Character Discussion Thread

[Con0rrrr]

You shouldn't hate yourself; we've all been destroyed/ganged up on in an argument/debate/discussion/whatever before. Anyone who says they haven't is lying.

I'm kind of kidding. But it does hurt me to present the evidence against one of my favorite characters XD

 

[Jedisupersonic]

View attachment 17834

This roster may be big (bigger then ridley) , but what do y'all think of it?

Lack of Isaac, 7 Pokemon and 6 Zelda characters make me salty but other then that I kinda like it.

 

[epicgordan]

Not to come off as rude or anything, but....

Now we're really opening a can of worms.

For the sake of brevity, a few other patterns (or "facts," if we're making that jump of Grand Canyon proportions):
--"We've never not gotten a fat mustachioed plumber as a newcomer in Smash. We're 100% getting one now too."
--"We've never not gotten a Star Fox newcomer in Smash. We're 100% getting one now too."
--"We've never not gotten two Pokemon newcomers in Smash. We're 100% getting two now too."
--"We've never gotten a character from a new series with just one game. Shulk has no chance at all."
--"We've never gotten a character with more than two guys onstage at once. Chorus Men have no chance at all."

The first pattern can be considered straw grasping rather than a real pattern. Besides, we still have Paper Mario and Jumpman who can very well be playable.

The second pattern doesn't mean much since the only game we got from Star Fox between no and Brawl's release was Star Fox 64 3DS. Melee was only two years after Smash 64, so it's not like Star Fox 64 wasn't still relevant either.

The third pattern is only relevant if you count Pokémon Trainer as one character. As Sakurai states otherwise, there really is not pattern here...unless you are to believe that we will be getting eight characters from the franchise.

The fourth pattern...has Roy having just one game. But if you were implying a one-game series, Xenoblade is actually a part of the same series that brought us Xenogears AND Xenosaga. The only thing new here is the company Monolith Soft currently works for.

The fifth pattern makes no sense at all, however. Especially if you consider each of the Pikmin that accompanies Olimar as separate guys. Besides, it's a new mechanic that we don't even know how it'd work, so....

And as for the Recency vs. Relevancy (what a dreadful word): The problem with K. Rool isn't just that he hasn't appeared in any of the more recent Donkey Kong games. Or that he isn't relevant at all. It's that on top of all that, Nintendo doesn't seem to give a crap about the character to attempt to revive him anytime soon. It's not that we all hate the idea of him being in the game. We're just being rational about his chances (btw, I don't consider Dixie Kong's chances to be any better, even with the recent release of Tropical Freeze; could still happen for DLC, though). It's almost as improbable as asking for classic Donkey Kong to be playable (not the star of DKC, or Cranky Kong), or Donkey Kong Jr.

Now, given the fact that Kremlings are enemies in Smash Run, I'd probably just give him the sixth most likely chance at getting in as a newcomer behind the likes of Chrom, Chorus Kids, Ridley, Mewtwo (technically, a veteran, but I digress), and yes, even Shulk, who is the only one of these characters not to have anything beyond outside sources loosely nodding towards his confirmation, or leaking his status. But here's another way to look at it: The enemies of Smash Run--or at least those not relating to SSE or Namco-Bandai--are directly related to each and every franchise so far to have at least confirmed character representation. The only exception to this are the Sneaky Spirits, and even then, it seems probable at this point that we'll get someone from Rhythm Heaven as a playable character. Ergo, Kremlings are tied to the Donkey Kong series. Guess who's playable? Donkey Kong and Diddy Kong. Not that this disconfirms King K. Rool, but even then, calling the Kremlings a character tease is more straw grasping than it is a hint. But, who knows for sure?

 

[FlareHabanero]

I'm prepared, I can accept that not everyone I want in will be in. It's part of being a good smash fan is to expect the unexpected and not complain when you don't get what you want.

Got to keep in mind that due to the better management, these two games are going to be better then the last installment. Hence why no matter what characters are included, the games are still going to be enjoyable.

 

[Jedisupersonic]

Got to keep in mind that due to the better management, these two games are going to be better then the last installment. Hence why no matter what characters are included, the games are still going to be enjoyable.

Of course, I enjoy all smash games still. This one I expect to like even more so

 

[Deleted member]

I'm probably the only one here, but this is actually my first time being involved in the community before the release of a Smash game. I didn't have a Wii or a computer when Brawl was coming out.

 

[Con0rrrr]

Not to come off as rude or anything, but....



The first pattern can be considered straw grasping rather than a real pattern. Besides, we still have Paper Mario and Jumpman who can very well be playable.

The second pattern doesn't mean much since the only game we got from Star Fox between no and Brawl's release was Star Fox 64 3DS. Melee was only two years after Smash 64, so it's not like Star Fox 64 wasn't still relevant either.

