Hey, sorry I didn't respond to this earlier but I REALLY dislike being on mobile in general and I wasn't about to try and address this on mobile as the post you quoted was done on mobile and I was heavily displeased with how it was formatted.
So, let's clear up the first mistake, which is the topic in discussion itself: you believe the discussion to be 'Why Monster Hunter won't get a character in Smash' (sounds like a click-bait youtube video, right?) but in reality, the discussion was not started by me. The original discussion was 'Is Monster Hunter likely to get a character into Ultimate' and while most persons were saying 'Yes!' because 'Monster Hunter just got two games revealed for Switch' which is the age-old 'Game on Switch = Character in Ultimate' argument that has been trashed to the point where it only becomes recognizable by switching the face of the character in question on what seems like a weekly basis (I remember when it was Tracer/D.va because of Overwatch) while I myself was saying 'It's not very likely' because of the evidence laid in front of me and because only a Sith deals in absolutes.
Thus I never even started the argument/discussion, but I am one of the few who thought Monster Hunter has little chance, and my side isn't 'No Monster Hunter rep' as much as it is 'Monster Hunter rep is highly unlikely'.
With that out of the way, let's check out all these points one at a time.
- Obviously this is true, as like I said myself, my argument is that it's heavily unlikely, not impossible. Also, the fact that the Hunter appeared in MvCI is proof enough that depending on the situation they can and will use the Hunter themselves as representation, although I would like to point out that in the story mode during this point heavy focus takes place on trying to save Valkanda from the wrath of the Elder Dragon Dah'ren Mohran, so even then it wasn't just about the Hunter themselves. However, this seems to be the only case in which the Hunter themselves has been represented as I cannot find any other time they have been used, though perhaps I just haven't dug deep enough. However, to back up my argument that they favor monsters over the Hunter for representation...
- During the crossover event between MHW and FFXIV, MHW got to fight Behemoth while FFIV got, you guessed it, Rathalos. Funnily enough, Square took their own take on what Rathalos armor would look like in the world of FFXIV, to what I have gathered is the dismay of a lot of players as it looks rather generic in comparison to other armor sets in FFXIV.
- As you well know, Smash 4 got both the Rathalos Armor and the Hunter's Armor (which I incorrectly stated as Default Gear: it's actually one of the first sets you can craft, which is why I confused it with the default gear) as Mii Costumes and Rathalos is an AT and boss in Ultimate.
- Rathalos and Tigrex showed up in hunting grounds in Metal Gear Solid: Peace Walker.
- Rathalos made an appearance in Dragalia Lost and I believe Rathalos armor is/was available.
- Teppen, which is a mobile card game that uses only Capcom characters, features three heroes from the Monster Hunter series. They are Rathalos, Nergigante, and a Felyne. No Hunter to be found despite it fitting well into the game, but perhaps it will happen later on? I looked at all the Monster Hunter-themed cards and not a single one of them references Hunters outside of a card called Barrel Bomb with is an explosive Hunters can place down during a battle. The rest are either monsters or references to monsters, be it attacks they use or situations they can cause.
I also found that in Lost Planet 2 you can apparently use Rathalos armor, but all of this proves my point, including Hunter in MvCI as the default outfit is Rathalos armor (secondary is Kirin armor): Rathalos is the posterboy of Monster Hunter, and by extension Rathalos armor is iconic. The big things about Monster Hunter are first and foremost the monsters and how the fight will be like and right behind it is how cool the armor and weapons will be and how good they will be. Thus, it makes perfect sense for Smash to have Mii Costumes of the armor of the most iconic monster and the another armor that is iconic for being one of the first you can craft, and it also makes sense for Rathalos to be a boss (I still get blown away every time he shows up via AT). However, is there a need for more if and when those costumes return? You already have the poster boy of your franchise and two iconic armor sets in a franchise where the monsters and the armor sets and weapons are what matters, not the characters, so do you really feel the need for that? Or do you feel that Monster Hunter has been properly represented already?
Regular folks may say no, but Sakurai and his team and Capcom and the Monster Hunter team could very well think otherwise.
