Louie G.
Smash Hero
I feel like this gets construed in odd ways both directions. When there is a very clear, cemented hierarchy of characters it is typically followed and once that has been covered then we get into the weeds and explore supplementary characters. Really though, I'd argue Mario is the only series where we've actually gotten to this point - Pokemon / Fire Emblem are their own beasts and Zelda should have gotten there by now... but I digress.I'm baffled when I see people ascribe what is clearly a general hierarchical system solely to Sakurai seemingly finding the choices we've been given as the most interesting. Just a coincidence it aligns with the fact that it could mistaken for an intact and active hierarchy, then, is it?
It's not a super common viewpoint, but it's one so obtuse that it's memorable.
As silly as it is to suggest that this is broken for certain franchises, I think there's a breaking point where I find it equally silly for people to cling onto it. Like Impa as I mentioned before, she's technically the next most important Zelda character, but she's so far behind the other three where it really wouldn't be a crime to throw in a Skull Kid or Midna instead. Or for Mario, where after Rosalina, Bowser Jr and a potted Plant all made it in first people are still insistent that Waluigi or Geno ought to wait their turn for Toad.
Regardless of my own personal opinions on those characters (it is pretty odd that Toad isn't here yet) I think once we've hit that sweet spot - like, the three or four most important characters, that's when Sakurai can just go for who he finds interesting. But there's no way we would have gotten the likes of Skull Kid before Ganondorf "just because", either. I dunno, I think you probably get what I mean.
Last edited: