different games. So why would a Microsoft amiibo work on Nintendo games? Do we expect it to work on future games beyond Smash?

Several games work with any kind of Amiibo, and several of the current Amiibo (Sadly ) probably will only get a specific use in Smash.

 

[Spazzy_D]

Nintendo would putting Banjo in Smash ONLY benefits Microsoft. It is free advertising, and I doubt that Banjo would sell considerably more then someone like K. Rool, and a portion of the profits may yet have to go to Microsoft.

I could only see it happening in the context of a larger and rather unprecedented deal with Microsoft.

 

[Capybara Gaming]

As much as I want Banjo in Smash, I seriously cannot see him getting an amiibo if it is only going to work on Smash and nothing else?

I mean, the selling point of amiibos is to use them in many different games. So why would a Microsoft amiibo work on Nintendo games? Do we expect it to work on future games beyond Smash?

Wii Fit Trainer unlocks content in Hyrule Warriors. Banjo wouldn't be exclusively Smash, just that would be the only game it would have Banjo-exclusive content.

What your saying holds no water. By the same logic," the claims may be true, doesn't suddenly mean their claim ARE untrue.

If you don't agree with their standpoint, then make a counter argument. Otherwise, you're wasting everyone's time.


You're kidding right?

Banjo is a Microsoft IP. By putting Banjo in the game, you are advertising for the competition. Lets say Banjo is in Smash. If fans want more Banjo, the only way to get it is to go out and get a Microsoft console. Oh, and the agreement to use Banjo will probably stipulate that Nintendo will have to pay Microsoft to do this. Let's not forget the inevitable Banjo amiibo which will be a legal nightmare. This mean the opportunity cost is INCREDIBLY high. Nintendo could just as easily add K Rool, Wolf, or Inkling and achieve the same result, earn the same profit, and not have to use a competitors IP.

Or, y'know, Microsoft could decide not to be a total prick, Phil's a nice guy and he's head of the company.

 

[JaidynReiman]

Or, y'know, Microsoft could decide not to be a total prick, Phil's a nice guy and he's head of the company.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Spencer_(Microsoft)

Phil Spencer is the head of Microsoft's Xbox division and Microsoft Studios.

Lolwut? He's the head of one division (Microsoft's game studio), not the whole company.

 

[Capybara Gaming]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Spencer_(Microsoft)



Lolwut? He's the head of one division (Microsoft's game studio), not the whole company.

*derp*

Spoiler

That's what I meant.

 

[Kalimdori]

Nintendo would putting Banjo in Smash ONLY benefits Microsoft. It is free advertising, and I doubt that Banjo would sell considerably more then someone like K. Rool, and a portion of the profits my yet have to go to Microsoft.

I could only see it happening in the context of a larger and rather unprecedented deal with Microsoft.

Yes. Only Microsoft. Nintendo can't make any sort of profit or benefit from this whatsoever. Obviously.

*sarcasm*

 

[Spazzy_D]

Yes. Only Microsoft. Nintendo can't make any sort of profit or benefit from this whatsoever. Obviously.

*sarcasm*

The only way it would be cost effective is if Banjo would bring in more money then other DLC characters, and I'm not sure he really would, especially if Microsoft is taking a portion of that money.

Why make Banjo and advertise for your competitor, when you can make K. Rool, sell about the same amount of units, and not deal with the hassle?

 

[Deleted member]

Hello everyone!

First off, I'd liked to mention that I am excited for Mewtwo's return. I look forward to giving him a shot come April 15th as well as hopefully having an 8 Mewtwos match before the college semester ends. But Lucas's announcement sent me into a jubilee. I was only expecting details regarding Mewtwo, but once I saw Lucas's face, I jumped up and down in joy and my hands were shaking out of this confirmation. I have come to love Lucas very much recently and I look forward to making him one of my mains for Super Smash Bros. Wii U. The Smash Ballot I am also excited for because I look forward to see what will come out of it and I have a lot of say about my feelings towards potential DLC additions.

Currently I am expecting five to six characters to be DLC including Mewtwo and Lucas; at least three of them being veterans and two unique newcomers with room for one more veteran or newcomer (more likely the former). I am expecting Wolf to be announced at E3 as the DLC character. If two DLC characters gets announced at E3, my expectations will rise to six or seven characters, but I am not expecting that to happen. This means that competition for the remaining spots will be very intense and I'd advised everyone to keep expectations in check with regards to any newcomers (as well as any potential veterans beyond maybe Wolf). I'm not sure if we will get characters from the ballot for DLC, but I definitely think it will lead to consideration of the most wanted characters in the ballot.