The third pattern is only relevant if you count Pokémon Trainer as one character. As Sakurai states otherwise, there really is not pattern here...unless you are to believe that we will be getting eight characters from the franchise.

The fourth pattern...has Roy having just one game. But if you were implying a one-game series, Xenoblade is actually a part of the same series that brought us Xenogears AND Xenosaga. The only thing new here is the company Monolith Soft currently works for.

The fifth pattern makes no sense at all, however. Especially if you consider each of the Pikmin that accompanies Olimar as separate guys. Besides, it's a new mechanic that we don't even know how it'd work, so....

And as for the Recency vs. Relevancy (what a dreadful word): The problem with K. Rool isn't just that he hasn't appeared in any of the more recent Donkey Kong games. Or that he isn't relevant at all. It's that on top of all that, Nintendo doesn't seem to give a crap about the character to attempt to revive him anytime soon. It's not that we all hate the idea of him being in the game. We're just being rational about his chances (btw, I don't consider Dixie Kong's chances to be any better, even with the recent release of Tropical Freeze; could still happen for DLC, though). It's almost as improbable as asking for classic Donkey Kong to be playable (not the star of DKC, or Cranky Kong), or Donkey Kong Jr.

Now, given the fact that Kremlings are enemies in Smash Run, I'd probably just give him the sixth most likely chance at getting in as a newcomer behind the likes of Chrom, Chorus Kids, Ridley, Mewtwo (technically, a veteran, but I digress), and yes, even Shulk, who is the only one of these characters not to have anything beyond outside sources loosely nodding towards his confirmation, or leaking his status. But here's another way to look at it: The enemies of Smash Run--or at least those not relating to SSE or Namco-Bandai--are directly related to each and every franchise so far to have at least confirmed character representation. The only exception to this are the Sneaky Spirits, and even then, it seems probable at this point that we'll get someone from Rhythm Heaven as a playable character. Ergo, Kremlings are tied to the Donkey Kong series. Guess who's playable? Donkey Kong and Diddy Kong. Not that this disconfirms King K. Rool, but even then, calling the Kremlings a character tease is more straw grasping than it is a hint. But, who knows for sure?

Pretty much what I wanted to say, but didn't have the time to address each of those ridiculous "patterns". I agree on the Kremling thing too. They are Donkey Kong enemies, and definently make the most sense of any DKC "grunt" for a simple enemy.

I didn't address this at risk of making the K Rool franchise even more furious. But the Gamexplain video that says he saw Kremlings in Smash Run, people take it as evidence towards playability. But what if by "Larger Kremling" they meant K Rool as a boss? Don't kill me please. But it makes sense.

 

[ElPanandero]

Am I the only one kind of bumming about this year's crop of newcomers? Other than Megaman, kind of pac man, and Rosalina because I love puppet characters, I'm neutral and uninterested in the newcoemrs (except Plateuna, mii's, and the WFT because her spot could go to another character). I don't know I'm hoping for a surprise reveal that makes me excited to play as someone new *coughissaccough*

 

[Pazzo.]

I'm probably the only one here, but this is actually my first time being involved in the community before the release of a Smash game. I didn't have a Wii or a computer when Brawl was coming out.

You're not alone. *Whistles nonchalantly*

An interesting note: We haven't seen Issac as an AT....

 

[BKupa666]

Now you're really veering off track. You cannot deny things like how K Rool was not in DKC reboots, and I know you are not denying that. But you're denying that means something. But what? Sluggers means more than the characters OWN series? I'm getting mad because not only are you completely ignoring what I have said, you are trying to make what I have presented seem illiterate by changing the subject to matters completely off track such as what I just quoted from you.

From K Rool fan to K Rool fan, you're being very stubborn. And I did not expect that from you seeing as you're respected here. I get the bias, but it goes over the line when you begin ignoring obvious details, facts, and evidence just because you do not like it. My post was completely objective and I personally edited it to make sure there was no Subjective opinions in there just because I want K Rool. Maybe you're not used to seeing an objective view to K Rool, as once again, you are the biggest K Rool fan here. But you need to look past that and respect what is true. You are taking the conversation unnecessarily off track which is not necessary. All I ask is respect for evidence and you're not taking it, you are only denying it with completely biased reasoning.

I went on a relevant (heh) tangent regarding Smash patterns, and how, just because you can point to something and interpret it one way, doesn't mean it was a conscious decision that will forevermore hold true (again, correlation does not equal causation). I'm not mad whatsoever in discussing this, and I don't understand why you are now, unless you expected people to just nod and accept everything you wrote in your lengthy post up there, despite it taking multiple creative liberties with regard to how we know characters are decided upon, as well as that an objective definition for "relevance" exists.