- I'm glad we don't have to argue about this point because it would be silly to suggest a monster could be a playable character. The monsters people love are way too big and broken and the monsters who could work aren't nearly as iconic or favored by the community. If you think Plant was a wacky blow to the community, just imagine a playable Jagras.
- There was never an argument coming from me that a Hunter isn't original enough to be playable, I merely suggested that they didn't offer much we haven't already seen and are kinda generic: A person wielding an oversized, fantasy-styled weapon with lots of tools and many attacks isn't really that new to Smash. This is a weaker argument to be sure, but Sakurai has expressed his desire for the DLC character to truly offer something unique and new to Ultimate, something that isn't already there. To date, we have...
- Joker, a character who has a temporary buff that is linked to a meter that builds over time and when damage is taken. This buff either augments or flat-out changes moves for a period of time, and he unpowered Down-B allows him to build more meter when hit during its active window. His gun overall is also fairly unique.
- Hero, who has way too many specials in his Command Menu and can randomly crit on smash attacks.
- Banjo & Kazooie, who has a Side-B that offers nigh full invincibility but has limited uses per stock and a Neutral-B that has two variations and can fire projectiles rapidly while moving.
- Terry Bogard, the first character to have both a Forward-B and a Back-B and a mechanic that gives him super powerful moves he can somewhat abuse when his percent is high/health is low.
- Byleth, a character who wields multiple melee weapons as well as a bow that gives them access to a wide range of abilities as well as an Up-B that is rather unique.
- Min-Min, a character that is so focused on ranged combat that they almost can't fight up close, has a Neutral-B and Side-B that are nontraditional and completely change how she is played, and a Down-B that swaps weapons mid-combat.
Sadly, adding a Hunter to the game doesn't offer much in terms of uniqueness: Byleth covers hording multiple weapons that function very differently and Min-Min has weapon swapping, which again is something you can't even do in Monster Hunter. We already have characters who buff themselves, characters that can place traps, lots of heavy-hitting fighters with large weapons...whenever I sit down and try to think of something that a Hunter can offer, I come up with things that have already been done, and that is with me seriously sitting down and giving it thought. I know Sakurai and his team can work wonders with characters but it really seems like the opportunity has been lost with Byleth. Once again, a weaker argument, but it was Sakurai's own words that he is striving for uniqueness when it comes to DLC.
Now, if you talk about the spin-offs where they can tame and ride monsters? That is a whole different story.
There is no gate being kept here, merely analysis of information, and this leads me to believe the scales are not in favor of Monster Hunter. Remember, my argument is not 'Monster Hunter has no chance' but rather I am responding to the discussion of 'Does Monster Hunter have a chance' with a reply of 'It really doesn't look like they do, and here is why I think this way.'
Speaking of bias, hopefully you all will understand now that I check my bias at the door when it comes to debates. I have spent thousands of hours on World and was pissed that I missed out on the most recent festival due to being up north on this remodeling project. I lost my **** when I saw the rope bug feature. I love the new platypus monster and I will now be buying my first-ever Amiibo because they now have Monster Hunter Amiibo, and I'm not one to easily buy merchandise that I can't play or wear. This new wave of having games that have dynamic action is amazing for me, and it started for me with Vindictus, but now so many games are taking this angle and I love it and I feel as though World had some bit of impact on this. I would spend hours just grinding resources I needed and even then I was enjoying myself.
With all of this, I don't see a Monster Hunter character coming to Smash. I think Dante and Phoenix Wright have much better chances, but I honestly don't think Capcom is getting a character in this pass. There just hasn't been any real evidence to support that, and it's one of the few things I disagree with
Fatmanonice
on. This isn't even the pathetic 'I want it badly, so Nintendo will never do it because they are evil and I can't be happy' mindset: I just simply did research and came to a conclusion. Now you know that my bias, which would be in favor of a Monster Hunter character because I love the franchise so much and I would buy them easily, plays no part here.
I'm of the opinion that you cannot learn, grow, or understand where the other person comes from if you don't check your bias and open your mind to the possibility that you may be wrong and that there may be something to gleam from what the other side has to say, no matter how small.