Critique Super Smash Bros.

Diddy Kong

Smash Obsessed
Joined
Dec 8, 2004
Messages
24,236
Switch FC
SW-1597-979602774
He could (and in my opinion, should) if Smash were willing to be a bit more adventurous with its movesets. Hell, it wouldn't even have to be his normals, just give his grabs and specials a greater emphasis on Mewtwo's signature telekinetic abilities. For instance, I've said in the past that Mewtwo's dinky Side-B should be replaced with a ranged command grab that can throw opponents towards him for combos or away from him for a kill. That'd be a perfect way of being more faithful to Mewtwo's actual abilities (not to mention, much more fun).
And furthermore, increase the poor ******'s grab range. Mewtwo (the Psychic Pokemon) should not have a grab hitbox that only barely covers his hand. (Perhaps even make his grab disjointed slightly, both to more faithfully represent his abilities and to give him slightly easier access to his good set of throws.)
I agree with all of this.
 

UserKev

Smash Lord
Joined
May 10, 2017
Messages
1,844
The false Smash ball ruins the reliable saving of the actual Smash ball. There's no "rush" spirit when both Smash balls are on the stage.



I'm already fighting really tough opponents. Do I really need triple obstacles? Yes, I know both Smash balls are only slightly identical but your opponent can hit them and still get you obliterated in the bomb.
 

Perkilator

Smash Champion
Joined
Apr 8, 2018
Messages
2,646
Location
San Clemente, California
The false Smash ball ruins the reliable saving of the actual Smash ball. There's no "rush" spirit when both Smash balls are on the stage.



I'm already fighting really tough opponents. Do I really need triple obstacles? Yes, I know both Smash balls are only slightly identical but your opponent can hit them and still get you obliterated in the bomb.
The best strategy is to attack the Fake Smash Ball from a distance and use it as a trap for unwary opponents.
 

Mario & Sonic Guy

Old rivalries live on!
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
22,118
Location
Mushroom Kingdom
NNID
TPitch5
3DS FC
5327-1637-5096
The Fake Smash Ball is definitely a nightmare for those who lack projectile attacks; you know what not to do, but trying to fight normally becomes extremely hard whenever the Fake Smash Ball wants to get caught in the crossfire.

At least the projectile users (like Fox and Simon) can use the Fake Smash Ball to their advantage, since they can activate it without getting caught in the explosion.
 

4ZURE

Smash Cadet
Joined
May 14, 2020
Messages
43
I actually want a reboot. I know most are opposed, but man does Smash feel dead in recent years. I think the Switch is the best showcase of how hype has carried series like Smash and Pokémon and how having more will only lead to disaster further down the line.

Smash feels wrong when compared to the Switch’s other titles. Where other franchises are moving past old design and embracing the new, here we have Smash that seems to be going backwards. Zelda Breath of The Wild, Mario Odyssey, even Fire Emblem Three Houses all have this uniqueness and advancement that honestly make Smash look like the lesser of the Switch’s title. I cannot believe that I find a Fire Emblem game more endearing than Smash, but even amongst all its flaws, I still see a drive to be better, to be different.

To give you a critique, I believe Smash to be a celebration of Nintendo. From the first 3 titles, we can clearly see that progression with Brawl being fantastic in representing the company through multiple fascists of characters, trophies, stickers, music, stages, assists, and a story mode. Now we come to Smash Ultimate and most things are stripped away. All new stages are based on the already popular franchises, trophies are gone just for a lame sticker show, most music is remixes of the songs that already have remixes, and we have a new roster with only one new Nintendo franchise (made before ARMS). This game lacks the encapsulated history of Brawl. Spirits are stickers, but at least stickers told people the specific game the thing was from, spirits typically just give a vague series except for a few that inexplicably break the rules. In the transition from Brawl we lost trophies that gave descriptions, the catalog of all Nintendo titles, the retro game demos, etc.

Smash Ultimate feels incomplete. It poured everything into creating a better balanced game, but as some YouTubers have started pointing out, it may actually be worse than ever. As for me, I’m not competitive, so the title does little for me in the grand scheme. It lacks charm, or any sense of identity. I hate how these new titles just seem like stepping stones and not their own unique take. Melee and Brawl felt unique amongst each other, so one had plenty reason to go back to either. I just don’t feel that with 4 and Ultimate. 4 is standard Smash with not much flare, while Ultimate just doubles down on that. When a new game comes and likely has the entire roster again, why should I ever keep Ultimate. Brawl had a story mode, and felt like the peak of classic Smash modes. You had unique things like the coin launcher and stickers. When it came to single player, Brawl did everything.

I want a reboot because I hate Smash’s direction. The roster is getting way to big and at some point it will burst and create a Sword and Shield situation as one cannot keep up. I feel that with Ultimate we have the perfect opportunity to go a different direction. We can go back and fix plenty of movesets that are stuck in eras long gone and update them to be more relevant. With less characters and time placed on them, we can maybe try an adventure mode of sorts. A clean slate also allows for a more even roster as we can try to fix the blatant over representation of Fire Emblem, Mario, and Pokémon and place them on a more even playing field with Kirby, Zelda, and others.
I also believe that it will keep Smash from running out of fighters. I get that there are plenty still to go, but let’s be honest. Most Nintendo picks are just getting more and more obscure, while 3rd parties have gone off the wall. There is only so much Nintendo can do. The fact that ARMS, a relatively big franchise getting in is now met with disappointment, kinda shows how far Smash has gone. Pretty much the entire DLC cycle was disappointment. I believe that Smash and it’s roster being so big is a problem as it’s going to get harder to satisfy.

IDK, Smash just feels wrong nowadays. It’s fun, but it definitely has a different feeling, less passionate? The games feel barebones and the roster feels more hollow than ever as it’s full of pointless additions when compared to Brawl’s more perfect main character roster.
 

scoobymcsnack

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jul 3, 2015
Messages
458
IDK, Smash just feels wrong nowadays. It’s fun, but it definitely has a different feeling, less passionate? The games feel barebones and the roster feels more hollow than ever as it’s full of pointless additions when compared to Brawl’s more perfect main character roster.
In your opinion, what makes a character feel pointless?
 
Last edited:

4ZURE

Smash Cadet
Joined
May 14, 2020
Messages
43
In your opinion, what makes a character feel pointless?
I should just give examples.

I think the returning Melee fighters were a mistake. Pichu and Young Link just seem there to be there. Same with Dr. Mario. These fighters bring little new to the table and aren’t major characters to their series, so I see little reason for them to be included. And this isn’t to say I hate clones, I just hate clones that feel like roster padding.

I would probably also say that many characters did not need to come back. I think Corrin is a good example as he has no fan demand and is seen as the worst of his series.

