- Joined
- Sep 6, 2010
- Messages
- 3,655
- NNID
- WarioLand
The Smash direct was on a Tuesday, actually.We got greninja, Charizard, sheik, Zero suit and Yoshi on a Sunday. So I believe it.
AFAIK, we never got a reveal on the weekends and Monday.
Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
The Smash direct was on a Tuesday, actually.We got greninja, Charizard, sheik, Zero suit and Yoshi on a Sunday. So I believe it.
We got greninja, Charizard, sheik, Zero suit and Yoshi on a Sunday. So I believe it.
It was April 8th wasn't it?The Smash direct was on a Tuesday, actually.
AFAIK, we never got a reveal on the weekends and Monday.
We got greninja, Charizard, sheik, Zero suit and Yoshi on a Sunday. So I believe it.
you're right I'm dumb. My bad everybody.The Smash direct was on a Tuesday, actually.
AFAIK, we never got a reveal on the weekends and Monday.
Sunday? that was on a tuesday, April 8thWe got greninja, Charizard, sheik, Zero suit and Yoshi on a Sunday. So I believe it.
Lets talk about something different. What characters are you hoping to see appear in smash run as enemies? Here's my wishlist:
-Metool from mega man (confirmed)
-A really unfitting pokemon (Confirmed via Petil)
-SSE enemies (confirmed)
-Risen from FEA
-Ghosts from Luigi's mansion
I do not believe any leak; I was merely asserting that the notion that Snake is "EITHER playable OR not" is fallacious. I am asserting that it is presumptuous, there is nothing objective that supports that sentiment unless you account for the logical fallacy (hasty generalization) based on an out of context quote that is, more likely than not, being misconstrued. I would appreciate it if you did not put words in my mouth (insinuating that I believe something based on the fact that I do not believe the opposite perspective is erroneous).>believing this "leak"
>with not even any proof asides from "guys i got an email"
Come on guys. You can do better than that.
Come on.
-Risen (Fire Emblem Awakening)Lets talk about something different. What characters are you hoping to see appear in smash run as enemies?
And this is the best idea ever.-Fighting Polygon Team (Super Smash Bros.)
Enemies in smash run?
-Mewtwo
-Ridley
-K. Rool
-Ganandorf
-Wolf
-Meta Knight
-Wario
-Ghirahim
*See's Vaati missing from the list*Enemies in smash run?
-Mewtwo
-Ridley
-K. Rool
-Ganandorf
-Wolf
-Meta Knight
-Wario
-Ghirahim
Honestly while it's true that stating the "Snake is either playable or not in the game" thing as a fact is indeed fallacious, it's not a baseless assumption either. While we might not know the exact process of obtaining Snake's right to use him in the game, we do know that Konami is a lucrative company that regardless of whatever use Sakurai has for Snake, they wouldn't simply give him for free, and from the context of Sakurai's quote we can assume that the process of getting the rights isn't as simple as asking to a friend to let you use his phone.I do not believe any leak; I was merely asserting that the notion that Snake is "EITHER playable OR not" is fallacious. I am asserting that it is presumptuous, there is nothing objective that supports that sentiment unless you account for the logical fallacy (hasty generalization) based on an out of context quote that is, more likely than not, being misconstrued. I would appreciate it if you did not put words in my mouth (insinuating that I believe something based on the fact that I do not believe the opposite perspective is erroneous).
The worst part of this? Six others "liked" your post. Hence the allusion to the bandwagon appeal fallacy. Pathetic.
Well, Third Party Contracts do kind of make it so he's guaranteed to be playable. He's in or he's out. Nintendo would guarantee just having it as a trophy is a waste of contracting time and possibly money too.I was merely asserting that the notion that Snake is "EITHER playable OR not" is fallacious. I am asserting that it is presumptuous, there is nothing objective that supports that sentiment unless you account for the logical fallacy (hasty generalization) based on an out of context quote that is, more likely than not, being misconstrued.
Zubats would be awesome in Smash Run.ZUBATS (Pokémon) to get the satisfaction of beating them.
