Character Discussion Thread

[Deleted member]

I never denied the greatness of the original game, so no. What I am saying is, Pac-Man is not recognised due to his character. Having character =/= being recognised because of it. Mario, Sonic, and Mega Man are all recognised BECAUSE of their character portrayals. Pac-Man is not. That is the key difference. And why Pac-Man doesn't fit in with these three, which seems to be basis of people wanting him (not to mention he is not even a platform game character, primarily).

So what if he's not recognized for his character? Is Mr. Game&Watch or ROB? There's more to a character than simply its personality - which Pac-Man does have, mind you - and there are none as iconic as Pac-Man. Of course his appeal is mostly for that reason, but it's not like he's Pong and he has in fact had plenty of platforming games.

Think about it this way!
Has PacMan ever been in a mainstream Mario crossover? NO!!!!!!!!!!
Has Sonic ever been in a mainstream Mario crossover? Yes, he's been in A LOT!!!!
Are the ties between Nintendo and SEGA strong? VERY STRONG!!!!!!
Are the ties between Namco and Nintendo strong? Not as much!
So yes, you were lying to me!

Could you stop overusing the caps lock and exclamation marks?

I don't know what you mean by "mainstream" Mario crossover, but Pac-Man has been in plenty of crossovers. Unless you want to disqualify them, what you're saying is plainly false. Not like Sonic has been in Mario Kart. If you can provide some legitimate evidence as to why Sega's relationship is stronger then I'd love to hear it, but as I said, Nintendo never entrusted a game as important as Smash Bros to Sega.

It's true that Namco has fighting game experience that Sega lacks, but in areas where Sega has expertise, I've not seen Nintendo give them such great responsibility. They may have a far richer history as rivals and later business allies, which is a completely different thing.

 

[Tepig2000]

I never denied the greatness of the original game, so no. What I am saying is, Pac-Man is not recognised due to his character. Having character =/= being recognised because of it. Mario, Sonic, and Mega Man are all recognised BECAUSE of their character portrayals. Pac-Man is not. That is the key difference. And why Pac-Man doesn't fit in with these three, which seems to be basis of people wanting him (not to mention he is not even a platform game character, primarily).

Of course. Because a character needs to be acknowledged for it's personality to be in Smash Bros..

 

[NickerBocker]

I never denied the greatness of the original game, so no. What I am saying is, Pac-Man is not recognised due to his character. Having character =/= being recognised because of it. Mario, Sonic, and Mega Man are all recognised BECAUSE of their character portrayals. Pac-Man is not. That is the key difference. And why Pac-Man doesn't fit in with these three, which seems to be basis of people wanting him (not to mention he is not even a platform game character, primarily).

Sounds pretty bias to me. The character portrayal is there, although it may not be as fleshed out, in the original arcade machine. There were cutscenes, to show off a little quirky humour that Pacman has, which keep in mind was completely new to the videogame world, and the images on the outside of the machine shows some personality to apply to the character. He comes from a time when imagination was required when playing these games. Sure, Mario and Sonic have personality, but that was because they were actually fleshed out in a certain direction. Mario being the courageous Italian plumber, jumping into fight with a "Wahoooo" and Sonic being "Cool and Blue." Pacman never really had that benefit. You're correct in saying he has very little character, but what he does accomplish is similar to what Smash is all about; ridiculous and imaginative. Smash isn't really meant to be taken seriously (at least, in the context of how these characters managed to find eachother) and Pacman was never really like that either (Not in the competitive nature of the game now, but the situation he was placed in.)

 

[Deleted member]

Sonic has never been in a mainstream Mario crossover. Olympics are spin-off games.


Aside from that, educate yourself:

Spoiler

Still think Namco has no Nintendo history?

 

[Rocket Raccoon]

I'm on the side that wants Pac-Man.

 

[Opossum]

As far as "Special Treatment" is concerned...


Game Arts helped develop Brawl, similar to how Bandai-Namco is helping now. "Special Treatment" would involve Game Arts getting a Grandia character in just because they're developing the game. As such, it didn't happen. Bandai Namco is in a similar position now. They wouldn't get a character just because they're developers. However, unlike a Grandia character, Pac Man has more actual merit for being in the game. He wouldn't get in just because Namco's helping: he'd get in because he is a legendary third party, like the other three in Smash. That's not special treatment.