I don’t necessarily know how to properly quantify. Characters like Jigglypuff or Pirhana Plant are just starting to rub me the wrong way. The Smash roster just feels bloated in general, so I guess my issue is I miss Brawl when it felt more even and every character had a big role in his or her series. Outside of maybe Jigglypuff, Brawl did a good job of cutting fat like Dr. Mario and focusing in on main characters with characters like MetaKnight or new series like WarioWare.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 31, 2010
Messages
965
I should just give examples.

I think the returning Melee fighters were a mistake. Pichu and Young Link just seem there to be there. Same with Dr. Mario. These fighters bring little new to the table and aren’t major characters to their series, so I see little reason for them to be included. And this isn’t to say I hate clones, I just hate clones that feel like roster padding.

I would probably also say that many characters did not need to come back. I think Corrin is a good example as he has no fan demand and is seen as the worst of his series.

I don’t necessarily know how to properly quantify. Characters like Jigglypuff or Pirhana Plant are just starting to rub me the wrong way. The Smash roster just feels bloated in general, so I guess my issue is I miss Brawl when it felt more even and every character had a big role in his or her series. Outside of maybe Jigglypuff, Brawl did a good job of cutting fat like Dr. Mario and focusing in on main characters with characters like MetaKnight or new series like WarioWare.
I, personally, would want the next SSB to have ONE Fighter each IP.

Nintendo have over 190 IPs! You can do a decent roster with that.
 

4ZURE

Smash Cadet
Joined
May 14, 2020
Messages
43
I, personally, would want the next SSB to have ONE Fighter each IP.

Nintendo have over 190 IPs! You can do a decent roster with that.
I wouldn’t necessarily want that, but an effort to have fighters more evenly distributed between the A and B tier franchises would be nice. Mario, Pokemon, and Fire Emblem should be a bit more held back on, while Zelda, Donkey Kong, Metroid, Kirby, Star Fox, Xenoblade, Splatoon, etc. play catch up. I know that ultimately Mario and Pokemon will outshine, but if we started new, it would be nice to see all the big boys on semi-equal playing field. It should be more like Mario and Pokémon have 6-7 at most, not Pokémon has 9 characters while Kirby has 3. Franchises like Kirby and Donkey Kong should definitely have 4-5 at this point. The only exception is maybe only 2 for Splatoon, Animal Crossing, and Xenoblade as they are new/lacking character franchises. Same for Yoshi and Pikmin which could probably suffice with 1.
 
Last edited:

Pupp135

Smash Cadet
Joined
Mar 30, 2020
Messages
60
I actually want a reboot. I know most are opposed, but man does Smash feel dead in recent years. I think the Switch is the best showcase of how hype has carried series like Smash and Pokémon and how having more will only lead to disaster further down the line.


I want a reboot because I hate Smash’s direction. The roster is getting way to big and at some point it will burst and create a Sword and Shield situation as one cannot keep up. I feel that with Ultimate we have the perfect opportunity to go a different direction. We can go back and fix plenty of movesets that are stuck in eras long gone and update them to be more relevant. With less characters and time placed on them, we can maybe try an adventure mode of sorts. A clean slate also allows for a more even roster as we can try to fix the blatant over representation of Fire Emblem, Mario, and Pokémon and place them on a more even playing field with Kirby, Zelda, and others.
I also believe that it will keep Smash from running out of fighters. I get that there are plenty still to go, but let’s be honest. Most Nintendo picks are just getting more and more obscure, while 3rd parties have gone off the wall. There is only so much Nintendo can do. The fact that ARMS, a relatively big franchise getting in is now met with disappointment, kinda shows how far Smash has gone. Pretty much the entire DLC cycle was disappointment. I believe that Smash and it’s roster being so big is a problem as it’s going to get harder to satisfy.
I love the large roster that we have, but I agree with you that the sequel should focus less on the roster and more on gameplay, modes, and stages since I feel like that’s the best way to move forward without becoming stale (ie porting Ultimate over and over again), and it would take too many resources to bring over 80+ characters into a game without porting it. While I won’t like the big number of cuts, older characters can get revamped, and the devs can create more new content like new stages since we only got 4 new stages in the base game. I think the next game could only have the essentials like the original 8, :ultluigi::ultinkling:(:ultvillager:/:ultisabelle:):ultbowser::ultpeach:a few pokemon and an fe rep (and if the original 12 counts then also :ultjigglypuff::ultness::ultfalcon:) and be something new in a good way.

I, personally, would want the next SSB to have ONE Fighter each IP.

Nintendo have over 190 IPs! You can do a decent roster with that.
I like how we have smaller franchises like Mother and Ice Climber (the game isn’t great but they’re fun to play as in SSB), and having one character per franchise sounds like a good idea on paper, but we’d be losing major characters like :ultbowser::ultpeach::ultdiddy::ultzelda::ultganondorf::ultkingdedede:all pokemon except :ultpikachu: and :ultvillager:/:ultisabelle:.

Edit:I removed the word reboot since the sequel would just focus on different aspects outside of the roster
 
Last edited:

MarioRayFalcon

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Messages
217
3DS FC
4098-6207-4994
I think the returning Melee fighters were a mistake. Pichu and Young Link just seem there to be there. Same with Dr. Mario. These fighters bring little new to the table and aren’t major characters to their series, so I see little reason for them to be included. And this isn’t to say I hate clones, I just hate clones that feel like roster padding.
It's much worse when you have characters like Ganondorf who did get updated for this new game, it doesn't make sense how they'd make an exception for these characters because of nostalgia or whatever. But personally I've seen enough of this franchise and I need Nintendo to return to other franchises they own.
 
Last edited:

4ZURE

Smash Cadet
Joined
May 14, 2020
Messages
43
I love the large roster that we have, but I agree with you that the sequel should be a reboot since I feel like that’s the best way to move forward without becoming stale (ie porting Ultimate over and over again), and it would take too many resources to bring over 80+ characters into a game without porting it. While I won’t like the big number of cuts, older characters can get revamped, and the devs can create more new content like new stages since we only got 4 new stages in the base game. I think the next game could only have the essentials like the original 8, :ultluigi::ultinkling:(:ultvillager:/:ultisabelle:):ultbowser::ultpeach:a few pokemon and an fe rep (and if the original 12 counts then also :ultjigglypuff::ultness::ultfalcon:) and be something new in a good way
I would say that a base roster for a new title would have to be at least double that of 64. In that case, I would try to keep things even by picking the big franchises that matter to Nintendo now and having 2 from each. My roster would likely look like this:

