Character Discussion Thread

[Con0rrrr]

My only input into the K Rool discussion is that it's not happening. There is simply too much against him than for him whether you like it or not (as it stands, it seems you don't like it). You're claiming he's the main series villain. He's not. The series was rebooted. Sure he's the main villain of the original, and I'm all for his inclusion due to Nintendo's history, but that's not enough for Smash.

Let's say when Kid Icarus got rebooted the only character that remained was Pit. All the other characters, villains or heros, were new. Would it be more likely to include the new villain or hero who is relevant to the recent reboot (In Kid Icarus' example, Palutena or Agnus or even Hades) than a villain from the old version of the series that has been completely ignored in the reboot? It would not. There's no other answer except that it would not make sense.

This is why Dixie or sadly, Cranky, have a much better chance than K Rool. Not only has Nintendo ignored him and tried to make us forget about him, they have put a spotlight on characters such as Dixie and Cranky. And someone here said Dixie wouldn't have an original moveset. Please tell me how her moveset could possibly be worse than a fat crocodile who butt slams and is slow.

I want K Rool over any other DK rep, but pretending like it is going to happen is ignorant.

 

[Deleted member]

ITT: People who use "reboot" as a synonym for "revival".

There's a reason why it's called "Donkey Kong Country Returns" and not "Donkey Kong Country Remade".

 

[ACDC]

ITT: People who use "reboot" as a synonym for "revival".

There's a reason why it's called "Donkey Kong Country Returns" and not "Donkey Kong Country Remade".

What's an ITT anyway?

 

[Deleted member]

What's an ITT anyway?

In This Thread.


It's satire.

 

[NickerBocker]

My only input into the K Rool discussion is that it's not happening. There is simply too much against him than for him whether you like it or not (as it stands, it seems you don't like it). You're claiming he's the main series villain. He's not. The series was rebooted. Sure he's the main villain of the original, and I'm all for his inclusion due to Nintendo's history, but that's not enough for Smash.

Let's say when Kid Icarus got rebooted the only character that remained was Pit. All the other characters, villains or heros, were new. Would it be more likely to include the new villain or hero who is relevant to the recent reboot (In Kid Icarus' example, Palutena or Agnus or even Hades) than a villain from the old version of the series that has been completely ignored in the reboot? It would not. There's no other answer except that it would not make sense.

This is why Dixie or sadly, Cranky, have a much better chance than K Rool. Not only has Nintendo ignored him and tried to make us forget about him, they have put a spotlight on characters such as Dixie and Cranky. And someone here said Dixie wouldn't have an original moveset. Please tell me how her moveset could possibly be worse than a fat crocodile who butt slams and is slow.

I want K Rool over any other DK rep, but pretending like it is going to happen is ignorant.

Well, here we go...

He certainly is the main villain of the series, there is literally no one else who could fill the role. Not Tikis, Not Vikings, its all about the King baby. Also, if the main villain isnt K Rool, who would it be?

You brought up Kid Icarus. If the revival of the series was not as successful and didnt have as big an impact, I dont see why they would add the new character other than recency and/or advertising. There would be no reason, it would make more sense to add a character that represents a better longevity of the series. I also think this is a bad comparison because KI had only 2 games before the reboot, and only one was actually half decent. Also, DK was not revived or rebooted, its just continuing and K Rool hasnt been in any yet. He could very well be in the next game with no issues.

Funny how you say you want K Rool, yet you decide to not only make fun of his appearance, but also flat out ignore his potential as playable. He is actually not slow, in DKC, hes faster than DK (running speed) Wow, a fast heavy-weight? How many of those do we have in Smash? What about his potential with his crown, blunderbuss and gadgets? What about his boxing? What about... well theres alot more than just hair and bubblegum I can tell you that.

Im pretty sure thinking K Rool has no chance is really ignorant. For someone who wants K Rool, you're certainly amplifying the negatives and disregarding/undervaluing the positives.

(Its going to suck if he doesnt get in because I know most detractors will gloat about how he had no chance in the first place, which most likely isnt the case.)

 

[Con0rrrr]

ITT: People who use "reboot" as a synonym for "revival".

There's a reason why it's called "Donkey Kong Country Returns" and not "Donkey Kong Country Remade".

Still does not change my point. Maybe even strengthens it. They revived a game series but left out the "main villain" as some are calling him? So why would he be in Smash?

 

[Johnknight1]

Still does not change my point. Maybe even strengthens it. They revived a game series but left out the "main villain" as some are calling him? So why would he be in Smash?

Diddy wasn't DK's "main sidekick" in Donkey Konga (I call it Donkey Krappa) 1-3 or Jungle Beat, and didn't appear in any of those games.

Last I checked, that didn't prevent him from winding up playable in Brawl.