There's nothing subjective about my stance on K. Rool. . .I think the two most recurring arguments leveled at him ("he's irrelevant" and "he's competing with Dixie") are fan-made in the absence of any actual substantiated arguments against him, but that he still stands a reasonable chance at being excluded for reasons we may never know unless they're somehow addressed. Me not giving credence to fan-made speculation vs. actual developer insight isn't bias, it's common sense.

Here's a reverse comparison: the group that recognizes global warming in the U.S. points to 97% of peer-reviewed scientific research indicating its existence, while the denier group points to blog posts and outdated studies. The rational people who recognize global warming's existence aren't biased for not giving credence to flawed "proof" to the contrary. Me siding with credible source Sakurai repeatedly bringing up certain factors (uniqueness/gameplay/popularity) and never others ("relevance," "slots," "too big") falls along those lines. And on that note, I'm not the Ken Ham you're making me out to be, where I'll never accept anything but my current stance because it's holy and infallible, I'm a Bill Nye who will change my stance the moment actual evidence is given.

So far, it hasn't.

 

[Deleted member]

An interesting note: We haven't seen Issac as an AT....

I hate to be "That downer guy," but Isaac's AT was hidden in Brawl.

 

[False Sense]

Ergo, Kremlings are tied to the Donkey Kong series. Guess who's playable? Donkey Kong and Diddy Kong. Not that this disconfirms King K. Rool, but even then, calling the Kremlings a character tease is more straw grasping than it is a hint. But, who knows for sure?

I get the feeling you don't quite understand why the Kremlings being in Smash Run is significant. It's true that they are generic enemy characters from the Donkey Kong series, so they make sense for Smash Run. But think, when was the last time the Kremlings were in a Donkey Kong game? They, along with K. Rool, have been left out of recent games. But for the first time in years, they've appeared again. Sakurai didn't need to include them as enemies if he thought they weren't relevant/significant enough. But apparently, he did. The fact that Sakurai is acknowledging their significance to the Donkey Kong series means that it's more likely that he recognizes K. Rool's significance to the series, and wouldn't mind the fact that he hasn't appeared in awhile.

 

[ihskeyp]

I hate to be "That downer guy," but Isaac's AT was hidden in Brawl.

That's true, but since it hasn't yet been announced he is still a possible newcomer.

 

[True Blue Warrior]

Doesn't Mega Man's inclusion show that recency or rather "relevancy" (emphasis on quotes) is not the be-all end all of roster decisions? Some people even said Pac-Man wouldn't be in because he isn't "relevant" and look at where we are

 

[Pazzo.]

I hate to be "That downer guy," but Isaac's AT was hidden in Brawl.

Really? I had no idea.

 

[Deleted member]

That's true, but since it hasn't yet been announced he is still a possible newcomer.

This is true. I'm just a pessimist. And only really care about Shulk when it comes to newcomers.

Doesn't Mega Man's inclusion show that recency or rather "relevancy" (emphasis on quotes) is not the be-all end all of roster decisions? Some people even said Pac-Man wouldn't be in because he isn't "relevant" and look at where we are

Using his face as an equivalent to the troll face

 

[BluePikmin11]

Doesn't Mega Man's inclusion show that recency or rather "relevancy" (emphasis on quotes) is not the be-all end all of roster decisions? Some people even said Pac-Man wouldn't be in because he isn't "relevant" and look at where we are

That is a bad argument against Pac-Man and it is arguing at it's worst.

 

[Spinosaurus]

After presenting evidence against K Rool

but also after presenting evidence against K Rool...

No one hates you for it, it's fine if you think a character is unlikely. If someone actually thinks you're an idiot for it then that's really childish.

Smash speculation isn't so serious (or, it SHOULDN'T be) as to point at each other and call names, which happens way too often.

 

[Deleted member]

Smash speculation isn't so serious (or, it SHOULDN'T be) as to point at each other and call names, which happens way too often.

Why so serious?

 

[Con0rrrr]

I went on a relevant (heh) tangent regarding Smash patterns, and how, just because you can point to something and interpret it one way, doesn't mean it was a conscious decision that will forevermore hold true (again, correlation does not equal causation). I'm not mad whatsoever in discussing this, and I don't understand why you are now, unless you expected people to just nod and accept everything you wrote in your lengthy post up there, despite it taking multiple creative liberties with regard to how we know characters are decided upon, as well as that an objective definition for "relevance" exists.

There's nothing subjective about my stance on K. Rool. . .I think the two most recurring arguments leveled at him ("he's irrelevant" and "he's competing with Dixie") are fan-made in the absence of any actual substantiated arguments against him, but that he still stands a reasonable chance at being excluded for reasons we may never know unless they're somehow addressed. Me not giving credence to fan-made speculation vs. actual developer insight isn't bias, it's common sense.