 

[Deleted member]

Sonic has never been in a mainstream Mario crossover. Olympics are spin-off games.


Aside from that, educate yourself:

Spoiler

Still think Namco has no Nintendo history?

I absolutely love this image, not only because I'm a fan of Pac-Man, it's informative and a nice history lesson about Namco/Nintendo's history.

It's true that Nintendo didn't pick Namco out of a hat of random developers. Their relationship had its ups and downs, but Sega was an outright competitor at one point and look what happened with Sonic.

As far as "Special Treatment" is concerned...


Game Arts helped develop Brawl, similar to how Bandai-Namco is helping now. "Special Treatment" would involve Game Arts getting a Grandia character in just because they're developing the game. As such, it didn't happen. Bandai Namco is in a similar position now. They wouldn't get a character just because they're developers. However, unlike a Grandia character, Pac Man has more actual merit for being in the game. He wouldn't get in just because Namco's helping: he'd get in because he is a legendary third party, like the other three in Smash. That's not special treatment.

Good point and it's like I said before, Sakurai was simply trying to say that this is not Namco's all-stars fighting game, but that doesn't mean that no Namco character will be included. It just means that Namco is treated the same as any other third-party developer.

 

[FlareHabanero]

It's true that Namco has fighting game experience that Sega lacks

False, SEGA has developed fighting games before like Virtua Fighter and Fighting Vipers. Their mascot Sonic entered the fighting game genre a few times too.

 

[NickerBocker]

I'm on the side that wants Pac-Man.

I don't even necessarily want Pacman, I'm just not going to be delusional and deny his inclusion by saying he doesn't qualify due to "no special treatment" or "He's not on the same level as Sonic, Snake or Megaman," which clearly he is.

 

[False Sense]

Oh lovely, a Pac-Man discussion.

I'm just going to say that I think Pac-Man is probably the only likely new third-party character we could get in this game. He's one of the very few left that can claim being "legendary," which Sakurai seems to be looking for when it comes to these kinds of characters. There really aren't that many others that can boast the same. So, given the characters fame, long history, strong ties with Nintendo, and just being such a big icon to video games as a whole, I think he's perfectly justified as a Smash character.

And there ARE actually a good amount of people that would like to see Pac-Man in Smash, myself included. He might not be as popular a character as Sonic or Mega Man, but he's got a nice fan base of his own.

 

[ChikoLad]

You guys do realise that you're reaching at straws at this point, right?

The point I am debating is Pac-Man getting special treatment based on his character. If you want him in because of moveset potential, that's different, as you could easily argue for it. But Pac-Man does not deserve to be in based on appealing personality, which was the cause of popularity for the big three. He has very little, and re-iterating that point is not helping your point, it helps mine. "I may not have a lot of money, but I have a euro".

I won't be upset if he gets in, I'm just sick of people comparing him to the other three in terms of being a recognisable PERSONALITY, because that he is not. He's a recognisable mascot. Not a recognisable personality. There is a huge difference.

And Tepig, the only characters you listed that are without character appeal are R.O.B and G&W, but they represent important phases of Nintendo history.

 

[BluePikmin11]

So because of personality, you shouldn't be playable in Smash Bros.

 

[Tepig2000]

You guys do realise that you're reaching at straws at this point, right?

The point I am debating is Pac-Man getting special treatment based on his character. If you want him in because of moveset potential, that's different, as you could easily argue for it. But Pac-Man does not deserve to be in based on appealing personality, which was the cause of popularity for the big three. He has very little, and re-iterating that point is not helping your point, it helps mine. "I may not have a lot of money, but I have a euro".

I won't be upset if he gets in, I'm just sick of people comparing him to the other three in terms of being a recognisable PERSONALITY, because that he is not. He's a recognisable mascot. Not a recognisable personality. There is a huge difference.

And Tepig, the only characters you listed that are without character appeal are R.O.B and G&W, but they represent important phases of Nintendo history.

The only one grasping at straws at this point is you. Saying a character needs to be known for it's character appeal when some characters in Smash aren't even known by the casual people.

So because of personality, you shouldn't be playable in Smash Bros.

You were ninja'd by me.

 

[Deleted member]

You guys do realise that you're reaching at straws at this point, right?

 

[Deleted member]

False, SEGA has developed fighting games before like Virtua Fighter and Fighting Vipers. Their mascot Sonic entered the fighting game genre a few times too.