Also, "muh recuncy" isn't a legitimate argument. All that matters is what they can do with the characters to make them unique, as well as whether or not a character is "important enough" to be playable in Smash, which K. Rool clearly is, seeing as how less popular and well known franchises like Kirby and Star Fox got their primary antagonists playable.

K. Rool clearly has more evident tools to work with than Cranky or Dixie, and thus, clearly stands a better shot at being playable than either of them (unless they had some pre-conceived ideas for either or both of them).

Your argument overall is based on the "recency" trope, which isn't even a real thing to base it on. Characters are chosen because they could make good playable characters and are "important enough" outside of Smash (ie: Luigi, not Toadette), not because they are recent.

 

[JFM2796]

Still does not change my point. Maybe even strengthens it. They revived a game series but left out the "main villain" as some are calling him? So why would he be in Smash?

Probably for the same reason they left the main enemies (Kremlings) out of Smash as well.

Oh wait, they are in, despite not appearing in the reboots.

 

[NickerBocker]

Still does not change my point. Maybe even strengthens it. They revived a game series but left out the "main villain" as some are calling him? So why would he be in Smash?

They didnt revive the game. Its just continuing because there hasnt been an official Country game since the SNES. It was never dead, moreso dormant. Yes another company took over production, but it doesnt change the fact that K Rool can still be used.

 

[The Light Music Club]

Still does not change my point. Maybe even strengthens it. They revived a game series but left out the "main villain" as some are calling him? So why would he be in Smash?

Well apparently he good enough to considered to be put in Mario Superstar Sluggers, so I can tell you that they aren't trying to have us forget about him. If he wasn't in that then maybe you could argue other wise. And well, some of the main baddies from DKC were the Kremlings and they show up in this Smash, so it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to think King K will show up too. And we are trying to celebrate the history of Nintendo, and I think King K Rool is a important part of not only Donkey Kong's history, but also Nintendo's.

 

[False Sense]

Still does not change my point. Maybe even strengthens it. They revived a game series but left out the "main villain" as some are calling him? So why would he be in Smash?

Well, for a comparison, Ganondorf does not have a perfect attendance record in Legend of Zelda games. In fact, he tends to be absent quite a bit, especially as of late. Yet no one questions that he is the definitive main villain of the Zelda series, and that he's earned his place in Smash.

 

[Johnknight1]

Well, for a comparison, Ganondorf does not have a perfect attendance record in Legend of Zelda games. In fact, he tends to be absent quite a bit, especially as of late. Yet no one questions that he is the definitive main villain of the Zelda series, and that he's earned his place in Smash.

Sans remakes, Ganondorf's last game was actually Brawl. His last Zelda appearance was in 2006 in Twilight Princess, which was 7 1/2 years ago.

Sans remakes, Wolf's last appearance was also in Brawl. His last Star Fox appearance was in 2006 in Star Fox Command, which was 8 years ago.

Like I said, "recency" doesn't matter, gameplay does. Everything ultimately revolves around gameplay in the end, and Smash is better for it.

 

[Con0rrrr]

Well, here we go...

He certainly is the main villain of the series, there is literally no one else who could fill the role. Not Tikis, Not Vikings, its all about the King baby. Also, if the main villain isnt K Rool, who would it be?

You brought up Kid Icarus. If the revival of the series was not as successful and didnt have as big an impact, I dont see why they would add the new character other than recency and/or advertising. There would be no reason, it would make more sense to add a character that represents a better longevity of the series. I also think this is a bad comparison because KI had only 2 games before the reboot, and only one was actually half decent.

Funny how you say you want K Rool, yet you decide to not only make fun of his appearance, but also flat out ignore his potential as playable. He is actually not slow, in DKC, hes faster than DK (running speed) Wow, a fast heavy-weight? How many of those do we have in Smash? What about his potential with his crown, blunderbuss and gadgets? What about his boxing? What about... well theres alot more than just hair and bubblegum I can tell you that.

Im pretty sure thinking K Rool has no chance is really ignorant. (Doesnt matter If he doesnt get because I know most will gloat about how he had no chance in the first place.)

Came off wrong in my post. It's just tough to get through to K Rool avid supporters. I specifically said I was using Kid Icarus as an example. Kid Icarus doesn't deserve 3 reps, let alone 2 before DK gets a third. I was not making fun of his appearence, I was telling it how it is. He is a fat crocodile? That's not wrong. Dixie has just as much potential as K Rool. Not that I want Dixie more than K Rool, I would hate that. But you gotta have a realistic mind when viewing these things. Just because I think K Rool is a better choice, doesn't mean it is more like to happen.

Let's say K Rool is still considered the main villain of the franchise. Which he shouldn't be considering how in the past two games (which may I remind you, are almost more than 10 years apart from the previous ones) flat out ignore K Rool. I woukd say there is no main villain in the DK series. There WAS but now he's gone, for now.