Having said that, what do I feel could make up the remaining two to three spots? Inklings I feel are the most likely newcomers at this point. Splatoon looks like it could do very well critically and commercially and while I don't think they are in the works now, I do think that the likely critical praise Splatoon gets as well as the substantial increase in demand for Inklings will get them as DLC and if not, almost certainly in the default roster for Smash 6. They're the only newcomers I would be surprised to see excluded.

Roy is someone I feel who's chances are underestimated. He's a highly requested character who just happens to be an easy character to work with. I believe that veterans will be prioritized over newcomers (they take relatively little work in comparisons to newcomers) and after Wolf, I believe that Roy could very well be next in line should there be a fourth veteran. Being a highly popular character after all of these years and despite many people lambasting Roy for being a "Marth clone", "terrible in Fire Emblem 6", "not relevant" is not something to brush aside and even as a Marth clone, Roy would still be well received simply because of how fun he was to play with in Melee.

I don't think we will be seeing any new third-party characters. 99.99% of the remaining third-parties can't hope to match up to the likes of Snake, Sonic, Mega Man, and Pac-Man and I see no reason why Sakurai will make his stance on third-parties looser. Indies to me I feel are especially unlikely because of how obscure they are and none of them can be considered legendary and I feel companies like Nicalis, Inticreates, and especially Team Meat (who's suggestion, Super Meat Boy, doesn't even have a game on a Nintendo platform) don't understand how difficult it is to get third-parties into a Super Smash Bros. game. But I'll probably rant more about this later. Banjo-Kazooie would be an amazing addition to see, but I see no circumstances where a first-party Microsoft character would make it as DLC. The only new third-party I feel that could feasibly get in under Sakurai's strict criteria is Bomberman; but even then he's a dead franchise that would have to compete with Snake, so he's out as well. Snake is the only third-party that could plausibly return and even he has issues with returning as well. And it goes without saying, but characters like Ridley and Takamaru who are in roles beyond a trophy will almost certainly not be DLC although they may be in consideration for Smash 6 if they receive high enough votes or other circumstances changes (assuming that a Smash 6 does happen).

Still I feel as the pool of potential additions are larger than what we think, even in such intensely competitive environments. I feel characters like Isaac, Dixie Kong, Krystal, and Bandanna Dee are relatively plausible for potential characters as well as others not as frequently mentioned. Ice Climbers and Chorus Kids I also feel could very well be DLC as well, but I feel people will not like to hear the reason why this is a possibility.

As for who I voted, that went towards King K. Rool. I loved Rare SNES and N64 days and love the Donkey Kong franchise; DKC was one of my favorite games on the SNES (as well as one of the first video games I've ever beaten) and I also have very fond memories of the GBA DKC2 game as well as Donkey Kong 64. Next to Diddy Kong, King K. Rool is my favorite character from the franchise. I like his costume scheme he had in the Donkey Kong series and I enjoy his insanity and his relentless pursuit towards destroying the dang dirty Kongs over the course of at least nine Donkey Kong games. I don't know how much of a shot he has at getting in, but from what I've seen, it looks as he may be the most wanted character yet. My hope is that fan demand is high enough to where he'll be considered for DLC or if not, will be enough for him to return into the Donkey Kong franchise (the latter of which I am very optimistic about), but we will see.

Regardless of what happens, the DLC character scene is bound to be crazy. The funny part will be how wrong we are with the DLC choices.

 

[G0LD3N L0TUS]

Regarding 3rd Parties, I`m in support of 3, in particular. The first is Snake, for hopefully obvious reasons. Next up, we have Rayman. I LOVE Rayman, and think he fits in with our current cast of third parties very well, sitting not too far behind the legends. Finally, there`s Banjo & Kazooie, who I never really gave me credit to. Having reconsidered, they would make great additions to the roster, and represent a good bit of Nintendo history as well.

 

[Geno Boost]

If I could pick a third party, it'd probably be Shantae, what about you guys and gals?

i am going to pick a characters that are closest to Nintendo and have something to do with Nintendo characters (like meeting mario) in the past
1. Geno (if square enix still owns him)
2. Banjo-kazooie
3. Bomberman
4. Rayman
5. Snake

 

[A10theHero]

The third party I obviously want is Spyro.
On the topic of third parties for DLC, I don't know if I've just been in the wrong places, but I haven't heard much support for Rayman. It might be because of that one well-crafted fake leak, but I thought that the support for him would be even greater than that for Banjo-kazooie. Yet I hear more talk about the Bird and Bear duo.