Mario: :ultmario::ultbowser:
Zelda: :ultlink: (Ganon)
Pokemon: :ultpikachu: (either Meowth or :ultmewtwo:)
Kirby: :ultkirby::ultkingdedede:
Splatoon: :ultinkling: (Octoling)
Animal Crossing: :ultvillager::ultisabelle:
Donkey Kong: :ultdk::ultkrool:
Fire Emblem: :ultmarth::ultrobin:
Xenoblade: :ultshulk: (Rex & Pyra)
Metroid: :ultsamus::ultridley:
Star Fox: :ultfox::ultwolf:

Yoshi: :ultyoshi:
Pikmin: :ultolimar:

If you want to make it a Melee 26, then add (Spring Man) and :ultbrawler::ultgunner::ultswordfighter:

As for reasons for my choices, I picked based on relevancy to Nintendo. All franchisees above have had entries on Switch, or will be getting one in the case of Metroid and Pikmin (assuming Pikmin 4 is still happening). I also choose a hero vs villain theme as the Smash community loves villains, plus it would be a poor move to remove Ridley and K Rool after at least 10 years of fan demand got them here.


As for individual choices:
I choose Ganon as BOTW ditched Ganondorf, and Ganon is overall a bigger staple to the series and has more potential as they have tons of 2D and 3D versions, whereas Ganon has like 3 iterations (not counting Warriors or spin-offs).

I think Meowth could make for the Pokémon antagonist. I think a cool idea would be to have trainers with Pokémon from now on, so why not have Team Rocket.

I choose Wolf over Falco because villains.

Yoshi and Pikmin don’t need more characters as there aren’t that many protagonists. Plus Olimar already has skins for Alf.

Spring Man is a choice because I have a feeling that ARMS is far from one and done.
 
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Messages
1,969
Location
Rivals of Aether, probably
NNID
ZeDiglett
I actually want a reboot. I know most are opposed, but man does Smash feel dead in recent years. I think the Switch is the best showcase of how hype has carried series like Smash and Pokémon and how having more will only lead to disaster further down the line.

Smash feels wrong when compared to the Switch’s other titles. Where other franchises are moving past old design and embracing the new, here we have Smash that seems to be going backwards. Zelda Breath of The Wild, Mario Odyssey, even Fire Emblem Three Houses all have this uniqueness and advancement that honestly make Smash look like the lesser of the Switch’s title. I cannot believe that I find a Fire Emblem game more endearing than Smash, but even amongst all its flaws, I still see a drive to be better, to be different.

To give you a critique, I believe Smash to be a celebration of Nintendo. From the first 3 titles, we can clearly see that progression with Brawl being fantastic in representing the company through multiple fascists of characters, trophies, stickers, music, stages, assists, and a story mode. Now we come to Smash Ultimate and most things are stripped away. All new stages are based on the already popular franchises, trophies are gone just for a lame sticker show, most music is remixes of the songs that already have remixes, and we have a new roster with only one new Nintendo franchise (made before ARMS). This game lacks the encapsulated history of Brawl. Spirits are stickers, but at least stickers told people the specific game the thing was from, spirits typically just give a vague series except for a few that inexplicably break the rules. In the transition from Brawl we lost trophies that gave descriptions, the catalog of all Nintendo titles, the retro game demos, etc.

Smash Ultimate feels incomplete. It poured everything into creating a better balanced game, but as some YouTubers have started pointing out, it may actually be worse than ever. As for me, I’m not competitive, so the title does little for me in the grand scheme. It lacks charm, or any sense of identity. I hate how these new titles just seem like stepping stones and not their own unique take. Melee and Brawl felt unique amongst each other, so one had plenty reason to go back to either. I just don’t feel that with 4 and Ultimate. 4 is standard Smash with not much flare, while Ultimate just doubles down on that. When a new game comes and likely has the entire roster again, why should I ever keep Ultimate. Brawl had a story mode, and felt like the peak of classic Smash modes. You had unique things like the coin launcher and stickers. When it came to single player, Brawl did everything.

I want a reboot because I hate Smash’s direction. The roster is getting way to big and at some point it will burst and create a Sword and Shield situation as one cannot keep up. I feel that with Ultimate we have the perfect opportunity to go a different direction. We can go back and fix plenty of movesets that are stuck in eras long gone and update them to be more relevant. With less characters and time placed on them, we can maybe try an adventure mode of sorts. A clean slate also allows for a more even roster as we can try to fix the blatant over representation of Fire Emblem, Mario, and Pokémon and place them on a more even playing field with Kirby, Zelda, and others.
I also believe that it will keep Smash from running out of fighters. I get that there are plenty still to go, but let’s be honest. Most Nintendo picks are just getting more and more obscure, while 3rd parties have gone off the wall. There is only so much Nintendo can do. The fact that ARMS, a relatively big franchise getting in is now met with disappointment, kinda shows how far Smash has gone. Pretty much the entire DLC cycle was disappointment. I believe that Smash and it’s roster being so big is a problem as it’s going to get harder to satisfy.

IDK, Smash just feels wrong nowadays. It’s fun, but it definitely has a different feeling, less passionate? The games feel barebones and the roster feels more hollow than ever as it’s full of pointless additions when compared to Brawl’s more perfect main character roster.
I couldn't agree more. IMO Smash has gotten incredibly formulaic and stale over the past decade or so. People constantly rag on the likes of Mario, Pokemon, and in recent years, Kirby for being formulaic and failing to "evolve" their gameplay over subsequent installments, and they have a point in all those cases. So I find it weird that people aren't doing this for Smash when the series has, by and large, been the same since Brawl. (Sure, they add new stuff each game, but mechanically, they're about as similar to each other as Star Allies is to Return to Dreamland, for instance.)

I also agree that the next Smash game should be a reboot of some kind. I've heard from a bunch of people on this site that they want Nintendo to just keep porting Ultimate to every new system forever adding new content to it each time, and all I can really say to that is... what? You guys really want to be stuck playing the exact same game indefinitely? Again, isn't this the exact kind of **** people give series like NSMB and Pokemon for on the regular? I think a hard or soft reboot is exactly what Smash needs right now - not necessarily a hard reset of the entire series by any means, just something to diversify the gameplay, bring some much-needed balance to the roster, and maybe see a truly new experience out of Smash for arguably the first time since Brawl. This is a big part of why I'd really like to see someone other than Sakurai direct the next Smash game; Ultimate kind of seems like Sakurai's swan song for his vision of the Smash franchise, and I'd love to see what a fresh pair of eyes could do for Smash at this stage.