But again, let's say for some wild reason he is the main villain still. There's no rules in place that the villain will need to get in before another character from the franchise. He hopefully would be included then, but when we go back to reality and recognize K Rool is no longer relevant or the main villain, he goes back to extremely unlikely.

Again, I want K Rool. Don't get me wrong. I just know where to take my bias out when it comes to this stuff. It's a shame. But it's the facts

 

[The Light Music Club]

Sans remakes, Ganondorf's last game was actually Brawl. His last Zelda appearance was in 2006 in Twilight Princess, which was 7 1/2 years ago.

Sans remakes, Wolf's last appearance was also in Brawl. His last Star Fox appearance was in 2006 in Star Fox Command, which was 8 years ago.

Like I said, "recency" doesn't matter, gameplay does. Everything ultimately revolves around gameplay in the end, and Smash is better for it.

See I was going to bring up Ganondorf, but since I'm not a big Zelda fan I wasn't 100% positive. I thought TP was his last game though. Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[JFM2796]

Sans remakes, Ganondorf's last game was actually Brawl. His last Zelda appearance was in 2006 in Twilight Princess, which was 7 1/2 years ago.

Sans remakes, Wolf's last appearance was also in Brawl. His last Star Fox appearance was in 2006 in Star Fox Command, which was 8 years ago.

Like I said, "recency" doesn't matter, gameplay does. Everything ultimately revolves around gameplay in the end, and Smash is better for it.

Interesting because King K. Rools last appearance was in 2008, making him more recent than either of them (sans remakes).

 

[Morbi]

Well apparently he good enough to considered to be put in Mario Superstar Sluggers, so I can tell you that they aren't trying to have us forget about him. If he wasn't in that then maybe you could argue other wise. And well, some of the main baddies from DKC were the Kremlings and they show up in this Smash, so it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to think King K will show up too. And we are trying to celebrate the history of Nintendo, and I think King K Rool is a important part of not only Donkey Kong's history, but also Nintendo's.

Is that truly saying much?

But other than that, the Kremlings appearing in Smash does not necessarily mean anything for King K. Rool. They are notable Nintendo enemies. Simple. There is nothing objective to indicate that they were added in the game because King K. Rool is on the roster.

 

[Deleted member]

Still does not change my point. Maybe even strengthens it. They revived a game series but left out the "main villain" as some are calling him? So why would he be in Smash?

It doesn't strengthen it.
DKC Returns left out everyone that wasn't DK, Diddy, and Cranky (and Rambi). Hell, Miyamoto had to make them include Cranky.

Retro Studios is on this kick about not wanting to ride on Rare's coattails and instead have their own thing. Though they aren't above catering to the fans, hence why Dixie and Funky came back for Tropical Freeze and while not bringing back K. Rool as the villain, made an eerily similar substitute in Lord Frederick as means to "do their own thing" while still attempting to cater to the fans. ("attempt" because not everyone appreciated "K. Rool Lite")


However, Sakurai is not Retro Studios. He's Sakurai. Whatever decisions they make is irrelevant to decisions he makes.
K. Rool is among the most requested characters for Smash 4. To think he's going to leave him out solely because Retro hasn't had him as the villain of the games they've designed, especially after the Kremlings show up in Smash Run alongside DKCR's Tikis (but not Tropical Freeze's Snowmads) is asinine.

 

[ACDC]

Came off wrong in my post. It's just tough to get through to K Rool avid supporters. I specifically said I was using Kid Icarus as an example. Kid Icarus doesn't deserve 3 reps, let alone 2 before DK gets a third. I was not making fun of his appearence, I was telling it how it is. He is a fat crocodile? That's not wrong. Dixie has just as much potential as K Rool. Not that I want Dixie more than K Rool, I would hate that. But you gotta have a realistic mind when viewing these things. Just because I think K Rool is a better choice, doesn't mean it is more like to happen.

Let's say K Rool is still considered the main villain of the franchise. Which he shouldn't be considering how in the past two games (which may I remind you, are almost more than 10 years apart from the previous ones) flat out ignore K Rool. I woukd say there is no main villain in the DK series. There WAS but now he's gone, for now.

But again, let's say for some wild reason he is the main villain still. There's no rules in place that the villain will need to get in before another character from the franchise. He hopefully would be included then, but when we go back to reality and recognize K Rool is no longer relevant or the main villain, he goes back to extremely unlikely.

Again, I want K Rool. Don't get me wrong. I just know where to take my bias out when it comes to this stuff. It's a shame. But it's the facts

I disagree. If it's a better choice it's more likely to happen. But I'm not saying it's 100% happening, just more likely. And I feel like when you say "It's a shame. But it's the facts" you're just making up facts because we don't know enough yet about him.