 

[ShrekItRalph]

I think Mewtwo, Lucas and Wolf will be the only cut vet's that will be DLC. Ice Climbers are still a problem for the 3ds but will likely be in Smash 5, I don't see Snake coming back, and the rest aren't popular enough to get the votes. I would rather them focus on new characters anyway.

Predictions for new characters: K. Rool, Inklings, Isacc and Wonder Red.

 

[Baskerville]

I really don't see Ice Climbers happening.

 

[LasermasterA]

I think Mewtwo, Lucas and Wolf will be the only cut vet's that will be DLC. Ice Climbers are still a problem for the 3ds but will likely be in Smash 5, I don't see Snake coming back, and the rest aren't popular enough to get the votes. I would rather them focus on new characters anyway.

Predictions for new characters: K. Rool, Inklings, Isacc and Wonder Red.

To be honest, that is the first time I have seen that spelling of Isaac.

Although I don't mind those predictions, sound good enough.

 

[Deleted member]

Nintendo still owns the rights for DK64, Rare even said as much. That doesn't necessarily mean that there weren't any issues to work out, but there would probably a lot less to deal with then there would be with getting completely Microsoft-owned games on like Goldeneye or Banjo-Kazooie.

The point was that previously DK64 couldn't be released on VC because it contained content exclusive to Rare (JetPac), which now belongs to M$.

In order to get 100% completion in DK64 you must collect the Rareware coin which requires you to beat the high score on Rare's arcade game: Jetpac. That IP has belonged M$ since the buyout, and obviously DK64 could not be released unless Nintendo got rights to THAT. Which apparently they recently have.

It's obvious Nintendo and M$ had some sort of discussion recently in which they negotiated how they would handle some Rare IP (it's probably also why the DKC trilogy was put back on there, iirc they were originally taken down because some of the content in them was still owned by M$, and after the 007 mess, they wanted it taken down). They did it to release one game, and not many qualms were had. Why couldn't they do this to release B-K, B-T, and Conker on VC as well as Banjo DLC in Smash, and perhaps an amiibo?

 

[Arcanir]

The point was that previously DK64 couldn't be released on VC because it contained content exclusive to Rare (JetPac), which now belongs to M$.

In order to get 100% completion in DK64 you must collect the Rareware coin which requires you to beat the high score on Rare's arcade game: Jetpac. That IP has belonged M$ since the buyout, and obviously DK64 could not be released unless Nintendo got rights to THAT. Which apparently they recently have.

It's obvious Nintendo and M$ had some sort of discussion recently in which they negotiated how they would handle some Rare IP (it's probably also why the DKC trilogy was put back on there, iirc they were originally taken down because some of the content in them was still owned by M$, and after the 007 mess, they wanted it taken down). They did it to release one game, and not many qualms were had. Why couldn't they do this to release B-K, B-T, and Conker on VC as well as Banjo DLC in Smash, and perhaps an amiibo?

You're playing down the differences between the two situations. DK64 does have a Rare game in it, but the fact of the matter is Nintendo still owns that entire game that contains Jetpac in the first place. Compare that to Banjo-Kazooie, Conker, and Rare's other titles, all of them are completely owned by Microsoft, no wiggle room to them, so there's no leg to stand on so to speak. So whatever potential issues exist with DK64, they likely pale in comparison to the number of issues that would exist for getting Rare's titles that are completely Microsoft-owned, especially when they're already on Microsoft's systems in the first place.

In short, they're not comparable situations, one Nintendo owns while the other Microsoft owns, and saying that Jetpac completely makes the former fact irrelevant ignores the other details that surround DK64.

 

[YoshiandToad]

If I could pick a third party, it'd probably be Shantae, what about you guys and gals?

Late to the party, but:

Rayman OR Bomberman is my top pick. Honestly both characters are pretty famous and I grew up with the latter, whilst the former has had a great showing of recent with Origins and Legends. I'd be completely satisfied with either.

After that I guess I'd be down for Banjo. I'm a pretty big Rare fan, but I've always preferred Conker to Banjo. No way the squirrel gets in over the bear/bird combo though.

On the other question I missed by ages:

Pre-Smash 4 Wants:
Toad, Meowth, Samurai Goroh, Dixie Kong, Pac-Man.

Got a total of ONE right.

Smash speculation period:
Toad(later to become Captain Toad when 3D World and especially Treasure Tracker was announced)
Meowth(Dead due to Pokeball)
Samurai Goroh(Dead due to AT)
Dillon(likewise)
Lip(Out due to Lip's Stick)
Pac-Man(correct)
Duck Hunt Dog(Thanks Arcadenik)
Dixie Kong(only female I wanted originally. One of the few important ones who didn't get in)
Impa
Bandana Waddle Dee
Vaati
Roy(not the Koopaling. Lucina killed this.)