Here's a reverse comparison: the group that recognizes global warming in the U.S. points to 97% of peer-reviewed scientific research indicating its existence, while the denier group points to blog posts and outdated studies. The rational people who recognize global warming's existence aren't biased for not giving credence to flawed "proof" to the contrary. And on that note, I'm not the Ken Ham you're making me out to be, where I'll never accept anything but my current stance because it's holy and infallible, I'm a Bill Nye who will change my stance the moment actual evidence is given.

So far, it hasn't.

Thank you for explaining. I at least see your reasoning now. But I feel as though the evidence I presented is not just patterns. Maybe the relevancy discussion, even though I still stand by that. But being left out of a reboot in my opinion is a much larger deal than it is made out to be.

it's not that I'm mad people did not like my post. I knew that going into it. I am a little angry though that people are saying what I presented is not evidence without any good reasoning. I feel the only "reasoning" I have seen in regards to some of your arguments and most others against mine is just because you don't like me going against K Rool.

At the end of your post you say you will not change your stance till evidence is given. Alright then. Please explain the evidence that we have seen that points towards K Rool's playability besides the Kremlings in Smash Run as that can be interpreted many different ways. As I said in my original posts, I get a little annoyed when people think K Rool is in just because he deserves it, and that still is all I have seen presented by you and anyone else.

Also in regards to you not changing your stance, I did not expect you to. In fact, I do not want you to. Diehard supporters like you are what keeps K Rools "chances" alive. I do expect you however to recognize what has been presented against him. Which mostly was in my original post. Even the arguments that are not the "relevancy" one (which again, I still standby) are enough to at least make you think, instead of insist it's all "patterns".

I get the feeling you don't quite understand why the Kremlings being in Smash Run is significant. It's true that they are generic enemy characters from the Donkey Kong series, so they make sense for Smash Run. But think, when was the last time the Kremlings were in a Donkey Kong game? They, along with K. Rool, have been left out of recent games. But for the first time in years, they've appeared again. Sakurai didn't need to include them as enemies if he thought they weren't relevant/significant enough. But apparently, he did. The fact that Sakurai is acknowledging their significance to the Donkey Kong series means that it's more likely that he recognizes K. Rool's significance to the series, and wouldn't mind the fact that he hasn't appeared in awhile.

Kremlings have been recurring when K Rool has not in some situations, such as Mario Strikers Charged, and potentially some others if I'm not mistaken. As I also already said, Kremlings are an easy "grunt" type to add.

But let's say Sakurai recognizes K Rool. Is he really significant to the series anymore? He has been left out of the reboots twice now without mention. And I can't speak for Sakurai, but potentially in his eyes the reboots could be all that matters to him. Again, I am NOT saying that is what he's thinking, I'm just saying it is a possibility.

Edit: So sorry for the double post. This thread just moves so fast I just assumed there'd be a post by now XD

 

[BKupa666]

Not to come off as rude or anything, but....

The first pattern can be considered straw grasping rather than a real pattern. Besides, we still have Paper Mario and Jumpman who can very well be playable.

The second pattern doesn't mean much since the only game we got from Star Fox between no and Brawl's release was Star Fox 64 3DS. Melee was only two years after Smash 64, so it's not like Star Fox 64 wasn't still relevant either.

The third pattern is only relevant if you count Pokémon Trainer as one character. As Sakurai states otherwise, there really is not pattern here...unless you are to believe that we will be getting eight characters from the franchise.

The fourth pattern...has Roy having just one game. But if you were implying a one-game series, Xenoblade is actually a part of the same series that brought us Xenogears AND Xenosaga. The only thing new here is the company Monolith Soft currently works for.

The fifth pattern makes no sense at all, however. Especially if you consider each of the Pikmin that accompanies Olimar as separate guys. Besides, it's a new mechanic that we don't even know how it'd work, so....

And as for the Recency vs. Relevancy (what a dreadful word): The problem with K. Rool isn't just that he hasn't appeared in any of the more recent Donkey Kong games. Or that he isn't relevant at all. It's that on top of all that, Nintendo doesn't seem to give a crap about the character to attempt to revive him anytime soon. It's not that we all hate the idea of him being in the game. We're just being rational about his chances (btw, I don't consider Dixie Kong's chances to be any better, even with the recent release of Tropical Freeze; could still happen for DLC, though). It's almost as improbable as asking for classic Donkey Kong to be playable (not the star of DKC, or Cranky Kong), or Donkey Kong Jr.

Now, given the fact that Kremlings are enemies in Smash Run, I'd probably just give him the sixth most likely chance at getting in as a newcomer behind the likes of Chrom, Chorus Kids, Ridley, Mewtwo (technically, a veteran, but I digress), and yes, even Shulk, who is the only one of these characters not to have anything beyond outside sources loosely nodding towards his confirmation, or leaking his status. But here's another way to look at it: The enemies of Smash Run--or at least those not relating to SSE or Namco-Bandai--are directly related to each and every franchise so far to have at least confirmed character representation. The only exception to this are the Sneaky Spirits, and even then, it seems probable at this point that we'll get someone from Rhythm Heaven as a playable character. Ergo, Kremlings are tied to the Donkey Kong series. Guess who's playable? Donkey Kong and Diddy Kong. Not that this disconfirms King K. Rool, but even then, calling the Kremlings a character tease is more straw grasping than it is a hint. But, who knows for sure?

Nothing rude there. They're throwaway patterns that sound ridiculous because they are, and yet, there's just as much evidence that they were conscious decisions as there is that "relevance" is a factor behind character decisions.

I don't rate K. Rool above any of those five listed characters, nor do I deny Nintendo's current indifference toward him (not that it matters with Masahiro "I decide what goes in the game, no one else" Sakurai calling the shots). But again, you're treating "relevance" as this objective thing with Classic DK and DK Jr. I don't think they're getting in because K. Rool and Dixie are the more obvious choices based on known criteria, but who's to say, if a fanbase really started rallying around those characters and unique aspects to them were pointed out or discovered, that they're unlikely strictly on the basis of being old? They certainly are important enough. . .

This Kremling thing has been beaten into the ground before. It was a conscious decision to bring them back, instead of just porting Tikis over from DKCR 3DS, which would have been the easy solution; the "they're DK's enemies" excuse covers K. Rool as well. The "Kremling Boss" is unlikely to be K. Rool because of how we know the boss events to work.

Also, nice fake leak over on the 3DS GameFAQs board. Pity you had that oversight about the Steel Diver.

 

[Con0rrrr]

Nothing rude there. They're throwaway patterns that sound ridiculous because they are, and yet, there's just as much evidence that they were conscious decisions as there is that "relevance" is a factor behind character decisions.

While I see where you're coming from here. I disagree that my argument is as ridiculous. It has never been countered, but more than that, it makes sense given the Smash Bros. series. The "patterns" you presented are just ridiculous things brought up. While my relevancy argument can potentially make sense from Sakurai's point of view. And that's where your "patterns" differ from my argument. Mine is something a developer would consider, "Alright I need a new DK character what's a big character in the series right now?" While your pattern of, "We've never not gotten a fat mustachioed plumber as a newcomer in Smash. We're 100% getting one now too", would certainly be questioned in development, as that makes 0 sense.

 

[Deleted member]

Doesn't Mega Man's inclusion show that recency or rather "relevancy" (emphasis on quotes) is not the be-all end all of roster decisions? Some people even said Pac-Man wouldn't be in because he isn't "relevant" and look at where we are

Relevancy has nothing to do with highly requested or wanted third parties, or new series representation in general. Please do tell how relevant Ice Climbers were at the time of Melee or Pit for Brawl. However, relevancy does matter when giving an existing series new characters. Just look at all the talk about a newcomer from FE Awakening. Or how much people wanted Palutena. It's also the same reason we got Lucario in Brawl, and Greninja in this game. Whether or not relevancy matters depends on the character itself, the series they are from, and their popularity.

 

[Opossum]

I didn't address this at risk of making the K Rool franchise even more furious. But the Gamexplain video that says he saw Kremlings in Smash Run, people take it as evidence towards playability. But what if by "Larger Kremling" they meant K Rool as a boss? Don't kill me please. But it makes sense.

The reason I see for this pointing to playability generally comes down to this: we've seen what "Smash Run bosses" entail. If Bonkers is anything to go by, they're moreso just mini-bosses from different series, and are treated as such. I can't see them giving K. Rool, the main antagonist, a role where he basically wanders a map where his own minions appear by the dozen. Hence, it makes sense for it to have been Klump, Krusha, Kludge, or Kudgel. That's my view on it, anyway, haha.

 

[Louie G.]

I saw someone say Ridley was more likely than K. Rool?

Come on guys.

 

[epicgordan]

I get the feeling you don't quite understand why the Kremlings being in Smash Run is significant. It's true that they are generic enemy characters from the Donkey Kong series, so they make sense for Smash Run. But think, when was the last time the Kremlings were in a Donkey Kong game? They, along with K. Rool, have been left out of recent games. But for the first time in years, they've appeared again. Sakurai didn't need to include them as enemies if he thought they weren't relevant/significant enough. But apparently, he did. The fact that Sakurai is acknowledging their significance to the Donkey Kong series means that it's more likely that he recognizes K. Rool's significance to the series, and wouldn't mind the fact that he hasn't appeared in awhile.

