I disliked the pedantic and mislead focus on 'perfect' here. It was a simple use of perfect as an adjective, not some platonic ideal concept, English is not my native tongue but I checked the dictionaries and it seemed the way I used it is common.
The big problem here is that you somehow take this meme as an "Erdrick is Guaranteed". I don't know how your discord friends use this, but while analyzing this for one week, didn't it strike you at any moment that the meme doesn't deal with leaks and the like? None of the characters are saying anything about leaks, datamines, and the like? No one is saying "OH THIS CHARACTER HAS A SECONDARY FORM CALLED BRAVE, HE IS CODENAME BRAVE"? That is intentional, because... this image isn't about Erdrick being a guaranteed pick, because he isn't. It's about why I think he is a good and legitimate pick, in face of the community trying to paint DQ as illegitimate, its why all the points in the image are related to quality, not likehood.
See, I am one of those persons who actually has wanted Erdrick / Roto for a long time, and despite the leak fueled boom, the arguments have stayed quite consistent on why Erdrick is a good pick, being basically the same as they were before the leaks, there are records of such conversations, with people sure DQ would be in Smash 4, for example, but it didn't happen, right? So its obvious things like Nintendo publishing the game don't guarantee, just hopeful notes for DQ being considered or arguments on why it should be considered, just like it happens for any other character... but its somehow a problem here.
Due to the position as the outsider, there is a constant suspicion and paranoia in the air, it is not uncommon for when someone presents a pro DQ point on 4chan or Twitter for people to answer with things like "Oh yeah, if sales mattered, wouldn't that also make Leon likely?" "Oh, you care about Nintendo presence, but what about Banjo Kazooie?" as if anyone supporting DQ was out to stomp and BTFO everyone else, the objective 'bad guys'.
Back to the perfect mix, its just a collection of points I care about when it comes to Smash picks. Yes, you can take each factor and say "Oh, but this one character didn't do this!" and you'd be right, if sales, historical relevance and Nintendo presence GUARANTEED we would have had Simon Belmont before Bayonetta. Doesn't make it wrong to want Simon or saying those three factors make Simon a perfect fit for smash? Nah.
... What? I mean, yes, a customizable, exploitable job system was one of DQ3's differentials, but to limit it to that is wrong. DQ3 is often called 'the first JRPG' because of a series of important features and tone choices of the game. And yes, they matter, for example, Mother 1 is mechanically identical do DQ, especially the battles, however, if you say Mother 1 is some sort of DQ clone you are mad, the way it uses said mechanics is completely revolutionary. Similar arguments could be used for FF or Pokemon.
But back to DQ III, even when compared to DQ II, the difference is like night and day (and not only because III has one of the earliest examples of a proper day-night cycle in an RPG, beating Ultima to it). First two DQs are very much a mix of Ultima and Wizardry with great advancement in UI for consoles (copied by everything from Phantasy Star to Pokemon) and a few quaint details and a lighter tone for monsters, DQ III takes that and fully turn it in its own genre, departing fully from the ye old fantasy of Ultima to become its own thing. The tone of the game is a clashing of light things such as funny flavor text, finding special clothes (including a bikini) that actually change the appearance of your character, and quaint plotlines in towns contrasting with a darker context of a world besieged by demons, full of little and major tragedies. DQ had already innovated by focusing on a town-to-town pace, but DQ III is pretty much the earliest example you have of an episodic focus on the stories of such towns, no longer you are just wandering around hearing about where the shield of the hero is, instead, you are experiencing local stories that connect to the larger context. There is a reason why Miyamoto himself noticed the difference between DQ I and II versus DQ III and IV, noticing the later had better character interactions and truly nailed the feeling of adventure, even comparing it to 'fine wine'.
Err, for someone who made a whole paragraph about how you can find out objectively bad games, you are too quick to jump to assumptions based on flawed research.
Saying Dragon Quest has stayed the same is like saying there is no difference between Super Mario Bros and Super Mario Bros 3. There is a massive difference, and yes, the series didn't turn into something else entirely, it never became another product, there is no Dragon Quest Nuts and Bolts instead of Dragon Quest III, and that is not an issue.
To say the series has not innovated is silly, there is a huge leap between DQ I and DQ III, or even between DQ III and DQ IV, with IV having a chapter system where you play different characters and having a full party with each character having their own unique personality, all that on an NES game. DQ V had the monster taming mechanic before Shin Megami Tensei and years before Pokemon, which yeah, is heavily DQ inspired, from puzzles to Ho-Oh's arrival cutscene. It was in the SNES era that they also added the concept of skills and such, another massive change to the series.
For a more recent example, DQ IX, the best selling third party of Nintendo's best selling console, absolutely took the social aspect of the DS to new limits, the DQ remakes for the DS and the many systems used in DQ IX were not only the new benchmark for new social systems in Japanese games, they were also what inspired the Street Pass system on the 3DS.
I will give you that DQ XI was a bit disappointing but it doesn't change history and its objectively wrong to say the series is the same as it was in 1.