All in all, Smash seems like it stands more for quantity than for quality at this point. It really feels like they spent more time just cramming as much content into this game as could possibly fit in it than they did actually innovating and freshening up the gameplay. I can't say they didn't try with this game, they most certainly did, but I will say I feel that effort was largely misplaced. Maybe it's just me, but I'd much prefer them to focus on the core gameplay and making each Smash game feel unique and fun to play than just piling on more and more "content" each game. (Like you said, it's the "Sword & Shield" problem applied to Smash.) I'd like to see Smash games with lasting appeal that I have reason to come back to even years down the line like Melee and Brawl, not same-y products that will inevitably be dropped like an ugly baby as soon as the next one comes out like Smash 4 and, yes, Ultimate. Then again, people seem to care more about the characters that are in the game than the game itself these days, so maybe I really am alone on that one. Smash could be the cruddiest, most bogged-down game in existence and it'd still thrive on pure brand appeal alone. (Like it or not, you know it's true.)
 
Last edited:

4ZURE

Smash Cadet
Joined
May 14, 2020
Messages
43
I couldn't agree more. IMO Smash has gotten incredibly formulaic and stale over the past decade or so. People constantly rag on the likes of Mario, Pokemon, and in recent years, Kirby for being formulaic and failing to "evolve" their gameplay over subsequent installments, and they have a point in all those cases. So I find it weird that people aren't doing this for Smash when the series has, by and large, been the same since Brawl. (Sure, they add new stuff each game, but mechanically, they're about as similar to each other as Star Allies is to Return to Dreamland, for instance.)

I also agree that the next Smash game should be a reboot of some kind. I've heard from a bunch of people on this site that they want Nintendo to just keep porting Ultimate to every new system forever adding new content to it each time, and all I can really say to that is... what? You guys really want to be stuck playing the exact same game indefinitely? Again, isn't this the exact kind of **** people give series like NSMB and Pokemon for? I think a hard or soft reboot is exactly what Smash needs right now - not necessarily a hard reset of the entire series by any means, just something to diversify the gameplay, bring some much-needed balance to the roster, and maybe see a truly new experience out of Smash for arguably the first time since Brawl. This is a big part of why I'd really like to see someone other than Sakurai direct the next Smash game; Ultimate kind of seems like Sakurai's swan song for his vision of the Smash franchise, and I'd love to see what a fresh pair of eyes could do for Smash at this stage.

All in all, Smash seems like it stands more for quantity than for quality at this point. It really feels like they spent more time just cramming as much content into this game as could possibly fit in it than they did actually innovating and freshening up the gameplay. I can't say they didn't try with this game, they most certainly did, but I will say I feel that effort was largely misplaced. Maybe it's just me, but I'd much prefer them to focus on the core gameplay and making each Smash game feel unique and fun to play than just piling on more and more "content" each game. (Like you said, it's the "Sword & Shield" problem applied to Smash.) I'd like to see Smash games with lasting appeal that I have reason to come back to even years down the line like Melee and Brawl, not same-y products that will inevitably be dropped like an ugly baby as soon as the next one comes out like Smash 4 and, yes, Ultimate. Then again, people seem to care more about the characters that are in the game than the game itself these days, so maybe I really am alone on that one. Smash could be the cruddiest, most bogged-down game in existence and it'd still thrive on pure brand appeal alone. (Like it or not, you know it's true.)
I’ll say, I also agree with your take. My issue with Smash is the quantity belief. I will say, technically the core gameplay is the soundest it has ever been, excluding Melee. The problem is that that is all there is. ARMS is fairly similar to Smash, a bunch of different ARMS and quite a few characters that really change up how one would play, yet really boring after awhile. The game just lacks content outside of the core, there is nothing to make things different.

I think the problem with Smash is its new focus on e-sports and competitive play. It has driven the fun out of the series for casuals as it strips the game of fun diversions like a story mode. If you don’t care about getting better, than there is nothing left, just like your average fighter. I sort of miss the days of Subspace, I don’t even care for the cutscenes, just a big adventure really keeps a person coming back. If anything, I wish the’d expand and allow for more levels based on properties.

I think the direction of Smash is best shown in the 3rd party fighters and how they feel in Brawl compared to the future titles. I remember a video going over guests in all fighting games and how he talked about how excellent Smash is. In Brawl, Sonic and especially Snake didn’t feel like guests. Through Subspace and such well defined details and easter eggs, Snake was part of the cast. He felt like he belonged there, that he was a Nintendo character so to speak. There was so much love and passion for the Metal Gear series that it honestly felt in place even though Snake would stand out like a sore thumb in any other context. Nowadays, with guests like Cloud, they are more clearly guests. Maybe it’s the lack of interaction, but 3rd parties are treated weirdly, either being way better than most or worse.
The gimmicks may also play a factor. I feel like most post-Brawl characters are just gimmicks at this point. Robin’s magic, Arsene, Luma, Wonder Wing, etc. So many are defined by a single move or mechanic that makes them either a pain to play, or incredibly unfair. Other than Joker, I feel most of the characters I play are closer to Brawl than Smash 4. I like standard movesets that aren’t wait for the meter. They’re just more fun.

IDK. Smash seems to be waning with me. I cannot describe why it just isn’t clicking as hard as it used to when I played Brawl. With Wii U I was frustrated and bored while playing, and now with Ultimate it’s just discontent. The game lacks reasons to play or much to go back to. The characters are nice, sure, but I don’t play as a good majority of them and wish my favorites from the modern titles like Lucina could be used in a Subspace or some sort.
 
Last edited:

UserKev

Smash Lord
Joined
May 10, 2017
Messages
1,844
I definitely agree that Smash should be rebooted. If it tries to appeal to direct sequels, its sure to go down the path of third party. A reboot can inherently save it.
 

4ZURE

Smash Cadet
Joined
May 14, 2020
Messages
43
I definitely agree that Smash should be rebooted. If it tries to appeal to direct sequels, its sure to go down the path of third party. A reboot can inherently save it.
Imagine how expensive Smash will become if it keeps going this way. We have atleast 8 major companies In Smash already, all of which will take a cut with each installmen.
 

Perkilator

Smash Champion
Joined
Apr 8, 2018
Messages
2,646
Location
San Clemente, California
>Be Wario
>Discover that Smash 4 now has 8 alts for each character
>Expect characters like Robin to share the 12-alt luxury you have due to every other character getting 2 more alts each from Brawl
>Get immeasurably disappointed when you find out 4 of your alts from Brawl were flushed away
>Get disappointed even more when it happens AGAIN for Ultimate

https://www.ssbwiki.com/Alternate_costume_(SSBB)#Wario
https://www.ssbwiki.com/Alternate_costume_(SSB4)#Wario
https://www.ssbwiki.com/Alternate_costume_(SSBU)#Wario

See my point?
 