 

[Johnknight1]

See I was going to bring up Ganondorf, but since I'm not a big Zelda fan I wasn't 100% positive. I thought TP was his last game though. Thanks for clearing that up.

Twilight Princess was his last game, sans The Wind Waker HD, which is obviously a remake of The Wind Waker.

Sans remakes, Ganondorf's last game was actually Brawl. His last Zelda appearance was in 2006 in Twilight Princess, which was 7 1/2 years ago.

Sans remakes, Wolf's last appearance was also in Brawl. His last Star Fox appearance was in 2006 in Star Fox Command, which was 8 years ago.

Fun fact: That means that sans remakes, K. Rool's appearance in Mario Super Sluggers (which was release about 5 months after Brawl) means that K. Rool's last appearance was more recent than Ganondorf's and Wolf's last appearances.

It also doesn't explain why outside of Smash the Ice Climbers haven't appeared in a game in about a quarter-century, and haven't starred in a game in nearly 30 years.

Interesting because King K. Rools last appearance was in 2008, making him more recent than either of them (sans remakes).

HOW DARE YOU ME!!!

 

[The Light Music Club]

Is that truly saying much?

But other than that, the Kremlings appearing in Smash does not necessarily mean anything for King K. Rool. They are notable Nintendo enemies. Simple. There is nothing objective to indicate that they were added in the game because King K. Rool is on the roster.

Yes I would say it is, mainly because that game is for critical characters in Mario's universe. All characters in that game play a notable role, and since King K is in the game, it shows Nintendo must consider him notable, and memorable.

Oh, and I'm not saying Kremlings = King K playable. I'm saying it means that characters from the SNES are still remembered by Nintendo.

 

[bilbo43]

I dont see Kremlings being included in the smash run as being strong evidence towards King K.Rool returning.

Look at the endless animal crossing references in Brawl. They had a stage dedicated, items and a buttload of trophies included in the game yet no rep until the following game.

All I'm saying is don't use certain items or enemies as evidence of a character's inclusion. We have to remember this is sakurai, he could make himself playable before he makes some of the predicted characters playable. Look how much he has trolled Ridley fans and there's still no confirmation of him in any of the games

I rate K K.Rool's chances of being included being 50/50.

 

[False Sense]

Came off wrong in my post. It's just tough to get through to K Rool avid supporters. I specifically said I was using Kid Icarus as an example. Kid Icarus doesn't deserve 3 reps, let alone 2 before DK gets a third. I was not making fun of his appearence, I was telling it how it is. He is a fat crocodile? That's not wrong. Dixie has just as much potential as K Rool. Not that I want Dixie more than K Rool, I would hate that. But you gotta have a realistic mind when viewing these things. Just because I think K Rool is a better choice, doesn't mean it is more like to happen.

Let's say K Rool is still considered the main villain of the franchise. Which he shouldn't be considering how in the past two games (which may I remind you, are almost more than 10 years apart from the previous ones) flat out ignore K Rool. I woukd say there is no main villain in the DK series. There WAS but now he's gone, for now.

But again, let's say for some wild reason he is the main villain still. There's no rules in place that the villain will need to get in before another character from the franchise. He hopefully would be included then, but when we go back to reality and recognize K Rool is no longer relevant or the main villain, he goes back to extremely unlikely.

Again, I want K Rool. Don't get me wrong. I just know where to take my bias out when it comes to this stuff. It's a shame. But it's the facts

So, by your logic, do you believe that Ganondorf is not the main villain of the Zelda franchise? And what about villains who aren't always villains? Characters like Bowser and King Dedede have more than once played the role of heroes within games. Do their inconsistent roles in their games cause them to lose the title of the main villain of their series?

Edit: @ Morbi I would agree with you that the Kremlings themselves don't directly point to the inclusion of King K. Rool on the roster. However, there's something I think you may be overlooking in regards to their presence in the game. Kremlings, along with K. Rool, haven't appeared in quite some time. They could have been ignored in this game in favor of something more recent. The fact that they are present in the game means that Sakurai is acknowledging the older Donkey Kong games in which the Kremlings and K. Rool appeared in, and judging by how the Kremlings are enemies in Smash Run, I would say it indicates that Sakurai recognizes their significance to the Donkey Kong series. The Kremlings presence in the game proves that they, and K. Rool, have not been forgotten; it puts a dent in a common argument used against K. Rool.

 

[Morbi]

So, by your logic, do you believe that Ganondorf is not the main villain of the Zelda franchise? And what about villains who aren't always villains? Characters like Bowser and King Dedede have more than once played the role of heroes within games. Do their inconsistent roles in their games cause them to lose the title of the main villain of their series?

I do not believe that Ganondorf is the main antagonist of the Legend of Zelda franchise. That honor is afforded to Ganon!