I didn't mean to imply Sega has no fighting game experience, but Namco is the more experienced of the two. Virtua Fighter and Fighting Vipers are not nearly as active IPs as Tekken or Soulcalibur.

You guys do realise that you're reaching at straws at this point, right?

The point I am debating is Pac-Man getting special treatment based on his character. If you want him in because of moveset potential, that's different, as you could easily argue for it. But Pac-Man does not deserve to be in based on appealing personality, which was the cause of popularity for the big three. He has very little, and re-iterating that point is not helping your point, it helps mine. "I may not have a lot of money, but I have a euro".

I won't be upset if he gets in, I'm just sick of people comparing him to the other three in terms of being a recognisable PERSONALITY, because that he is not. He's a recognisable mascot. Not a recognisable personality. There is a huge difference.

And Tepig, the only characters you listed that are without character appeal are R.O.B and G&W, but they represent important phases of Nintendo history.

Those games were popular because they were fun, not because of the characters or mascots. They were simply created for the sake of a player avatar to experience the game, especially back when we didn't have long cutscenes or voice acting, to say Mario or MegaMan were popular due to the main characters is evidently inaccurate. Later on they got personalities, but that's not what made them icons.

 

[Parmite]

If I could choose one Namco rep., it would be The Prince from Katamari Damacy. I prefer him over Pac-Man.

 

[ChikoLad]

I didn't mean to imply Sega has no fighting game experience, but Namco is the more experienced of the two. Virtua Fighter and Fighting Vipers are not nearly as active IPs as Tekken or Soulcalibur.



Those games were popular because they were fun, not because of the characters or mascots. They were simply created for the sake of a player avatar to experience the game, especially back when we didn't have long cutscenes or voice acting, to say Mario or MegaMan were popular due to the main characters is evidently inaccurate. Later on they got personalities, but that's not what made them icons.

Actually, Mega Man was popular because of the character. He was considered badass, and represented a pretty strong theme that went on to be explored really deeply in the X series when Mega Man was getting stale back in the NES days. A lot of people don't want Mega Man games back for their gameplay, as there are plenty of quality successors, including Mighty No.9. People genuinely want Mega Man and his crew to return. They always have been beloved characters.

Mario only gained an identity later, but he isn't even in Smash Bros because of genuine appeal, he's in because he's Ninty Mickey Mouse.

 

[Deleted member]

Actually, Mega Man was popular because of the character. He was considered badass, and represented a pretty strong theme that went on to be explored really deeply in the X series when Mega Man was getting stale back in the NES days. A lot of people don't want Mega Man games back for their gameplay, as there are plenty of quality successors, including Mighty No.9. People genuinely want Mega Man and his crew to return. They always have been beloved characters.

Mario only gained an identity later, but he isn't even in Smash Bros because of genuine appeal, he's in because he's Ninty Mickey Mouse.

I completely disagree that MegaMan was popular because of MegaMan the character. The game was popular because it was considered fun to play and challenging with inventive game design. Keep in mind this was what most players back then thought MegaMan looked like:

Not exactly "badass".

As for Mario, you've touched on the very point I've been making, that a character can get into Smash Bros purely on being an icon. Mario is not the only one you can argue did that, there's also Game&Watch, ROB and some others who are weaker examples.

 

[Deleted member]

I wouldn't use the "icon" point in regards to the Ice Climbers....

 

[Deleted member]

Ah yeah... ignore that one. The others are fine examples though.

 

[Autumn ♫]

I still think KOS-MOS would be a better choice than any other Bandai Namco character.

 

[FlareHabanero]

Oh yeah, and wanting a character for their personality is the wrong way of looking at things, because let's face it Nintendo is not a company that puts emphasis on character development.

 

[Deleted member]

Ah yeah... ignore that one. The others are fine examples though.

Though as a sidenote, the back of Melee's box considered them a big name at the very least.

 

[NickerBocker]

Actually, Mega Man was popular because of the character. He was considered badass, and represented a pretty strong theme that went on to be explored really deeply in the X series when Mega Man was getting stale back in the NES days. A lot of people don't want Mega Man games back for their gameplay, as there are plenty of quality successors, including Mighty No.9. People genuinely want Mega Man and his crew to return. They always have been beloved characters.

Mario only gained an identity later, but he isn't even in Smash Bros because of genuine appeal, he's in because he's Ninty Mickey Mouse.

