So basically, being a reoccuring character is irrelevant if you aren't "dah hip noo charucter u need 2 sapport". Well, ****, guess that means we should have so many goddamn third-parties it'd lose why it's a Nintendo series. :/
Seriously, though; if I was forced by Sakurai to choose between Ridley, who's pretty much the Bowser to Samus' Mario, and Anthony Higgs....which one do you
honestly think more people would know (and thus generate more profit)? Certainly not the one-off character who was one of the very few saving factors of an otherwise poorly-written mess of a franchise killer, that's for
damn sure.
Reccurring characters are
always much more necessary in a
crossover fighting game specifically celebrating Nintendo's history than one-offs. That's the same damn reason people loathe Dark Pit's entire existance; he's a last-minute addon because Sakurai just wanted to give him a "unique" Final Smash (which is just a clone of the Light Arrow), and other characters could have been made clones over him, like Dixie Kong. He's literally just tacked on to say "HEY GUYS, KID ICARUS IS RELEVANT NOW! BUY UPRISING!".
I'm pretty sure everyone would be absolutely
livid if they put in one of the Tikis over King K.Rool just because they're the hip new villains. Recent appearances don't matter for some characters; they're iconic enough to be considered all-stars. That's why K.Rool is so popular; he's
the villain of the DKC games. The Tikis and Snowmads were nice distractions, but the most iconic DK villains are K.Rool and the Kremlings. Ridley is
the villain of the Metroid games, the mortal enemy of the main character and the one character with real personal ties to her that
isn't one-off. If someone thinks of Metroid characters, they think of Samus, Ridley and Mother Brain.
This is a celebration of Nintendo's
history first and foremost, not a advertising bandwagon they can throw random crap on just to sell it. That's why I'm not too keen on Inkling being DLC (though I still respect people who
do want Inkling); Smash is celebrating Nintendo's
history, not whatever game is the newest. Historical relevance or iconic value should
always come before marketing in deciding Smash fighters.
For example;
- Sonic is the rival to Mario, having been the biggest threat to Nintendo's career throughout the 1990's.
- Pac-Man is a gaming legend, having even more reach than Mario himself. He'd deserved a spot in Smash since the begining of it all.
- Mega Man, despite not being as obviously gigantic as Pac-Man and Sonic, is still a hugely popular series with a large fanbase; and Mega Man also had some of the most popular games on the NES. Everybody who knows about Capcom knows Mega Man.
- Snake revolutionized the stealth-action game and is the progenitor of the genre. He's pretty much nearing gaming legend status.
These are all third-parties, but the rule applies to first-parties, as well.
- Charizard is probably one of the most popular Poket Monsters in the world next to Pikachu, Mewtwo and Jigglypuff, and is the mascot of two separate games (Pokemon Red and it's remake, Fire Red). It also plays a large role in the Kanto and Johto seasons of the anime.
- Fox was the star of a game that pretty much revolutionized an industry, since it was the first 3D console game on a system that had, beforehand, only been able to use sprites. Star Fox 64 also innovated the industry thanks to the Rumble Pak, as well.
- R.O.B was a Trojan Horse that let Nintendo singlehandedly revive the dying video game industry and ultimately making everything up until now possible. Without R.O.B, the NES would probably have been unable to sell.
- Samus is the female protagonist. Without Samus, females in gaming would have been stuck as Peach-like characters. That's...pretty damn important.
Importance is always a more important factor than anything, because it means the audience
knows the character more. I bet if Anthony got revealed, half of the fanbase would just be like "Who the **** is this guy?". If Ridley got revealed, I'm pretty sure everyone would be screaming.