Maikeru-San

Smash Rookie
Joined
Mar 22, 2018
Messages
17
NNID
FeelingDrowzy
3DS FC
3798-1270-7758
Switch FC
4247-0006-8233
Here's my overall opinion of this:

A reboot could be a step in the right direction for the game because really their's no reason to keep going at this point in my opinion. I'm one of those people who wouldn't really mind an Xenoverse 2 like Smash game where it's mostly a port because of the things. Reason is my personal fear about the reboot is because of Nintendo, not the game itself will make the future smash games pretty mediocre, think about it. Ever since Brawl where they went with the More Characters with simple combos over how Melee has done it (which I personally prefer) where it tries super hard to appeal to the casuals which I don't mind at all, but for those like me who do like playing it in a fighting way won't really enjoy the next game personally. I mean if their's 24 characters and they all play like Ultimate because of Nintendo's lack of support for the competitive community, would you really want to buy the next game (If it's like Subspace then that's all forgiven BUT only if it's for that.)

The main reason why I got into smash was because Sonic was in the game and the fact that 3rd party characters can be crossover like this is super ledgendary and I'm seriously hoping they continue that route (Mostly because it gives the game it's own identity of being THAT GAME FOR IT, no other game was like this Playstation All stars was only PS characters i believe so I should be right) In my opinion it would be a huge upsetting thing to see that thing go and my imagination being limited, it's fun to see obscure characters that's not nintendo getting in tbh. That's why I always prefer post Brawl and never really got into the first and Melee. If I can't have any bond with characters, I won't really have a reason to grind to get better.


If a reboot (which will happen) comes to the "Nintendo Switch Ultra DX" or something I'm sorta hoping it'll be like Brawl's roster with a equal amount of characters, DLC that basically gives me a reason to buy the character, and gameplay that's is sorta mixing Project + and Ultimate together (and GOOD Online this time :) )



My ideal roster will be 32, since we all can agree nintendo will never really give the gameplay 90% people really want from the new games so it'll at least be fair, a good story (SSE) and some modes and there
 

Koopaul

Smash Champion
Joined
Oct 29, 2013
Messages
2,129
Smash Ultimate gives you the most options and customization out of any Smash. But as a result it makes the things you still can't do even more glaring.

Like, why can't I set the frequency of each individual item instead of having to set the frequency for all of them?

Why can't I play whatever music I want on any stage. The Spirit battles allow this, why can't I? I want to play the Super Mario World medley on the Super Mario World stage!

Why can't I set which stages have hazards and which ones don't individually instead of turning them all on or off?

Why can't I organize CSS by series? The site allows you to do this. Also you can stack echoes. So customizing the CSS seems like it would make sense.

There are so many stages now, many of which I don't use. Why can't I have a favorites tab to get to the ones I like more easily?

And so on and so on. I never felt like I needed all this until I was given all those other options. It's like they give you the features to costumize but you're limited with them.
 
Last edited:

soviet prince

I am the terror that flaps in the night
Joined
Nov 10, 2007
Messages
3,118
Location
Kentucky
NNID
7066-9708-9591
A reboot would kill it for me, why buy a lesser version then the game I got now? It will be like exchanging your 70 inch tv for a 40 inch. I did not nor know anyone that buys the game or really cares about side content like story mode or gimmick mini games. Most people buy it for the main smash mode to see there favorite characters fighting in a fighting game. Also of course the game plays the same as past games if it was different it would be a different series. I think a port is the only way to go, maybe the new characters can just be reworked vets with all the newcomers be saved for dlc.


As for critique:

- Gsp is a headache
- Final Smash being streamlined was a mistake, they all fill the same, want to see controllable FS again.
- Stopping just a little short of having all stages, not sure why not go all the way and finish them even if minor things had to be tweaked.
- light on new stages
- echo fighters could been explored more
- alt costumes seem to be a simple thing they can add
 

Ze Diglett

Smash Lord
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Messages
1,969
Location
Rivals of Aether, probably
NNID
ZeDiglett
A reboot would kill it for me, why buy a lesser version then the game I got now? It will be like exchanging your 70 inch tv for a 40 inch. I did not nor know anyone that buys the game or really cares about side content like story mode or gimmick mini games. Most people buy it for the main smash mode to see there favorite characters fighting in a fighting game. Also of course the game plays the same as past games if it was different it would be a different series. I think a port is the only way to go, maybe the new characters can just be reworked vets with all the newcomers be saved for dlc.
This is exactly my point in advocating for a reboot. The next Smash game (assuming it isn't a straight port, which would be incredibly lame IMO and only exacerbate the issue) is going to have less characters than Ultimate; this is practically a guarantee as Sakurai even said it himself. So how are you going to convince people to make the jump to a game that has less content (and will still definitely be full price)? Answer: by changing up the formula and trying something new. It doesn't have to jump genres or anything (though I do think a Smash 3D fighter or something would be pretty sick), you just need a selling point of some kind to convince people to move on from Ultimate. That is why the series needs a reboot. (Although the word "reboot" seems to make gamers instantly choke on their cereal, so maybe don't market it as such.)
As for the "of course the game plays the same if it were different it would be a different series" comment, that's just a plain asinine take IMO. Odyssey doesn't play the same as Galaxy doesn't play the same as 64 doesn't play the same as Sunshine, you get the idea. These games may follow a similar formula at a base level ("collect the shiny things to advance toward saving the princess"), but they still all provide fundamentally distinct experiences because each game was willing to try its own thing. This usually came in the form of a central gimmick like F.L.U.D.D. or Cappy, but it even comes down to differences in progression and how the levels are laid out (64 and Odyssey are more exploration-based, whereas Galaxy and Sunshine are more objective based, for instance). Doesn't stop these games from all sharing a cohesive identity and, in fact, being the same series. Smash is more like 2D Mario in this regard; the content's different each time, sure, but no matter how you look at it, the core gameplay is basically the same with maybe a new mechanic or two thrown in if they're feeling adventurous. Brand identity is not an excuse for stagnation, and should never be treated as such. That is why I believe a change in direction is necessary for Smash going forward. Maybe it's just me being nostalgic, but it feels like Smash hasn't truly "evolved" since Brawl - as a brand, maybe, but as a game? - and is instead just sitting in one spot stuffing as much "content" down its own throat as it can.
and now, a humorous visual to go with my previous statement
 
Last edited:

Pupp135

Smash Cadet
Joined
Mar 30, 2020
Messages
60
This is exactly my point in advocating for a reboot. The next Smash game (assuming it isn't a straight port, which would be incredibly lame IMO and only exacerbate the issue) is going to have less characters than Ultimate; this is practically a guarantee as Sakurai even said it himself. So how are you going to convince people to make the jump to a game that has less content (and will still definitely be full price)? Answer: by changing up the formula and trying something new. It doesn't have to jump genres or anything (though I do think a Smash 3D fighter or something would be pretty sick), you just need a selling point of some kind to convince people to move on from Ultimate. That is why the series needs a reboot.
While I don’t like cuts and will be disappointed to lose :ulticeclimbers: again and :ultness: if the Original 12 doesn’t guarantee safety, I completely agree with this statement since the sequel will feel lacking without any big changes outside of cuts.
While there are more changes that could be done, some things that could help include revamping characters and how move sets work, bringing back custom moves, and making most stages new since there were only 4 new ones in the base game. The first two ideas would have a bigger effect on gameplay though.
 