 

[Deleted member]

So, by your logic, do you believe that Ganondorf is not the main villain of the Zelda franchise? And what about villains who aren't always villains? Characters like Bowser and King Dedede have more than once played the role of heroes within games. Do their inconsistent roles in their games cause them to lose the title of the main villain of their series?

Dedede's not even a villain, though.
Just a jerk with good intentions and poor communication skills.

 

[NickerBocker]

Came off wrong in my post. It's just tough to get through to K Rool avid supporters. I specifically said I was using Kid Icarus as an example. Kid Icarus doesn't deserve 3 reps, let alone 2 before DK gets a third. I was not making fun of his appearence, I was telling it how it is. He is a fat crocodile? That's not wrong. Dixie has just as much potential as K Rool. Not that I want Dixie more than K Rool, I would hate that. But you gotta have a realistic mind when viewing these things. Just because I think K Rool is a better choice, doesn't mean it is more like to happen.

Let's say K Rool is still considered the main villain of the franchise. Which he shouldn't be considering how in the past two games (which may I remind you, are almost more than 10 years apart from the previous ones) flat out ignore K Rool. I woukd say there is no main villain in the DK series. There WAS but now he's gone, for now.

But again, let's say for some wild reason he is the main villain still. There's no rules in place that the villain will need to get in before another character from the franchise. He hopefully would be included then, but when we go back to reality and recognize K Rool is no longer relevant or the main villain, he goes back to extremely unlikely.

Again, I want K Rool. Don't get me wrong. I just know where to take my bias out when it comes to this stuff. It's a shame. But it's the facts

Uniqueness is really a matter of opinion, because literally every character can be unique.

Youre right he hasnt appeared in a main game since DK64, but he was in Mario sluggers, came out in 2008 which is more recent than some characters on the roster, and had a trophy in Melee and Brawl, both praising his popularity. If youre using relevance as an argument, I think popularity makes a character relevant, because they become part of gaming culture. Even if he isnt the main villain anymore, that doesnt mean he wont get added.

Ill admit i have some bias when it comes to K Rool. I just generally dont understand what "facts" you are talking about, because this is speculation and nothing is concrete.

 

[Con0rrrr]

K. Rool clearly has more evident tools to work with than Cranky or Dixie, and thus, clearly stands a better shot at being playable than either of them (unless they had some pre-conceived ideas for either or both of them).

This is not correct. More tools to work this has never been a factor for Smash. Many characters with "tools to work with" have been cut in favor of characters like Wolf or Lucas.

Also, about relevancy. While I admit that's the biggest counter argument to my statment, it's different when the character didn't appear in both of the series' revivals.

They didnt revive the game. Its just continuing because there hasnt been an official Country game since the SNES. It was never dead, moreso dormant. Yes another company took over production, but it doesnt change the fact that K Rool can still be used.

Indeed. It does not change the fact that K Rool can be used. But it does soften his chances. You guys cannot deny that. I'm as pissed as anyone that Retro has not brought him back. They should, but they haven't. Which even though relevancy isn't a ginormous factor, it is one when the character has been left out of his own series.

Probably for the same reason they left the main enemies (Kremlings) out of Smash as well.

Oh wait, they are in, despite not appearing in the reboots.

This is the best and only evidence for K Rool in Smash 4. And i'm extatic for it! I'd love to have more evidence. But it still isn't enough to say "Well DK needs a third rep so K Rool is in for sure"

Well apparently he good enough to considered to be put in Mario Superstar Sluggers, so I can tell you that they aren't trying to have us forget about him. If he wasn't in that then maybe you could argue other wise. And well, some of the main baddies from DKC were the Kremlings and they show up in this Smash, so it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to think King K will show up too. And we are trying to celebrate the history of Nintendo, and I think King K Rool is a important part of not only Donkey Kong's history, but also Nintendo's.

We can all be real and recognize it doesn't take a bit of relevancy or importance to have been included in that game. Toadsworth was in it for crying out loud! While good news for K Rool, is him being in Sluggers really enough of a boost to get him in Smash?

Sans remakes, Ganondorf's last game was actually Brawl. His last Zelda appearance was in 2006 in Twilight Princess, which was 7 1/2 years ago.

Sans remakes, Wolf's last appearance was also in Brawl. His last Star Fox appearance was in 2006 in Star Fox Command, which was 8 years ago.

Like I said, "recency" doesn't matter, gameplay does. Everything ultimately revolves around gameplay in the end, and Smash is better for it.

Difference is, Zelda wasn't dead then revive. If Zelda was a series in the 80s and 90s that had Ganon as the villain, then dropped off the map for 15 years and comes back with no Ganon. I would be here today saying that Ganon most likely won't be in Smash 4. This is a completely different situation.


