Oh boy, don't get me started on the "recentness" argument people abuse. I used to see it brought up a lot against Roy, for example.
While no one likes the recentness arguement being brought up, I've been noticing something for a while now regarding the newcomer selection and the remaining Gematsu characters.
Rosalina, Greninja, Palutena and Chrom are the only newcomers from existing IPs. All of the remaining characters are from new IPs. A trend can be seen between these four which is that each of these four are from, or heavily based on in Palutena's case, a recent game, being Mario Galaxy (2007), Pokemon XY (2013), Kid Icarus Uprising (2011) and Fire Emblem Awakening (2012). Is this trend coincidental or intentional?
Continuing on from that trend, the remaining new IPs are also recent IPs.
- Miis have been everywhere since 2006
- Wii Fit is from 2007
- Animal Crossing's been on every Nintendo console since the N64 in 2001
- Punch-Out Wii is from 2009
- 2010 had Xenoblade
- Rhythm Heaven Fever came out in 2011.
In fact, all of these new IPs are from the 2000s or later (with the exception of Little Mac). Again, did Sakurai intend for this to happen when he planned out the newcomers or is this pure coincidence?
If I am on to something, which I'm probably not but that's how theories work, this would mean that characters would indeed have had to appear in a recent game to be on the table. In terms of existing Smash IPs, all that comes to mind for me is Skyward Sword, Other M, Return to Dreamland, Triple Deluxe, Pikmin 3 and Tropical Freeze. For new IPs, I can think of Golden Sun (2010), Pushmo (2011) and Brain Age (2005).
Like I've said above, I have no idea if this is intentional or not. Relevancy has usually never meant anything in terms of roster selection but this trend with all of our newcomers so far is making me think that it is actually meaning something this time.