Oh, I get the significance. But when one applies that sort of logic, then clearly, any major enemy from any major franchise represented could hint towards their respective playable villainous reps. Granted, I understand why people treat it like a big deal. But at least the Sneaky Spirits means something concrete. Do the Kremlings mean anything more than DK enemies? Not saying they won't be in the game; but I do believe that we shouldn't jump to any conclusions until we know more.

It's kind of like the Trophy Quiz; people assume that the four trophies each hint towards a newcomer reveal from their respective franchises. Why? Because everybody was expecting to see Chrom and Palutena playable; Ridley was highly anticipated; and people were wanting a new Zelda representative (Ghirahim, Ganon, Impa, or Tingle). However, when one looks closely, we were still short a FE and Zelda veteran at the time, and we have since gotten Ike back.

Of course, another way to read a Zelda newcomer is the return of Ganondorf, but with a completely different moveset, so that he in essence, becomes a new character. But that is assuming that we get Ridley and Chrom down the line as well

Or even another way: Only a couple trophies were hinting towards newcomers, while the others are merely to disguise which ones are the genuine hints.

I don't raise my expectations that high over a newcomer based on enemies when the enemies themselves already came from an already represented series. The Kremlings, for all we know, could be nothing short of a red herring.
Now, I do not believe quite yet that K. Rool would be a boss in Smash Run either simply because the Kremiing boss was not identified by name. Think a character like K. Rool would be easy to identify....

 

[Con0rrrr]

The reason I see for this pointing to playability generally comes down to this: we've seen what "Smash Run bosses" entail. If Bonkers is anything to go by, they're moreso just mini-bosses from different series, and are treated as such. I can't see them giving K. Rool, the main antagonist, a role where he basically wanders a map where his own minions appear by the dozen. Hence, it makes sense for it to have been Klump, Krusha, Kludge, or Kudgel. That's my view on it, anyway, haha.

But he isn't the main antagonist anymore.

I definently see your point though. Even if he isn't anymore, that shouldn't be his role in the game. But we know Kraid is a Smash Run boss as well. He's extremely large. So if Kraid works, then I definently see how K Rool would work. (Kremling Raid is seen on the screen and there's raining Kremlings and the only way to make it stop is to defeat K Rool....kidding)

I saw someone say Ridley was more likely than K. Rool?

Come on guys.

For me, at the moment, yes. He's playable character sized, been teased forever, and is the most wanted. K Rool is nowhere to be seen. There's a lot more detail I could go into, just ask for smashoperatingbuddy123's post. Alderalo also has some good ones.

 

[Opossum]

But he isn't the main antagonist anymore.

I definently see your point though. Even if he isn't anymore, that shouldn't be his role in the game. But we know Kraid is a Smash Run boss as well. He's extremely large. So if Kraid works, then I definently see how K Rool would work. (Kremling Raid is seen on the screen and there's raining Kremlings and the only way to make it stop is to defeat K Rool....kidding)

I'd say he's still the main antagonist of the series. He's been the final boss more than any other DK boss has.

And a common theory was that it was likely a Fake Kraid, which are noticeably smaller. This would work well with the "miniboss" theory, as Fake Kraids are treated much like Bonkers in Kirby is.

 

[Con0rrrr]

I'd say he's still the main antagonist of the series. He's been the final boss more than any other DK boss has.

And a common theory was that it was likely a Fake Kraid, which are noticeably smaller. This would work well with the "miniboss" theory, as Fake Kraids are treated much like Bonkers in Kirby is.

Hmm I see. My argument for the main antagonist thing is that with the new DKC reboots, it almost renders the previous ones less important seeing as they series is 100% "rebooted". I'm sure you see where I'm coming from so I won't go into detail, but that's where I'm coming from.

 

[Opossum]

Hmm I see. My argument for the main antagonist thing is that with the new DKC reboots, it almost renders the previous ones less important seeing as they series is 100% "rebooted". I'm sure you see where I'm coming from so I won't go into detail, but that's where I'm coming from.

I wouldn't really call it a reboot. It's more of a revival, hence "Returns." Even then, he's still the main antagonist of the series. Lord Frederick and Tiki Tong definitely aren't, that's for sure.

 

[Jedisupersonic]

I wouldn't really call it a reboot. It's more of a revival, hence "Returns." Even then, he's still the main antagonist of the series. Lord Frederick and Tiki Tong definitely aren't, that's for sure.

I did a double take when I saw.. Lord Fredrick.

I'm not much a DKC player but a big FE one so thats probably why.. I thought in my head instantly

"FREDRICK CAN'T RECLASS TO LORD"

 

[Espio264]

This is how I see it:
(This is my 600th post. I'm gonna wax all poetic like.)