I also jokingly supported Ludwig, being a fan of the Koopalings, but not expecting them. Then he was one of the few I actually got right. Whoops.

Post Smash DLC period(aka the present):
Captain Toad
Dixie Kong
Impa
Bandana Waddle Dee
....and then there's a whole bunch I wouldn't mind but don't actively support at all: Inklings, Chibi Robo, Bomberman, Rayman, Banjo, Wonder Red, Andy and Isaac.

 

[Deleted member]

You're playing down the differences between the two situations. DK64 does have a Rare game in it, but the fact of the matter is Nintendo still owns that entire game that contains Jetpac in the first place. Compare that to Banjo-Kazooie, Conker, and Rare's other titles, all of them are completely owned by Microsoft, no wiggle room to them, so there's no leg to stand on so to speak. So whatever potential issues exist with DK64, they likely pale in comparison to the number of issues that would exist for getting Rare's titles that are completely Microsoft-owned, especially when they're already on Microsoft's systems in the first place.

In short, they're not comparable situations, one Nintendo owns while the other Microsoft owns, and saying that Jetpac completely makes the former fact irrelevant ignores the other details that surround DK64.

If its as simple as you imply, then why was DK64 not released until now?

Likewise, if the head of the Xbox division has expressed interest in seeing Banjo in Smash, then what exactly is as difficult to overcome as you imply? Especially since you imply that the obstacle lies with Microsoft, the very same Microsoft that has said they'd like to see Banjo in Smash and has in the past has offered "undisclosed Rare IP" to appear on Nintendo VC, and will do so again if it can be of benefit to them somehow.

I have to disagree with that idea. The majority of the obstacles now lie in fan demand, and Nintendo's willingness to go through with it, and the demand is clearly there if Ukulele is any indicator.






Anyway, I don't quite understand the pessimism surrounding Banjo.

I get it if some people don't wanna see Banjo in Smash, I get it if some people would rather see other characters get in Smash, but I don't get it if someone WANTS to see Banjo in Smash, but chooses to be pessimistic about it for one reason or another. And this is something I've seen quite a lot in a few places (namely /v/ and here).

Look, even if it's 1%, a slim chance is still a chance.

This is as good a chance as Banjo is EVER gonna get to be in Smash. Whether M$ is making a Banjo game or not is irrelevant. The head of Xbox gave the OK, and the demand for it to happen is there. RIGHT NOW Banjo is relevant and viral since it's NOW that people are hyped up for a return to glory of ANY sort. It's NOW that news have been going around of Rare devs working on a spiritual successor. It's NOW that we have a legitimate chance to vote for characters to be in Smash, and the fact that it's DLC means there's more to gain for the individual parties involved should the character be released. The Banjo hype is real, and it exists NOW. Literally, all the stars have aligned to make something that once seemed impossible, possible.

The same cannot be said for the future. It quite simply won't ever get any better than this.

So, being people being pessimistic about the whole opportunity is irrational, since the possibility of it happening couldn't and will NEVER be any better. If you wanna see Banjo in, then go vote, and get other people to vote. Plain and simple. **** the odds, just do what you can, and hope for the best. That simple. 1% might as well be 100% in this case since it's at least a fighting chance, and that's something that never existed before.

EDIT: Somewhat unrelated, but those ARE words to live by, as it applies to EVERY area of life, not just some silly ballot.

If you allow yourself to be limited by pessimism and negativity then you'll only become your own prison, and you'll never get what you want in life. **** the odds, and **** thinking about it. If you want something, then make a clear plan of action, go through with it, and just do everything in your power to get it.

No, this doesn't guarantee you'll succeed. But at least you gave it your best, and that's something you can always be satisfied with.

 

[VioletScarlett]

I'm of the opinion that Wolf is the last veteran we'll see return. All the others are either old Melee clones (), have technical issues (), or have Third Party difficulties (). Wolf has very significant demand and has little standing in his way, so I think he's the only veteran left that's truly likely. I'd expect newcomers based on the Ballot after him.

What this guy said.

 

[MagnesD3]

The only way it would be cost effective is if Banjo would bring in more money then other DLC characters, and I'm not sure he really would, especially if Microsoft is taking a portion of that money.

Why make Banjo and advertise for your competitor, when you can make K. Rool, sell about the same amount of units, and not deal with the hassle?

Or sell king k Rool and banjo Kazooie as dlc and make double the profits!