You guys are bringing up some great points! I want to be wrong. But you guys gotta hear this evidence too.

 

[False Sense]

I do not believe that Ganondorf is the main antagonist of the Legend of Zelda franchise. That honor is afforded to Ganon!

...Well, they're technically the same person, just in a different form. And even then, Ganon also does not appear in every Zelda game, and, again, especially later ones. So I would still say that, going by the logic of the user I was responding to, Ganon/Ganondorf should not be considered the main antagonist of the Zelda franchise.

Also, did you see that edit I made to my last post?

 

[The Light Music Club]

This is not correct. More tools to work this has never been a factor for Smash. Many characters with "tools to work with" have been cut in favor of characters like Wolf or Lucas.

Also, about relevancy. While I admit that's the biggest counter argument to my statment, it's different when the character didn't appear in both of the series' revivals.



Indeed. It does not change the fact that K Rool can be used. But it does soften his chances. You guys cannot deny that. I'm as pissed as anyone that Retro has not brought him back. They should, but they haven't. Which even though relevancy isn't a ginormous factor, it is one when the character has been left out of his own series.



This is the best and only evidence for K Rool in Smash 4. And i'm extatic for it! I'd love to have more evidence. But it still isn't enough to say "Well DK needs a third rep so K Rool is in for sure"



We can all be real and recognize it doesn't take a bit of relevancy or importance to have been included in that game. Toadsworth was in it for crying out loud! While good news for K Rool, is him being in Sluggers really enough of a boost to get him in Smash?



Difference is, Zelda wasn't dead then revive. If Zelda was a series in the 80s and 90s that had Ganon as the villain, then dropped off the map for 15 years and comes back with no Ganon. I would be here today saying that Ganon most likely won't be in Smash 4. This is a completely different situation.


You guys are bringing up some great points! I want to be wrong. But you guys gotta hear this evidence too.

Like I said, yes in a way it does, because it shows Nintendo still recognizes him as an important part of the Mario world.

And what do you mean "even Toadsworth" last time I checked he played quite a decent sized part in Partners in Time.

 

[Deleted member]

Donkey Kong didn't die, though.
It just hadn't had a traditional platformer in quite some time.

Just like Kirby. Hence "Kirby's Return to Dream Land". The Kirby franchise didn't go anywhere, but it didn't have a non-remake traditional platformer since 2006.


EDIT: Best comparison I can give.
Diddy Kong.

The last "major" DK game that Diddy was in was DK 64 prior to Brawl.
Jungle Beat, the closest thing to a "major" title since 64, featured no pre-existing character other than Donkey Kong himself.
Diddy was left to just spin-off roles.

Yet he was in Brawl.

 

[Deleted member]

My only input into the K Rool discussion is that it's not happening. There is simply too much against him than for him whether you like it or not (as it stands, it seems you don't like it). You're claiming he's the main series villain. He's not. The series was rebooted. Sure he's the main villain of the original, and I'm all for his inclusion due to Nintendo's history, but that's not enough for Smash.

Let's say when Kid Icarus got rebooted the only character that remained was Pit. All the other characters, villains or heros, were new. Would it be more likely to include the new villain or hero who is relevant to the recent reboot (In Kid Icarus' example, Palutena or Agnus or even Hades) than a villain from the old version of the series that has been completely ignored in the reboot? It would not. There's no other answer except that it would not make sense.

This is why Dixie or sadly, Cranky, have a much better chance than K Rool. Not only has Nintendo ignored him and tried to make us forget about him, they have put a spotlight on characters such as Dixie and Cranky. And someone here said Dixie wouldn't have an original moveset. Please tell me how her moveset could possibly be worse than a fat crocodile who butt slams and is slow.

I want K Rool over any other DK rep, but pretending like it is going to happen is ignorant.

If Kremlings are relevant enough to be brought back into Smash Run, King K. Rool is definitely relevant enough to be playable. According to the picture above, recency is definitely not the issue here.

King K. Rool is the main villain of the franchise. When most people think of the main villain of the Donkey Kong franchise, most of them think about King K. Rool. The villain of the DKC games, the villain of the Donkey Kong Land games, the villain of Donkey Kong 64, and the villain of the Paon games. No other DK villain has appeared more than once in the series. Ghastly King has failed to show up again, Tiki-Tong has failed to show up as the villain of Tropical Freeze, and who's to say that Lord Fredrik will return for a DKC3? So far, no one has been able to successfully replace King K. Rool as the villain of the DK franchise and until we see a villain that makes consecutive appearance as the villain of the DK franchise, no one really will.

Also too many people overestimate the recency argument. That is seriously one of the worst arguments that got brought up on the frequent basis here. By this logic, Marth, Mr. Game & Watch, and Ice Climbers would not have appeared in Melee. By this logic, we would have not gotten Pit or R.O.B in Brawl, nor would we have seen characters like Sheik, Ice Climbers, Jigglypuff, or Ness return.