There are points A through X. Everything we know up until now. The past. Fact.

There is point Y. Now

And there is point Z. The game(s) in our hands.

What makes the time between Y and Z fun is speculation. It's what keeps us coming back here everyday. It's what bonds us together as a community. If Sakurai came out at E3 last year and said, "Guess what! New Smash Bros! There are 48 characters. Here they all are. Here's all the stages. Here's all the music and extras and nuances to the playstyle. Chew on that for 18 months." - the time between Y and Z would be really boring.

He leaves us with the unknown, with speculation to fuel our imaginations and get us excited about the possibilities. This is why we throw in our K. Rools and our Ridleys and our Mewtwos, because they excite us, and they are not yet part of X, fact.

And if you think you know what Z, the end is, then you're full of ****. And if you think this or that believable leak makes you part of the exclusive club that can condescend to those who are trying to make Y, the now, fun through speculation, then you're full of ****, and you're a D-bag.

Especially since we have reasonable cause to believe there is a Z + 1, DLC, coming. It means that there is still possibility beyond the supposed end of the journey, an epilogue if you will.

Let us have our Isaacs and Toads and Ivysaurs and Paper Marios. Because we ain't at Z yet, and you don't know ****.

And above all else, Falco's the man.

 

[BKupa666]

At the end of your post you say you will not change your stance till evidence is given. Alright then. Please explain the evidence that we have seen that points towards K Rool's playability besides the Kremlings in Smash Run as that can be interpreted many different ways. As I said in my original posts, I get a little annoyed when people think K Rool is in just because he deserves it, and that still is all I have seen presented by you and anyone else.

I look at character likelihood from the perspective of "Which known boxes do they check?" rather than "What can be seen and interpreted positively in their favor." With K. Rool. . .

--Sakurai's Four Criteria (K. Rool fits all four, albeit it can be argued for most characters)
--Sakurai can add characters at the behest of fans (the definition of "popular" can be argued, but based on Mega Man, who was cited as a big request and was on the polls we followed, it looks to match up with ours)
--This recent spiel from Famitsu (talks about individuality, strategy, entertainment value)
--Brawl interview quote (searching for the link) "there are only so many characters entitled to step onto the battlefield" (read: there are only so many important characters before the bottom of the barrel is scraped)

With K. Rool, not only does he check those boxes, but he stands out as more popular (based on countless online polls) and more important (main villain) than a fair chunk of the pool, and can be argued as more obviously unique as well (has clearly visible unique moves, as opposed to ones that need to be invented). If he's in, his inclusion can be attributed to those factors. If not, it'll be because Sakurai either believed other characters fulfilled them better, or because he has some other reason he may or may not share specific to him.

 

[JFM2796]

I think people are kind of missing just how significant the Kremling's appearance in Smash Run is.

These characters have never been enemies in Smash before, not in Melee's adventure mode or Brawl's Donkey Kong Country themed SSE levels, where the enemies were instead Koopas and Goombas. And we know it wasn't due to any copyright shenanigans, seeing as we get Kremling trophies in Melee and Brawl.

So the question is if recency is so important, why were they brought back as an enemy Smash run now rather than just the Tikis and other cannonfodder from the reboots? Is it because Sakurai recognizes them as an integral part of the DK franchise in spite of their disappearance? Because that is what the evidence seems to point to.

K. Rool is in the game without a doubt. As a playable character? That isn't so certain.

 

[epicgordan]

Also, nice fake leak over on the 3DS GameFAQs board. Pity you had that oversight about the Steel Diver.

Thanks. I actually hope nobody spoils the fun over there. It just seems a bit fun trying to make up your own leaks since they appeared to have done it for a short while after the Petilil leak was confirmed fake.

I saw someone say Ridley was more likely than K. Rool?
Come on guys.

Yes, I said it. Not only are there much more concrete hints pointing in Ridley's favor in contrast to K. Rool, but it's already been confirmed that at the very least, Ridley will be the in the game in some capacity or another. Whether he's a boss, a character, or both, however, remains to be seen. And yes, they can be both. The Ridley in Other M is a clone of the real Ridley who was killed previously. And if Brawl can give us Ridley and Meta Ridley, then Wii U can have both the original and clone Ridley together simultaneously.

Speaking of which, I'd like end this with a joke:

Ridley: So, I heard I am to be playable in Smash Brothers, huh?
K. Rool: How? Aren't you too big?
Ridley: Size doesn't matter, really.
K. Rool: That's not what I heard!
Ridley: ?
K. Rool: Hey, Kalypso! You can get up now!
Kalypso: Mmm...that was one, big, juicy sausage!
K. Rool: Yeah, baby!
Ridley: ...Ugh...I think I'm going to be sick.

Go ahead, Robot Chicken! Steal the joke!

 

[Con0rrrr]

I look at character likelihood from the perspective of "Which known boxes do they check?" rather than "What can be seen and interpreted positively in their favor." With K. Rool. . .

--Sakurai's Four Criteria (K. Rool fits all four, albeit it can be argued for most characters)
--Sakurai can add characters at the behest of fans (the definition of "popular" can be argued, but based on Mega Man, who was cited as a big request and was on the polls we followed, it looks to match up with ours)
--This recent spiel from Famitsu (talks about individuality, strategy, entertainment value)
--Brawl interview quote (searching for the link) "there are only so many characters entitled to step onto the battlefield" (read: there are only so many important characters before the bottom of the barrel is scraped)

With K. Rool, not only does he check those boxes, but he stands out as more popular (based on countless online polls) and more important (main villain) than a fair chunk of the pool, and can be argued as more obviously unique as well (has clearly visible unique moves, as opposed to ones that need to be invented). If he's in, his inclusion can be attributed to those factors. If not, it'll be because Sakurai either believed other characters fulfilled them better, or because he has some other reason he may or may not share specific to him.

What I meant is evidence presented by Nintendo. Which is something chararaters like Ridley or the Chorus Men have. We've analyzed gameplay and came to a conclusion.

You told me how he deserves to be playable. Which, believe me, is something I know. He deserves it. But there's almost nothing that points towards him actually being in. Which is what I asked for.

This exact argument for him "being playable" is just how he deserves to. Which is what you posted. And that's why I get annoyed when people say he is for sure in the game. There's barely anything to support that besides "he deserves it".

 

[FlareHabanero]

Fyi, the whole recent thing only works for Fire Emblem and Pokémon, due to the factors of a new character being included with every passing installment, and in interviews it was mentioned several times that there are intentions to get the newest guy, blatantly in the case of Pokémon for promotional purposes.

 

[BKupa666]

What I meant is evidence presented by Nintendo. Which is something chararaters like Ridley or the Chorus Men have. We've analyzed gameplay and came to a conclusion.

You told me how he deserves to be playable. Which, believe me, is something I know. He deserves it. But there's almost nothing that points towards him actually being in. Which is what I asked for.

This exact argument for him "being playable" is just how he deserves to. Which is what you posted. And that's why I get annoyed when people say he is for sure in the game. There's barely anything to support that besides "he deserves it".

Those factors being factors is a general positive as far as him being in, or at least being a candidate to be in. As far as specific items that can be seen and interpreted, you already mentioned the Kremlings, whose significance a lot of people really undervalue despite many of them being the ones who expected nothing but Returns content in the game. . .someone already mentioned it, but I think they guarantee K. Rool some role in the game (playable/boss/AT). They've never appeared as enemy mooks without him involved somehow.

"Large Kremling" is a bigger, more compelling factor in K. Rool's favor because, based on what we know of boss events, they're large generic enemies; the two obvious Kremling candidates (Klump/Krusha) have been missing even longer than K. Rool and the Kritters. Someone could argue "Oh, the Kritters are just there to 'rep classic DK,' but having multiple Kremling enemies, including a revived and fleshed-out boss one, is more of a sign that Sakurai/Namco really intend to stress the Kremlings as THE definitive DK enemies, despite two games' absence. Yes, "Large Kremling" could technically be K. Rool if there are two different varieties of boss events that both match up with the Nintendo Rep's description, but that strikes me as improbable based on what we've seen.

tl;dr More Kremling prominence = better odds of a bigger role for Rool

 

[Rockaphin]

I'm still hoping for Paper Mario. And I'll probably be hoping until the next game, whenever that may be. I'll post my updated roster soon.

 

[False Sense]

Oh, I get the significance. But when one applies that sort of logic, then clearly, any major enemy from any major franchise represented could hint towards their respective playable villainous reps. Granted, I understand why people treat it like a big deal. But at least the Sneaky Spirits means something concrete. Do the Kremlings mean anything more than DK enemies? Not saying they won't be in the game; but I do believe that we shouldn't jump to any conclusions until we know more.

No, you still don't get it. I am not making the claim that Kremlings hint towards K. Rool because they are his minions. I never used that "logic." I am making the claim that the Kremlings may indicate that K. Rool could be in due to being old Donkey Kong enemies that have not appeared in awhile, which puts a dent in the "relevancy" argument. Why would Sakurai have the Kremlings in the game if he thought they were too old and unimportant? The fact that he added them in means he is pulling content from those older Donkey Kong games. King K. Rool was prominent in those older games, thus, it makes sense that he would be considered for a playable status.