....
Now let me address each of the 'anti-DQ' arguments really quick and your misconception of what each means.
First Argument
And you completely lost me. It isn't "He doesn’t need to be in a new game centered around him to be considered for Smash." which isn't wrong, but it's not what I meant.
The first one is a joke towards the mental gymnastics people make to say Erdrick hasn't been playable since 1988. Since he has had full remakes, ports, and is played in a spin-off. Its why most of what le funny man is saying is towards remakes and spin-offs not counting, even though nobody does that to other characters who come from series with no repeating protagonists (Red in particular...)
Also, keep in mind that DQ never repeats a protagonist. In 33 years, no protagonist has returned in a mainline game, outside of quick cameos at best, and even then, only two do that, IV's protagonist and Erdrick. Of all these protagonists, however, Erdrick is the one who is the most mentioned, both within Dragon Quest games, as well as outside, with constant Japanese pop culture references.
Nope, it's actually the exact same as Final Fantasy, except DQ has a few shared worlds for the first six games there are two trilogies of shared worlds. The Zenith trilogy (4-6) and the... Erdrick Trilogy (1-3). There is also the concept of traveling between worlds, and some characters do appear in games outside of those, such as Lamia, from Dragon Quest III, in VIII, and Erdrick, from Dragon Quest III, in XI...
Noticing a pattern? III is the most referenced DQ, the design of the character classes you could recruit reappear a whole lot as NPCs, a lot of what DQ III did became standard to the series, and, of course, Erdrick is referenced a lot. DQ III is constantly voted the best DQ and Erdrick himself won a popularity poll in SE's own website. I could go on about how Erdrick is the centerpiece of most anniversary events and so on, but whatever.
Next, you have two clashing arguments, "Is Erdrick still relevant", while also trying to use DQ XI, which had ads with a kid playing classic DQ before, as an adult, playing XI, banked on Erdrick and DQ III nostalgia. It boggles my mind that people take SE using nostalgia bait and giving Luminary the Erdrick title means Erdrick is irrelevant. Like... what? The whole thing was calling back to DQ III, music from DQIII was re-used, the whole thing ends with an Erdrick cameo and the words "To be continued" which have not been used in Dragon Quest mainline since DQ III's iconic "To be continued in Dragon Quest I" yet people look at that (or, in factual terms, hear that from second-hand sources) and are like "yep, Erdrick is done for"
Like, if the next Mario and Luigi had SMRPG Music, a character called Yeno that was a wooden puppet and ended with a cameo of
♪!? himself, would you say Geno is done for? No, right, it would be a sign he is still relevant, or at the very least remembered.
Second Argument
People do say "I hate Erdrick because I want to be surprised." this means that if a character is obvious or leaked they are bad. I don't give a damn about leakers and have wished for Erdrick for a long time. That is all.
Third Argument
Someone already answered why this one is wrong. Which you noted... and then said "quantity over quality!" and noted a bunch of games that sold more than DQ on the NES even though the only other third-party one was Ninja Turtles (which sold about as much as DQ3, but was bundled with NES consoles, so there is some discussion on whether that counts as third-party sales or not)
Like, be a bit more honest about the biases here, okay? It's obviously not an even ground. This is what I referred to in my Leon / Banjo example earlier in the thread. I don't want to be too antagonistic, but just imagine if instead of arguing about DQ I was saying Geno wasn't important to SMRPG / Wasn't even on the cover so Nintendo didn't care and people just remember about Mario or that at any claim SMRPG did very well I suddenly started talking about every other SNES RPG that sold well. I wouldn't do since I would like more SMRPG in Nintendo crossovers including Smash, but I were to do it, I wouldn't claim to be presenting just unbiased information.
And again, talking about the quality of games you haven't touched isn't the way to go, DQ I -> IV is a constant climb of quality and complexity, just because the game was released in rapid-fire sucession it doesn't mean it was bad, considering your profile picture, I would assume you are familiar with at least one other NES series that released a lot of sequels but was still great.
Fourth Argument
Sugiyama is an idiot and there is no denying that. Literally, there is no denial of that, I made that bit with the intent of making it clear that yes, he is an idiot who said idiotic stuff. I regret that my working on the first half came a bit euphemistic over his homophobia, however, this is an image about mental gymnastics, the mental gymnastics here is adding more bad stuff to him that isn't there.
In particular, this means the warping of it all in the "holocaust denier" lie, which has gone so far it has been even used in the context of Yuji Horii being a holocaust denier (!?). Like, call trash trash, but don't go making stuff up by saying its also radioactive.
Won't discuss the fifth one since we are in a similar wavelength, even if having different ideas about the conclusion. I don't mind characters that aren't well known. I don't mind characters that only the west likes. I don't mind characters that only Japan likes. To me, Smash is becoming too much about the hype and the epic reveals.
And I guess this is it, any other point has been touched by others or is something about leaks and the likes which aren't relevant to me