And if we're going to say that King K. Rool has no shot because of a couple of no-shows, then what business does Mega Man have in this game? If you think King K. Rool is being treated like crap, then Mega Man has been through hell. Three cancellations in a row (with Legends's cancellation being one of the worst ways I've ever seen a cancellation been handled), being left out of a cross-over that he was expected in (MvC3) and overall uncertainty of whenever or not the franchise will get another game should have disqualified him from this game if we're going to apply the recency arguments to newcomer. Mega Man's inclusion had nothing to do with recency, he was added because he was so highly requested, so unique, and considered a legendary character by Sakurai's eyes; one of his pre-requisite for adding third-party characters. But apparently, this never happened and we also lost Sheik and Ike because they weren't "recent" enough to return.

Also, people need to stop assuming that King K. Rool can't get in if Dixie Kong/Cranky Kong is added. Sakurai is going to add characters based on merits, not to fulfill an imaginary character requirement. King K. Rool's inclusions is not going to cause Dixie or Cranky to be dropped and neither would Cranky or Dixie's inclusion cause King K. Rool to not be included. Whenever or not King K. Rool is added lies on whenever or not Sakurai thinks King K. Rool is worthy of playable status. Also, King K. Rool definitely has capacity to be unique. He has the Crown Toss, he has Shock Wave and he has moved he can pull from both his Kaptain and Baron K. Roolenstein outfits (the Blunderbuss being one of them). The Kremling Kutthroats thread already has various move sets made by fellow K. Rool fans such as MasterWarlord and BKupa666 that show how unique King K. Rool could be if he gets in. I'm not saying Dixie Kong can't be unique, but I am saying that King K. Rool is definitely capable of being unique.

 

[False Sense]

Difference is, Zelda wasn't dead then revive. If Zelda was a series in the 80s and 90s that had Ganon as the villain, then dropped off the map for 15 years and comes back with no Ganon. I would be here today saying that Ganon most likely won't be in Smash 4. This is a completely different situation.

...Um, I'm not much of a Donkey Kong fan myself, but I don't think the series was ever really "dead." It still had fairly consistent releases, if I recall, which up until Returns included K. Rool.

Is there something I'm missing here?

 

[Con0rrrr]

Like I said, yes in a way it does, because it shows Nintendo still recognizes him as an important part of the Mario world.

And what do you mean "even Toadsworth" last time I checked he played quite a decent sized part in Partners in Time.

Look at Mario Sluggers roster and you will understand why it does not matter. That's the kind of Nintendo game that Nintendo just hands to a developer, says "Do what you want with it, just make it good", checks the game, then ships it. That game bares no effect on character's "appearances".

But still, Sakurai has a mind of his own. That man be crazy. Heck. I wouldn't be shocked if he put in "AmphibiCranky". A mutation of Cranky causing him to mutate into K Rool. And he looks disgusting. This is Sakurai guys.

 

[NickerBocker]

@ Con0rrrr

Youre probably right that him not being in the revivals hurts his chances, but that much? Really? That is one of the few arguments against him. Another DK character being added has a very good chance, and based on what we know,I firmly believe K Rool is the best choice and has the best chance among DK newcomers.

Sakurai does indeed cater to popular requests, and K Rool is one of the top ones requested worldwide, on the same level as Mewtwo I would say. That alone is enough for him to be in, and he has other merits as well, and meets criteria (being a nintendo character is pretty much the only required criteria.)

 

[Con0rrrr]

...Um, I'm not much of a Donkey Kong fan myself, but I don't think the series was ever really "dead." It still had fairly consistent releases, if I recall, which up until Returns included K. Rool.

Is there something I'm missing here?

Most recent release before Returns was on N64. So no.

 

[Johnknight1]

This is not correct. More tools to work this has never been a factor for Smash.

Apparently Link, Samus, Yoshi, Kirby, Pikachu, Ness, Peach, Bowser, Mewtwo, The Ice Climbers, Marth, Mr. Game & Watch, Meta Knight, Pit, Zero Suit Samus, Wario, Snake, Ike, Diddy Kong, The Pokémon Trainer (specifically his Pokémon), King Dedede, Sonic, R.O.B., Pikmin & Olimar, The Villager, Mega Man, The Wii Fit Trainer, Rosalina & Luma, Little Mac, Greninja, etc. etc. etc. don't exist.

Many characters with "tools to work with" have been cut in favor of characters like Wolf or Lucas.

There is no proof any character was cut for other characters. What ultimately was the leading cause of cuts in Brawl was the SSE anyways, which took over 60% of the development team's time, money, resources, focus, and efforts, which obviously equates to more than just a few characters.