Also Pigmasks (Mother 3)
and Revenants (Fire Emblem)
Do you actually have the contract on hand? Or perhaps you have statements from both parties that indicate that they would only enter into a contract regarding playable characters and nothing more? I would like a link to this baseless claim, if it would not cause you any trouble. Unless you are alluding to our minimal precedent.I'd like to see the M32 Scout, M72 Unit and Offensive Hover Unit Mechon be Smash Run enemies. They'd be excellent additions and fearsome foes for the fighters. We've already got Pooka, Mettaurs and Motobugs from the Third Party franchises, but I really am curious what we'll see from other games. Maybe ROB enemies will return? Perhaps more SSE enemies? The latter seems very likely at this point with Smash Run being SSE combined with City Trial for the rogue's gallery of minor foes. (And nonsense Pokemon.)
As for other enemies, I'd prefer to see characters like Grima and Metal Face be bosses. Especially Metal Face.
Well, Third Party Contracts do kind of make it so he's guaranteed to be playable. He's in or he's out. Nintendo would guarantee just having it as a trophy is a waste of contracting time and possibly money too.
Getting Snake just as a trophy is pretty much a giant screw you to the public, one that Sakurai would much rather just bat a blind eye to than completely screw with endlessly (also seeing how he and Kojima are still friends it's likely a decision that wouldn't make ties between Konami and Nintendo any better).
These and:As for other enemies, I'd prefer to see characters like Grima and Metal Face be bosses. Especially Metal Face.
Why does this bother you so much?Do you actually have the contract on hand? Or perhaps you have statements from both parties that indicate that they would only enter into a contract regarding playable characters and nothing more? I would like a link to this baseless claim, if it would not cause you any trouble. Unless you are alluding to our minimal precedent.
I apologize, I did not see this comment before posting the earlier comment. You are correct, that is an oversight on my part. The assumption is not necessarily baseless. I feel as though many are over-estimating the contracting and the fees regarding the process though. It is not as tedious of a process as we presume. Sakurai alludes to the difficulty in a context pertaining to the implementation of the character (as he does not actually have the right to interpret the character unless he is exclusively granted that privilege), not the acquiring the rights aspect (which is as simple as filing and negotiating). In fact, based on my knowledge of contract law, he is referring more so to the parties involved than the process. As Snake was actualized once before, you do not have to repeat the same exact process. Just to clarify.Honestly while it's true that stating the "Snake is either playable or not in the game" thing as a fact is indeed fallacious, it's not a baseless assumption either. While we might not know the exact process of obtaining Snake's right to use him in the game, we do know that Konami is a lucrative company that regardless of whatever use Sakurai has for Snake, they wouldn't simply give him for free, and from the context of Sakurai's quote we can assume that the process of getting the rights isn't as simple as asking to a friend to let you use his phone.
So i think that it is a safe assumption to believe that Sakurai wouldn't get the rights of a franchise just to use one character as a trophy. With that said i agree that people were quick to misenterpret your comment and i apologize if this sounded offensive in any way, since i do not have intentions of discrediting your comments.
This reminds me that Black Shadow taking Ganondorf's moveset would make so much sense-Other F-Zero racers fighting asGanondorfCaptain Falcon clones
Glass Joe hordesF-Zero enemies should be miniature vehicles of other drivers because why not
I got nothing for Punch Out.
Flying boxing gloves and chocolate bars.F-Zero enemies should be miniature vehicles of other drivers because why not
I got nothing for Punch Out.
http://smashboards.com/threads/design-smash-run-enemies.352178/Everyone said:Smash Run Enemies.
Mods weren't stopping it, so I went with it.
"There are three infinite things in the world :ZUBATS (Pokémon) to get the satisfaction of beating them.
Also Pigmasks (Mother 3)
and Revenants (Fire Emblem)
"And I'm not sure about the universe.""There are three infinite things in the world :
• the universe
• human stupidity
• the number of zubat in dark caves"
- Albert Einstein
Well, it's not really designing the enemies, but it's saying: who do we want and who do we think would be enemies? Not really much how they will work, but simply discussing the chances of what appearing in Smash Run as an enemy is topical.
who is extremely popular in Japan that could be revealed?Remmeber this museum thing
We have a rumor picture
239457"]
Look at the box next too the miis and under villager
Reveal for this japan event perhaps?
(Ps its from gonintendo.com)
Hint: it's one of the swordsmen in your signature.who is extremely popular in Japan that could be revealed?
Ah ok i will admit i do not know Japan Popularity charts at all.Hint: it's one of the swordsmen in your signature.