 

[Dastardly Ridleylash]

You're playing down the differences between the two situations. DK64 does have a Rare game in it, but the fact of the matter is Nintendo still owns that entire game that contains Jetpac in the first place. Compare that to Banjo-Kazooie, Conker, and Rare's other titles, all of them are completely owned by Microsoft, no wiggle room to them, so there's no leg to stand on so to speak. So whatever potential issues exist with DK64, they likely pale in comparison to the number of issues that would exist for getting Rare's titles that are completely Microsoft-owned, especially when they're already on Microsoft's systems in the first place.

In short, they're not comparable situations, one Nintendo owns while the other Microsoft owns, and saying that Jetpac completely makes the former fact irrelevant ignores the other details that surround DK64.

Except technically Nintendo still owns the games Rare released on their systems in some manner; they were the publishers of the software. They still need to negotiate specifics with Microsoft, but saying that they're all completely owned by Microsoft is not quite accurate; Microsoft only owns the XBLA re-releases, not the original N64 versions. If Nintendo wants to release the original N64 games on the Virtual Console, the only obstacle would be negotiating the rights with Microsoft for permission to use the IP's (which could also end up with discussion about Banjo being DLC in Smash), not the games.

The only other Rare N64 game not on the VC is Diddy Kong Racing, which is a Nintendo-owned IP spinoff.

 

[SmashChu]

Or, y'know, Microsoft could decide not to be a total prick, Phil's a nice guy and he's head of the company.

It has absolutely nothing to do with that. Any third party company is going to expect compensation for using their IP. This increases the opportunity cost of making the character because your profits for the same level of sales will be less. Then there is the fact that putting Banjo in Smash Brothers causes a huge rift because its a competitor's francise. Nintendo would be advertising for Microsoft as you can only get Banjo on XBox One. The reverse is also true. Banjo in Smash may give XBox One owners a reason t buy a Wii U. The Amiibo will be a legal nightmare because Nitnendo will be sellinga toy of a competitor's IP. Everyone is looking from Microsoft, but Nintendo may also be the one that doesn't go with the idea. It will be easier and just as profitable to use Wolf, Inklings or K Rool than Banjo.

 

[WeirdChillFever]

I'm just sitting here thinking Sakurai doesn't think Banjo is as big as an icon as Mega Man, Sonic and Pac-Man are.

 

[Strofirko]

I'm just sitting here thinking Sakurai doesn't think Banjo is as big as an icon as Mega Man, Sonic and Pac-Man are.

You know,a big icon for smash should be recognized in all the 5 sides of the world,what most third parties flooding this ballot doesn't match with this.

 

[Dastardly Ridleylash]

What would be the most likely scenario if Sakurai does (in some fantasy realm) add Ridley as DLC, then? Would he just excuse the Pyrosphere one as the clone? Because Ridley obviously has a partial moveset completed (forward tilt, ledge attack, knockback, possibly even a Final Smash), but Ridley is on the unlikely side of things, unfortunately, because of A) Sakurai's opinions on the matter and B) His presence in the game as a stage boss.

I'm fully expecting King K.Rool as a possibility, though; Retro's head seems interested in the K.Rool movement, and I could see Sakurai adding K.Rool to promote a DK game.

 

[Maxilian]

I'm just sitting here thinking Sakurai doesn't think Banjo is as big as an icon as Mega Man, Sonic and Pac-Man are.

Well... that's because Banjo is not as big as an icon as Mega Man, Sonic and Pac-Man

 

[WeirdChillFever]

I can see it now,
The fans want him, Nintendo and Microsoft are ok with the deal.

Sakurai: "Not known enough try again"

 

[Maxilian]

I can see it now,
The fans want him, Nintendo and Microsoft are ok with the deal.

Sakurai: "Not known enough try again"

I'm pretty sure that if he gets into the list of most voted character, we will get him but i doubt it

 

[Wintropy]

inb4 banjo fans defend banjo's status as a cultural icon

The only third-party characters I think are likely at this point in time are Snake (owing to his veteran status) and Rayman (due to massive fan support and Ubisoft getting their foot in the door). I'm sorta maybe kinda vaguely of half-expecting Snake and I expect nothing substantial from Rayman. That said, I wouldn't rule anything out, either.

I think characters like Professor Layton and Shantae, while very popular and characters I would definitely like to see, don't have quite the same level of mass appeal as Sonic, Mega Man and Pac-Man do. What they do have - and this may turn out to be of great importance and should not be underestimated - is an extremely close and long-running relationship with Nintendo. I'm not expecting them to suddenly appear as playable character right off the bat, but getting some content in Smash is a very distinct possibility. That would, if nothing else, but them in a very favourable position going forward. Who knows? Maybe Nintendo will be willing to reward them for their dedication and we may yet see Layton and Shantae in Smash.