So much wat.

Megaman games are regarded as some of the hardest and most fast paced platformers of their time, something that games rarely do anymore (Because they spoonfeed you to victory.) Megaman 9 and 10 coming out for the last generation shows that people still like the original style

 

[ChikoLad]

I completely disagree that MegaMan was popular because of MegaMan the character. The game was popular because it was considered fun to play and challenging with inventive game design. Keep in mind this was what most players back then thought MegaMan looked like:

Not exactly "badass".

As for Mario, you've touched on the very point I've been making, that a character can get into Smash Bros purely on being an icon. Mario is not the only one you can argue did that, there's also Game&Watch, ROB, Ice Climbers and some others who are weaker examples.

Mega Man's character was given great emphasis in the games, and his in game design was always considered the canon one and people loved it. To deny that the character and atmosphere of the game had anything to do with the love of the franchise is absurd.

I never denied that a character can get in based on them being a Nintendo icon, as that is a source of appeal. Pac-Man is not a Nintendo icon though. And being a Nintendo property is a rule for getting on the roster. Any character breaking that rule is a special exception. Which Namco isn't getting.

...NickerBocker, Mega Man style games have been around for a LONG time before Mega Man 9. People wanted Mega Man back for Mega Man, not the gameplay, as there were plenty of worth subs for that.

 

[Deleted member]

Though as a sidenote, the back of Melee's box considered them a big name at the very least.

"NINTENDO'S BIGGEST STARS ARE ALL HERE!
DUKE IT OUT WITH MARIO, LINK, DONKEY KONG,
THE ICE CLIMBERS, AND MANY MORE."

That's a clear indication of how Nintendo views its franchises. Mario, Zelda, Donkey Kong, Ice Climbers. Must have been a slow year for Pokemon.

 

[Deleted member]

And being a Nintendo property is a rule for getting on the roster. Any character breaking that rule is a special exception. Which Namco isn't getting.

And now you've managed to confuse "special treatment" and "exception" as synonyms.

Way. To. Go.

 

[False Sense]

Mega Man's character was given great emphasis in the games, and his in game design was always considered the canon one and people loved it. To deny that the character and atmosphere of the game had anything to do with the love of the franchise is absurd.

I never denied that a character can get in based on them being a Nintendo icon, as that is a source of appeal. Pac-Man is not a Nintendo icon though. And being a Nintendo property is a rule for getting on the roster. Any character breaking that rule is a special exception. Which Namco isn't getting.

...NickerBocker, Mega Man style games have been around for a LONG time before Mega Man 9. People wanted Mega Man back for Mega Man, not the gameplay, as there were plenty of worth subs for that.

...Why not, exactly? Sega, Konami and Capcom got special exceptions. Why not Namco?

 

[Deleted member]

Mega Man's character was given great emphasis in the games, and his in game design was always considered the canon one and people loved it. To deny that the character and atmosphere of the game had anything to do with the love of the franchise is absurd.

I never denied that a character can get in based on them being a Nintendo icon, as that is a source of appeal. Pac-Man is not a Nintendo icon though. And being a Nintendo property is a rule for getting on the roster. Any character breaking that rule is a special exception. Which Namco isn't getting.

The atmosphere and character of the game - yes! That is absolutely true. I have never before heard this idea that MegaMan is popular because of the blue bomber's personality, that is what seems absurd.

It is not limited to solely Nintendo icons. If the character is not owned by Nintendo but has a rich history on the company's platforms and a significant role n game history, they too qualify. Sonic may be a beloved games mascot to many fans, but he was added primarily because he is an icon, not because of his character. If it were Tails, Knuckles, or any other Sonic protagonist in the main character seat they'd be added instead. It's not about the characters. If it was, then I'd think we'd have seen the usually far more memorable villains from these games before the protagonists, as they generally have the most "character."

 

[ChikoLad]

...Why not, exactly? Sega, Konami and Capcom got special exceptions. Why not Namco?

Because Sakurai said so.

And Golden, in this context, they do mean the same thing. Please stop damage controlling, guys. Make points, not cringeworthy attempts at being witty.

 

[NickerBocker]

Mega Man style games have been around for a LONG time before Mega Man 9. People wanted Mega Man back for Mega Man, not the gameplay, as there were plenty of worth subs for that.