Also, about relevancy. While I admit that's the biggest counter argument to my statment, it's different when the character didn't appear in both of the series' revivals.

Ganondorf didn't appear in The Phantom Hourglass, Spirit Tracks, Skyward Sword, or A Link Between Worlds. Does that make him irrelevant for not appearing in a 2-parter of Zelda games, the origin of Zelda, and a new spin on an old classic=???

Dude, the DKC series is huge. In fact, it now sells better than Zelda did, and it garners more attention. Stop acting like people forget K. Rool exists, because no Zelda game has come close to touching DKC1's sales, at all.

Also, if we're talking about "not returning in revival series", uhhhhh, Sheik hasn't appeared in a Zelda game in about 16 years. That's older than a lot of people here.

As for all your points, ultimately copy and paste them to Diddy Kong in Brawl.

That's how bad your points are. They aren't relevant at all, just like how these arguments against Diddy Kong in Brawl weren't relevant at all.

 

[Con0rrrr]

@ Con0rrrr

Youre probably right that him not being in the revivals hurts his chances, but that much? Really? That is one of the few arguments against him. Another DK character being added has a very good chance, and based on what we know,I firmly believe K Rool is the best choice and has the best chance among DK newcomers.

Sakurai does indeed cater to popular requests, and K Rool is one of the top ones requested worldwide, on the same level as Mewtwo I would say. That alone is enough for him to be in, and he has other merits as well, and meets criteria (being a nintendo character is pretty much the only required criteria.)

Best choice, yes. Best chance? That's where we disgree, but to each their own

 

[The Light Music Club]

Look at Mario Sluggers roster and you will understand why it does not matter. That's the kind of Nintendo game that Nintendo just hands to a developer, says "Do what you want with it, just make it good", checks the game, then ships it. That game bares no effect on character's "appearances".

But still, Sakurai has a mind of his own. That man be crazy. Heck. I wouldn't be shocked if he put in "AmphibiCranky". A mutation of Cranky causing him to mutate into K Rool. And he looks disgusting. This is Sakurai guys.

Really? Name on character here that is important to the game they are in:

Except for maybe the babies, they all are important in some way. Even the Sunshine characters, since they show up everywhere in that game.

 

[Morbi]

...Well, they're technically the same person, just in a different form. And even then, Ganon also does not appear in every Zelda game, and, again, especially later ones. So I would still say that, going by the logic of the user I was responding to, Ganon/Ganondorf should not be considered the main antagonist of the Zelda franchise.

Also, did you see that edit I made to my last post?

Exactly the point, if Ganon and Ganondorf are the same entity (which there are) there is no logical reason to argue that he is not the main antagonist. However, I was just being facetious.

No.

So, by your logic, do you believe that Ganondorf is not the main villain of the Zelda franchise? And what about villains who aren't always villains? Characters like Bowser and King Dedede have more than once played the role of heroes within games. Do their inconsistent roles in their games cause them to lose the title of the main villain of their series?

Edit: @ Morbi I would agree with you that the Kremlings themselves don't directly point to the inclusion of King K. Rool on the roster. However, there's something I think you may be overlooking in regards to their presence in the game. Kremlings, along with K. Rool, haven't appeared in quite some time. They could have been ignored in this game in favor of something more recent. The fact that they are present in the game means that Sakurai is acknowledging the older Donkey Kong games in which the Kremlings and K. Rool appeared in, and judging by how the Kremlings are enemies in Smash Run, I would say it indicates that Sakurai recognizes their significance to the Donkey Kong series. The Kremlings presence in the game proves that they, and K. Rool, have not been forgotten; it puts a dent in a common argument used against K. Rool.

Ah, I see. That is certainly a notion that I did not contemplate. That is a great point, something that I will have to add to my evaluation. It was easy for me to overlook because I have only ever played Donkey Kong Country (as such, it is hard for me to even remember that they are "forgotten").

 

[JFM2796]

If Kid Icarus getting a revival warrants a new playable character I would imagine that Donkey Kong Country Return's success does as well. In my opinion it is really just a matter of Dixe vs. King K. Rool, but I also believe that getting both isn't completely out of the question.

 

[Johnknight1]

...Um, I'm not much of a Donkey Kong fan myself, but I don't think the series was ever really "dead." It still had fairly consistent releases, if I recall, which up until Returns included K. Rool.

Is there something I'm missing here?

If it makes money, it never dies.

Star Wars was "dead" for over a decade (twice essentially), and it's come back for a new trilogy each time.

Where there's money, there is content to make money soon after.

DKC is the biggest money maker for Nintendo home console games now that isn't the Wii/DS/Wii U series, Mario, Smash, or potentially Pokémon. It's more important to them financially than Zelda at this point, just like how it was until Ocarina of Time came out with the DK arcade and DKC trilogy run.