Last edited:

Wunderwaft

Smash Champion
Joined
Mar 21, 2019
Messages
2,489
While I don’t like cuts and will be disappointed to lose :ulticeclimbers: again and :ultness: if the Original 12 doesn’t guarantee safety, I completely agree with this statement since the sequel will feel lacking without any big changes outside of cuts.
While there are more changes that could be done, some things that could help include revamping characters and how move sets work, bringing back custom moves, and making most stages new since there were only 4 new ones in the base game. The first two ideas would have a bigger effect on gameplay though.
Eh if any of the original 12 is in the most danger of being cut it's Jigglypuff. IIRC Jigglypuff was originally planned to be cut from Brawl but due to the game being delayed thanks to Sonic they bought Jigglypuff back.
 

Koopaul

Smash Champion
Joined
Oct 29, 2013
Messages
2,129
While I don’t like cuts and will be disappointed to lose :ulticeclimbers: again and :ultness: if the Original 12 doesn’t guarantee safety, I completely agree with this statement since the sequel will feel lacking without any big changes outside of cuts.
While there are more changes that could be done, some things that could help include revamping characters and how move sets work, bringing back custom moves, and making most stages new since there were only 4 new ones in the base game. The first two ideas would have a bigger effect on gameplay though.
If there's a reboot, worrying about cuts is pointless. If Ness returns he wouldn't even be the same character anyway.

Remember this is a reboot. It's comparable to the Spider-Man movies. You got your Tobey Maguire movies, the Andrew Garfield movies, the MCU movies starring Tom Holland. They're all about Spider-Man but they are all separate entities with a new person playing the character.

A Smash reboot would be the same case. It would be different enough that, technically, none of the old characters would be returning. Mario would be a new Mario. Donkey Kong would be a new Donkey Kong. And so on.
 
Last edited:

Pupp135

Smash Cadet
Joined
Mar 30, 2020
Messages
60
If there's a reboot, worrying about cuts is pointless. If Ness returns he wouldn't even be the same character anyway.

Remember this is a reboot. It's comparable to the Spider-Man movies. You got your Tobey Maguire movies, the Andrew Garfield movies, the MCU movies starring Tom Holland. They're all about Spider-Man but they are all separate entities with a new person playing the character.

A Smash reboot would be the same case. It would be different enough that, technically, none of the old characters would be returning. Mario would be a new Mario. Donkey Kong would be a new Donkey Kong. And so on.
I see your point that the series would practically be restarted and that the veterans would be drastically different from their current versions, but I do think it‘s fair to be concerned about cuts since some people will complain that a character in Ultimate is not in the “reboot” (eg If :ultjigglypuff: misses the cut, I could see people complaining since it was in every SSB game despite losing its popularity after the 90s/early 00s).
 
Last edited:

soviet prince

I am the terror that flaps in the night
Joined
Nov 10, 2007
Messages
3,118
Location
Kentucky
NNID
7066-9708-9591
This is exactly my point in advocating for a reboot. The next Smash game (assuming it isn't a straight port, which would be incredibly lame IMO and only exacerbate the issue) is going to have less characters than Ultimate; this is practically a guarantee as Sakurai even said it himself. So how are you going to convince people to make the jump to a game that has less content (and will still definitely be full price)? Answer: by changing up the formula and trying something new. It doesn't have to jump genres or anything (though I do think a Smash 3D fighter or something would be pretty sick), you just need a selling point of some kind to convince people to move on from Ultimate. That is why the series needs a reboot. (Although the word "reboot" seems to make gamers instantly choke on their cereal, so maybe don't market it as such.)
As for the "of course the game plays the same if it were different it would be a different series" comment, that's just a plain asinine take IMO. Odyssey doesn't play the same as Galaxy doesn't play the same as 64 doesn't play the same as Sunshine, you get the idea. These games may follow a similar formula at a base level ("collect the shiny things to advance toward saving the princess"), but they still all provide fundamentally distinct experiences because each game was willing to try its own thing. This usually came in the form of a central gimmick like F.L.U.D.D. or Cappy, but it even comes down to differences in progression and how the levels are laid out (64 and Odyssey are more exploration-based, whereas Galaxy and Sunshine are more objective based, for instance). Doesn't stop these games from all sharing a cohesive identity and, in fact, being the same series. Smash is more like 2D Mario in this regard; the content's different each time, sure, but no matter how you look at it, the core gameplay is basically the same with maybe a new mechanic or two thrown in if they're feeling adventurous. Brand identity is not an excuse for stagnation, and should never be treated as such. That is why I believe a change in direction is necessary for Smash going forward. Maybe it's just me being nostalgic, but it feels like Smash hasn't truly "evolved" since Brawl - as a brand, maybe, but as a game? - and is instead just sitting in one spot stuffing as much "content" down its own throat as it can.
and now, a humorous visual to go with my previous statement
A reboot is a terrible idea how you going to sell less characters, less stages, ect? Sounds going backward rather then forward, you say who will buy it look at mario 8 port on switch and how much it sold even though there was little to nothing new at launch( nothing wonderful when dlc was done either). Like I said have it be the release title for there next system but have:

- 1-3 new 1st party characters
- all characters return
- new stages
- indro of alt customes
- updated movesets for majority of cast esp brawl and lower veterns
- make the final smash controllable again
- new items from the newer dlc characters series
 

Pupp135

Smash Cadet
Joined
Mar 30, 2020
Messages
60
A reboot is a terrible idea how you going to sell less characters, less stages, ect? Sounds going backward rather then forward, you say who will buy it look at mario 8 port on switch and how much it sold even though there was little to nothing new at launch( nothing wonderful when dlc was done either). Like I said have it be the release title for there next system but have:

- 1-3 new 1st party characters
- all characters return
- new stages
- indro of alt customes
- updated movesets for majority of cast esp brawl and lower veterns
- make the final smash controllable again
- new items from the newer dlc characters series
I‘d love to see this if the devs had the time and resources, but that is unfortunately not the case, so people suggest to sacrifice the roster for other elements like gameplay, modes, stages, alts, items, and revamps, including your suggestions