I don't understand where this is coming from. I'm well aware the games were around before the existence of MM9, I don't understand where this idea is coming from that people wanted the MM games back for the character Megaman. He was pretty.... bland. I mean, he's a robot, who shows no emotion, not even a celebration when he defeats an enemy or a boss. So wanting the character back specifically seems a little outlandish to me. If you said something like Protoman, then yes I would agree, but Megaman does very little in his games to show any amount of personality or "badassness" Other than just blasting enemies with his Mega Buster.

At least for myself, I enjoy the Megaman games for the shear challenge of playing a good platformer, not because of the characters personality, or lack-there-of.

Point is, Pacman not having character doesn't mean anything

 

[False Sense]

Because Sakurai said so.

And Golden, in this context, they do mean the same thing. Please stop damage controlling, guys. Make points, not cringeworthy attempts at being witty.

"Just because the game is being cooperatively developed with Namco Bandai involved, that doesn’t at all mean that they’d be given any special consideration for having characters in the game. Smash Bros. can still be considered as an all-star collection of Nintendo characters. Just like with Mega Man or any other third-party character, it would have to be a very special situation."

-Sakurai

Is the legendary Pac-Man, a character known by pretty much everyone in the world, not considered a very special situation?

 

[Jason the Yoshi]

Could you stop overusing the caps lock and exclamation marks?

I don't know what you mean by "mainstream" Mario crossover, but Pac-Man has been in plenty of crossovers. Unless you want to disqualify them, what you're saying is plainly false.

A mainstream crossover is something like the REAL mario kart games that receive recognition. None of the crossovers with PacMan were mainstream. Another mainstream crossover is Mario and Sonic at the Olympic Games!

 

[SuperBrawler]

Pac-Man is a gaming legend. And Namco, I think is important to Nintendo, and Sakurai/Nintendo trust them to work on Smash Bros., which is probably one of Nintendo's best games ever.

EVERYONE knows Pac-Man. All over the world.

 

[ChikoLad]

I don't understand where this is coming from. I'm well aware the games were around before the existence of MM9, I don't understand where this idea is coming from that people wanted the MM games back for the character Megaman. He was pretty.... bland. I mean, he's a robot, who shows no emotion, not even a celebration when he defeats an enemy or a boss. So wanting the character back specifically seems a little outlandish to me. If you said something like Protoman, then yes I would agree, but Megaman does very little in his games to show any amount of personality or "badassness" Other than just blasting enemies with his Mega Buster.

At least for myself, I enjoy the Megaman games for the shear challenge of playing a good platformer, not because of the characters personality, or lack-there-of.

I'm guessing you never tackled 7 then. It's not the only one, but it's ending is fairly meaningful because of Mega Man himself.

 

[Deleted member]

Because Sakurai said so.

And Golden, in this context, they do mean the same thing. Please stop damage controlling, guys. Make points, not cringeworthy attempts at being witty.

Sakurai never said what you are implying he did. All he said was Namco is not getting any special treatment. The same applies to every other third-party developer. He did not mean Namco was considered less important than other third-parties, but in fact that everyone was on an even playing field.

A mainstream crossover is something like the REAL mario kart games that receive recognition, the appearances of PacMan in Mario Kart were not mainstream they were ARCADE games. Another mainstream

If Mario Kart is what constitutes as a "real" crossover game then neither Sonic or Pac-Man have appeared in one to this day.

And the fact they were "not mainstream" does not disqualify the Arcade GP games as legitimate crossovers. That's not even a valid argument.

 

[FlareHabanero]

I'm guessing you never tackled 7 then. It's not the only one, but it's ending is fairly meaningful because of Mega Man himself.

You mean where Mega Man had enough of Wily's **** and wanted to kill him? Yeah, that was tacked on in the English versions.

 

[BluePikmin11]

Also notice the "characters" in Sakurai statement. It only says there won't be multiple Namco characters. But it doesn't mean Pac-Man is out of the question.

 

[JamesDNaux]

There's not liking a character, but outright trying to deny them and hate the idea of them getting in? I don't understand why people are so against Pac-Man, how would you like it if people started trashing Sonic and yelling for him to be removed because of a few bad games? Pac-Man is still a legend of gaming, he's more recognizable than Mario, how would it even hurt for him to be in the game? If you really don't like him that much for god knows what reason, don't play as him.

 

[Joe D.]

So we're saying that personality is a focus when getting considered for smash?


Sorry, I had too.