You know, I am genuinely amused by talk of tiers, because it is about 92% subjective. The idea is that given even skill between two players, what would be the heirarchy, but the problem is that there are no two players which have even skills. Not just vertically, but horizontally as well. That is different people always have different strengths and different weaknesses, and that applies to people who are both practiced and skilled. Since you have no folks who are even to test it on, its all based on what your personal oppinion of a character is. Which there is nothing wrong with, so long as you treat it as an oppinion, rather than a fact.
Okay, enough of that.
So, props to whoever created this topic, its good to take a break from the waves of character suggestions, and consider what we want left out.
Personally, though, I feel that most people are too quick to give characters the boot. Game'N'Watch, for example. That is one decent character, but most folks around here seem to want him out. Now if we didn't have all kinds of fanboys suggesting poorly developed, fad characters such as Daisy or Waluigi, or characters which have literally no connection to Nintendo, Smash Bros., or anything Smash Bros. is based on such as Cloud, Sora, or Cookie Monster (okay, so perhaps that last one wasn't serious, but at this point I feel there is no floor to the depths of insanity people will suggest given enough time), then I could see the sense in suggesting his removal. But think about it, he's original, he's Nintendo owned, and he didn't come from a game series which has already been pillaged of its important characters. That aside, he actually plays pretty d*** well if you take the time to learn.
I guess that's what bothers me about most of the suggestions I've heard around recently, so many have been so self oriented. I mean, it seems like no objective thought is given to the intelligence of the suggestions, but it should be folllowed because Nintendo is your personal b**** that should follow your suggestions, and only your suggestions, because they are making the game for you, and not the hundreds of thousands of other people who will play it. Yes, let's take out Game'N'Watch, not because he's a bad character, not because he doesn't fit in the game, not because he isn't owned by the company making the game, but because YOU personallly happen to dislike him as a character. Of course, not to pick on all of the folks who want him ommitted, as I'm certain some of you have very valid reasoning, and my frusterations are far more on a corporate level, with prevailing attitude that is sure to backfire on society in general, but I have seen exhibited on what seems to me to be astronomical levels here in this forum recently. So, I guess all preceding rantage is to say that if you have an oppinion, please examine it objectively, and consider WHY you think what you think, before assuming it is a well thought out idea.
That said, my appologies for the ranting.
In any case, I've seen some interesting thoughts on the clones. It seems that Nintendo is going to have a tricky time no matter how they handle them, though. That is, the clones, as they are now demand change. I suppose you could argue with that point, but I think from Nintendo's POV they will at least require revision, as every other character will recieve revision. So, the question then becomes "how much change?" Change to the point of removal of a character? Or just subtle changes? This is where much of it digresses to subjective oppinions about characters. I mean, I personally don't want to see Falco changed much, as he is one of my favorite characters, but that doesn't mean it's a bad idea. I mean, he does need to be separated from Fox, and therefore I am torn between my own tastes and what makes the most sense. So with Falco, I would suggest very little revision. However, my own biases aside, I would like to see most of the clones stay.
In truth, I feel there is only one character who's apparent lack of popularity and difficulty in usage could warrent complete omission. That would be Pichu. Pichu seems to me to be a fad character. That is, he was in Pokemon Silver/Gold, he was tied to Pikachu, he achieved localized popularity, and I feel Nintendo looked at that, and threw him in without much forthought. Now, a few years later, he hasn't appeared in much, hasn't been the focus of anything, and in truth is a very forgettable character within both the Pokemon and Smash Bros. franchises. As far as playability goes, he has such a distinct disadvantage through damaging himself in his attacks that I really don't think a vast ammount of players really use him. In essence, I don't feel like Nintendo has much to lose by kicking him. Now, if he came from a unique franchise, all of this would be different, but there are three other Pokemon representing said franchise, so it isn't as though they're dropping the franchise by kicking him (one of my issues with dropping G'n'W).
You know, the more I write the more appathetic I get, so I'm going to cut myself off here. Have a good one.
Andy