Edit: removed the word reboot from this
 
Last edited:

Ze Diglett

Smash Lord
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Messages
1,969
Location
Rivals of Aether, probably
NNID
ZeDiglett
A reboot is a terrible idea how you going to sell less characters, less stages, ect? Sounds going backward rather then forward, you say who will buy it look at mario 8 port on switch and how much it sold even though there was little to nothing new at launch( nothing wonderful when dlc was done either).
Except you're missing the whole point that whatever the next new Smash game is going to be will inevitably have less characters, stages, etc. than Ultimate anyway. It's simply an unsustainable amount of content to carry over between installments. That's precisely why I believe Smash needs to try something different next time. You're looking purely at the negatives of my proposal; consider how a new Smash game could evolve the gameplay (y'know, of this video game) in exchange for putting less value on pure content.
As for MK8D, yeah, that was a financial success for Nintendo, but what about the people who were tired of MK8 at that point and wanted to play a new Mario Kart game on a new system? How do you think those people feel now that, between MK8D and MKT, we likely aren't going to get another console Mario Kart until next generation at best? I hate to say this, but just because "people will buy it" does not make it a good idea. Maybe you would be okay with playing the same recycled products year after year, but personally, I'd like to see something new out of my favorite series that I pay full price to play. Again, look at Pokemon; a guilty pleasure for me, I'll admit, but plenty of people have abandoned it because it became same-y and failed to evolve its gameplay. Do you really want Smash to be like that?
 
Last edited:

soviet prince

I am the terror that flaps in the night
Joined
Nov 10, 2007
Messages
3,118
Location
Kentucky
NNID
7066-9708-9591
Except you're missing the whole point that whatever the next new Smash game is going to be will inevitably have less characters, stages, etc. than Ultimate anyway. It's simply an unsustainable amount of content to carry over between installments. That's precisely why I believe Smash needs to try something different next time. You're looking purely at the negatives of my proposal; consider how a new Smash game could evolve the gameplay (y'know, of this video game) in exchange for putting less value on pure content.
As for MK8D, yeah, that was a financial success for Nintendo, but what about the people who were tired of MK8 at that point and wanted to play a new Mario Kart game on a new system? How do you think those people feel now that, between MK8D and MKT, we likely aren't going to get another console Mario Kart until next generation at best? I hate to say this, but just because "people will buy it" does not make it a good idea. Maybe you would be okay with playing the same recycled products year after year, but personally, I'd like to see something new out of my favorite series that I pay full price to play. Again, look at Pokemon; a guilty pleasure for me, I'll admit, but plenty of people have abandoned it because it became same-y and failed to evolve its gameplay. Do you really want Smash to be like that?
I am quite fine with how the game plays right now other then the tweaks I listed above, look at pro sports they play the exact same ever year and don't need to change things up as far as rules. What I listed is manageable just need more development time which I think the franchises has sold enough to earn that. I really don't get the need for every sequel have to do something new I am fine with more of the same with some tweeks here or there somethings don't need a reboot. If you want a story I prefer they make it, it's own game.
 

4ZURE

Smash Cadet
Joined
May 14, 2020
Messages
43
A reboot is a terrible idea how you going to sell less characters, less stages, ect? Sounds going backward rather then forward, you say who will buy it look at mario 8 port on switch and how much it sold even though there was little to nothing new at launch( nothing wonderful when dlc was done either). Like I said have it be the release title for there next system but have:

- 1-3 new 1st party characters
- all characters return
- new stages
- indro of alt customes
- updated movesets for majority of cast esp brawl and lower veterns
- make the final smash controllable again
- new items from the newer dlc characters series
There is going to be less characters regardless, it seems Ultimate is a one-time deal. Nintendo also barely got Cloud back, so chances are the Square boys will be gone, already chipping away at the roster’s value.

You bring up Mario Kart 8 Deluxe as selling the same game, but that really only worked due to chance. MK8 was on Wii U, a console a majority of people did not own, so of course it would sell well when moved to a new system. MK8 was pretty much a save the cargo on the sinking ship situation. Either people bought it because they never had it, or they bought it because even the Wii U’s userbase wanted to get off the thing. It was a failed console with more drawbacks for video games than points in its favor.

As for Smash, I lack vision of this thing ever advancing at this point. You bring up how they should update characters, but one, how many can actually be updated, and two, are people not just going to feel ripped off when looking at the roster. If they are only adding 1-3 new characters, than won’t it just look bad to a consumer. Take something like Ultimate MvC which did the port thing, they added twelve and people whined that they had to buy a new game, that it wasn’t DLC. As for changing up characters, how many can truly be done? If they do become fully new characters, than they will be treated as such, and judging by Ultimate, only 6 newcomers came. Porting over all characters means you have to balance each character amongst 75+, they will barely be able to make changes to the original roster as the time constraints and work load are against them.

You also claim that a reboot would be working backwards, but are we not going that way already? Since Brawl Smash has cut more and more content with each installment. We went from having a story mode, to not between games. Ultimate cut out trophies and pretty much all extras for the laziest route possible with spirits. At some point, the removal of extra content will catch up. While competitive players can keep playing, the casuals will drop, which will kill Smash’s high sales. Fighting games cannot rely on just game mechanics, which is why they have had a history of dying out. Most companies know this, that is why Nether Realm added story modes and gear systems. It was an attempt to create an appeal to the casual market. Smash is losing that the farther they go, and at what point will it kill the series and prevent things such as Cloud from getting in because the expense is not worth it?

Smash is big, but it isn’t infallible. Brawl was the game that made Smash more mainstream as it was the casual experience. Smash thrives on not being a fighting game, I only wonder if driving it more into that direction will be its downfall? It seems more and more that the more casual fans are turning on it, and even some competitive types are claiming it is awful for competitive and that Smash 4 is better or Melee.
 

Blutrausch

Smash Cadet
Joined
Jan 16, 2020
Messages
46
Smash is big, but it isn’t infallible. Brawl was the game that made Smash more mainstream as it was the casual experience. Smash thrives on not being a fighting game, I only wonder if driving it more into that direction will be its downfall? It seems more and more that the more casual fans are turning on it, and even some competitive types are claiming it is awful for competitive and that Smash 4 is better or Melee.
Smash is a fighting game, even though Sakurai considers it more of a party game. SSBB wasn't that popular among competitive players, so if Sakurai or whoever succeeds him went in a more casual direction, then the series would be losing more fans. As much as Sakurai doesn't want to go full-on competitive, the competitive scene has grown and casual players have found more interest in competitive play. Sakurai's philosophy isn't in the direction of competitive play and he's made it clear that those who are competitive would be better off playing traditional fighters.

I don't play Mortal Kombat 11, but I've been watching someone named Super on YouTube for a few months now and I actually find MK11 way more interesting than SSBU. True combos, a small roster of 30 characters, I believe, and some interesting mechanics that I think would be interesting if implemented in Smash. I haven't bothered with SSBU for quite some time now, and the game doesn't pop up in my head as often as it used to. I'm aware of the game, but I haven't touched it in months and I'm happier because of it. Anyway, I'm rambling.
 

Mario & Sonic Guy

Old rivalries live on!
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
22,118
Location
Mushroom Kingdom
NNID
TPitch5
3DS FC
5327-1637-5096
Brawl, Smash 4, and Ultimate all have one thing in common; shield-grabbing CPUs, even on the easiest difficulty levels. That's just so ridiculous, as even against level 1s, players who are scared of getting grabbed end up having to fight defensively, and that's not even a fool-proof plan.
 
Last edited:

soviet prince

I am the terror that flaps in the night
Joined
Nov 10, 2007
Messages
3,118
Location
Kentucky
NNID
7066-9708-9591
There is going to be less characters regardless, it seems Ultimate is a one-time deal. Nintendo also barely got Cloud back, so chances are the Square boys will be gone, already chipping away at the roster’s value.

You bring up Mario Kart 8 Deluxe as selling the same game, but that really only worked due to chance. MK8 was on Wii U, a console a majority of people did not own, so of course it would sell well when moved to a new system. MK8 was pretty much a save the cargo on the sinking ship situation. Either people bought it because they never had it, or they bought it because even the Wii U’s userbase wanted to get off the thing. It was a failed console with more drawbacks for video games than points in its favor.

As for Smash, I lack vision of this thing ever advancing at this point. You bring up how they should update characters, but one, how many can actually be updated, and two, are people not just going to feel ripped off when looking at the roster. If they are only adding 1-3 new characters, than won’t it just look bad to a consumer. Take something like Ultimate MvC which did the port thing, they added twelve and people whined that they had to buy a new game, that it wasn’t DLC. As for changing up characters, how many can truly be done? If they do become fully new characters, than they will be treated as such, and judging by Ultimate, only 6 newcomers came. Porting over all characters means you have to balance each character amongst 75+, they will barely be able to make changes to the original roster as the time constraints and work load are against them.

You also claim that a reboot would be working backwards, but are we not going that way already? Since Brawl Smash has cut more and more content with each installment. We went from having a story mode, to not between games. Ultimate cut out trophies and pretty much all extras for the laziest route possible with spirits. At some point, the removal of extra content will catch up. While competitive players can keep playing, the casuals will drop, which will kill Smash’s high sales. Fighting games cannot rely on just game mechanics, which is why they have had a history of dying out. Most companies know this, that is why Nether Realm added story modes and gear systems. It was an attempt to create an appeal to the casual market. Smash is losing that the farther they go, and at what point will it kill the series and prevent things such as Cloud from getting in because the expense is not worth it?

Smash is big, but it isn’t infallible. Brawl was the game that made Smash more mainstream as it was the casual experience. Smash thrives on not being a fighting game, I only wonder if driving it more into that direction will be its downfall? It seems more and more that the more casual fans are turning on it, and even some competitive types are claiming it is awful for competitive and that Smash 4 is better or Melee.

Honestly don't buy it for the content I barley touch anyway
 

UserKev

Smash Lord
Joined
May 10, 2017
Messages
1,844
A game with less characters is the real Improvement. Its fine to represent gaming history, but to try and fill a game with as much "third party" is essentially regrettable. You could have had a game with people wanting more while still pulling in ok sells. Brawl is the GOAT.

I'd take a new Smash game every 4-6 years than trying to give me something "Ultimate" that I'm to be stuck with in the long run.
 

Lenidem

Smash Ace
Joined
Oct 14, 2018
Messages
500
I just realized; there are plenty of Spirits where hostile Assist Trophies appear. Why aren't there Spirits where Assist Trophies pop put at the start of a Spirit Battle to help you?
Because you're supposed to "free" the spirits, and you might not have fred the ally for a given fight before said fight?

But those trophies make no sense anyway. The spirit is supposed to be trapped in the character you're fighting. So how could he be assisting himself at the same time?...
 

Perkilator

Smash Champion
Joined
Apr 8, 2018
Messages
2,646
Location
San Clemente, California
Because you're supposed to "free" the spirits, and you might not have fred the ally for a given fight before said fight?

But those trophies make no sense anyway. The spirit is supposed to be trapped in the character you're fighting. So how could he be assisting himself at the same time?...
This is under the assumption that the Assist Trophy related to that Spirit is freed.
 

SGoW

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Sep 2, 2019
Messages
246
Because you're supposed to "free" the spirits, and you might not have fred the ally for a given fight before said fight?

But those trophies make no sense anyway. The spirit is supposed to be trapped in the character you're fighting. So how could he be assisting himself at the same time?...
There's a lot battles where your fighting multiple opponents at once, so I don't think that matters too much.
 

Ryu Myuutsu

Smash Champion
Joined
Mar 24, 2013
Messages
2,431
Location
Niigata, Japan
NNID
BahamurShin
3DS FC
3668-9945-1996
You know how a politician makes promises before an election on how they will instill better policies and systems than the currents ones, but they mostly fail to convey properly on the hows and the logistics of their operation? A common theme I notice here is that when some people bring up the necessity of a reboot, they never go into how. And they try to sell you the idea as the best next course of action that Smash needs ASAP, because they obviously know better.

That proposal usually comes from the younger ones with a revolutionary and idealistic, but stupid and naive mindset. It's hard for me to respect that mindset because it's a way to cheat yourself into believing you've contributed into doing something meaningful. If you are going to talk about rebooting, provide some insight. But don't pretend that this is going to be the best direction when you don't even have your **** together, specially when the explanations of why some additions are pointless are "they just seem to be there" or "they rub me the wrong way". Discuss facts and not your pointless "feels".

Being fine with how the game plays now is completely acceptable. It may also have something to do with the fact that I'm busy with other aspects of my life and that when I sit to play Smash with my bro and cousin I was just want to have a good time rather than bring about a gaming revolution to my favorite game. People bring Mario Odyssey and Breath of the Wild as examples of reworking old franchises, but there are others that have tried and failed. Star Fox Zero and the Paper Mario series are good examples of this. Change by virtue of being change isn't inherently good. Reworking the wheel isn't something that should be forced upon every time. If Smash already plays good as it is, then why transform the entire concept? The most popular idea that seems to get thrown around is to make new movesets for existing characters. And while some characters like Ganon can use a rework, what about the ones whose movesets are already faithful to their source?
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom