How come so many people are taking a dump of FE lately?

[VexTheHex]

People are just triggered that their character of choice may not be in or already is deconfirmed basically.

You can tell when people are already going after both Pokemon and Mario (the 2 biggest faces of Nintendo) as having too many characters in a Nintendo fighting game. Who do they support? Dead franchises, much smaller franchises with small character pools, 3rd party nobodies, new franchises that haven't proved to survive time, etc. Instead of realizing they are supporting small fries that will get scrap slots, they expect the world to cater to their niche picks over what's actually hugely popular and recognizable.

As long as the franchise offers exciting character, I'm all for them getting more in. Pokemon excels at this and Mario does as well besides the Dr. and Daisy. But both were low effort additions. I mean we could get a little mushroom guy using explorer stuff, a tall and thin weirdo using sports stuff and vines, or a weaponized doll. And we could also get a siren mermaid, a wrestler cat heel, a edgy archer owl, or a rock wolf. All solid additions.

Fire Emblem has struggled with this, but 3 of their additions were low effort ones anyways. People are hyping Edelgard who would be another Roy or Corrin for promotion and may bomb... and she uses swords... and axes. So still risk of another sword. Claude and Dimitri have unique weapons, but all know waifu on the front is the one people will rally for and the only one with a chance. Another white haired female sword user more than likely.

 

[Kirbyfan391]

I'm biased as hell with my roy fanboyism(though not necessarily FE fanboyism) so I'm not going to give my personal subjective take, but I don't get why anyone would be surprised at the hate FE gets, isn't it very obvious? The reasons are mentioned throughout this thread, them just being swordsmen/women, preferring to see non-FE stuff instead, getting FE characters before the game even releases, etc..

Plus to be fair, it's pretty obvious Sakurai is biased over FE. He planned to have Marth as back as 64, while FE wasn't an overseas series, also kind of telling we could've had no Marth/Roy in overseas Melee, but Wii U exclusive Ice Climbers was a no-no from the start. Then, both Roy and Corrin were in Smash before they could have a proper fandom from their games, Sakurai hosted the Shadow Dragon Iwata Asks, and finally despite being big on characters being unique, he adds characters that in their games have like what, 4 battle animations you can actually translate to a moveset?

And FE representation in Smash is something even fans of FE can dislike, from not representing non-sword/mage aspects of the series, to focusing on 3DS emblem, to not having Lyn playable. And while understandable, SmashFE characters are all lords/main characters, but to a lot of people the charm of FE characterization is the whole army of miscellaneous characters rather than main lord, that's why stuff like FE Warriors and Heroes exist. But of course, representing a series without the main character will always trigger a question mark, so there's no way to go about it to please everyone feasibly.

But yeah, whether you hate FE representation so far or are the "7 characters isn't enough" type of person...it's pretty easy to see why so many are taking a dump on it...

 

[Mogisthelioma]

I'm biased as hell with my roy fanboyism(though not necessarily FE fanboyism) so I'm not going to give my personal subjective take, but I don't get why anyone would be surprised at the hate FE gets, isn't it very obvious? The reasons are mentioned throughout this thread, them just being swordsmen/women, preferring to see non-FE stuff instead, getting FE characters before the game even releases, etc..

Plus to be fair, it's pretty obvious Sakurai is biased over FE. He planned to have Marth as back as 64, while FE wasn't an overseas series, also kind of telling we could've had no Marth/Roy in overseas Melee, but Wii U exclusive Ice Climbers was a no-no from the start. Then, both Roy and Corrin were in Smash before they could have a proper fandom from their games, Sakurai hosted the Shadow Dragon Iwata Asks, and finally despite being big on characters being unique, he adds characters that in their games have like what, 4 battle animations you can actually translate to a moveset?

And FE representation in Smash is something even fans of FE can dislike, from not representing non-sword/mage aspects of the series, to focusing on 3DS emblem, to not having Lyn playable. And while understandable, SmashFE characters are all lords/main characters, but to a lot of people the charm of FE characterization is the whole army of miscellaneous characters rather than main lord, that's why stuff like FE Warriors and Heroes exist. But of course, representing a series without the main character will always trigger a question mark, so there's no way to go about it to please everyone feasibly.

But yeah, whether you hate FE representation so far or are the "7 characters isn't enough" type of person...it's pretty easy to see why so many are taking a dump on it...

I'm well aware that people hate FE. My concern was why they were taking it out on other people, as if these people were responsible for their troubles.

 

[Oddball]

These examples don't work. Wolverine, Hulk, Sabretooth, Drax, Iron Man, Rocket Racoon, and Rogue have two things in common. Most live on Earth. All are in the mainstream continuity that is Earth-616.

Just because you don't like the examples don't mean they don't work. I get it. You want to be right. That doesn't mean you can just ignore the things that prove your wrong.

 

[Luigifan18]

People are just triggered that their character of choice may not be in or already is deconfirmed basically.

You can tell when people are already going after both Pokemon and Mario (the 2 biggest faces of Nintendo) as having too many characters in a Nintendo fighting game. Who do they support? Dead franchises, much smaller franchises with small character pools, 3rd party nobodies, new franchises that haven't proved to survive time, etc. Instead of realizing they are supporting small fries that will get scrap slots, they expect the world to cater to their niche picks over what's actually hugely popular and recognizable.

Ahahahahahahahaha... this explains the FE hate so well. We do need more Zelda representatives, though; I'm hoping for Vaati, but I've resigned myself to Skull Kid being far more likely.

 

[Kirbyfan391]

I'm well aware that people hate FE. My concern was why they were taking it out on other people, as if these people were responsible for their troubles.

They are? I haven't seen that. Even in this thread no one really is dissing or even mentioning the people that are FE fans or fine with FE representation. Saying something bad about FE stuff isn't automatically an attack on its fans and whatnot. Unless you meant something else by "other people".

 

[KirbyWorshipper2465]

There are a few problems with Fire Emblem.

While it's a long running series, it's kind of a niche one, not nearly as popular as some of Nintendo's bigger franchises which gives the impression that it's been given more representation than it deserves. The fact that several of the characters are tied to a single game doesn't help matters. It gives them a "one-and-done" feeling. They're obsolete right off the bat.

Another problem there is that a few of the characters in the past have been given spots before their game was even out making it feel like blatant advertising when other characters from different franchises don't appear to get this treatments.

Then we run into how same-y many of the Fire Emblem feels, both in moves and generic anime swordsman appearance.

Of course there's also the people that feel upset when Fire Emblem gets yet another new character when a franchise they may like doesn't even get an assist trophy.



Mario IS Nintendo and Smash gets it's name from mario. Half the roster could be Mario characters and I still wouldn't think it felt forced. ... Well, as long as they kept using actual characters. Give me Fawful, Wart, Tatanga, Paper Mario, and the like and I'm fine. Once it starts getting to Koopa Troopa, Goomba, Dry Bones etc that's when they've stepped over the line. (I will make an exception for Hammer Bros though.)

Yeah, with Mario, you expect it to get a lot of attention, so go figure there. Even Pokémon has some justification, regardless of the leaning towards Gen 1 and promotional picks.

With FE, it's generally less justified. On top of that, the representation tends to be less than accurate, when you consider that barely anyone that isn't a swordsman is in the roster at all, to the point that if one were to play an FE installment after knowing of the series via Smash, they'd be surprised to see archers, axe-wielders, riders, and weredragons, among others. It's all exacerbated by the fact that the inclusions are generally always the singular main characters (Chrom and Robin being the only deuteragonist exceptions), so you don't even get secondary characters, let alone any villains.

 

[SmashBro99]

I wish Japan had less of a love for anime boys with swords.

No manly men with axes or heavy armor units in smash ever.

 

[Mogisthelioma]

They are? I haven't seen that. Even in this thread no one really is dissing or even mentioning the people that are FE fans or fine with FE representation. Saying something bad about FE stuff isn't automatically an attack on its fans and whatnot. Unless you meant something else by "other people".

Yeah. Just not always on this website. I see FE fans getting just as much hate as FE itself. It's really unnerving.

 

[Zerp]

Because it's grossly overrepresented in proportion to other Nintendo series, it's gotten a lot more popular recently but it's recent game sales are still roughly Kirby tier, so it's not THAT popular, and it didn't have the same strong sales legacy as franchises like Donkey Kong, Metroid and Kirby did before it for such a long time. Outside of marketing reasons it's weird that it has so many characters and thing is, many of us (including me) don't like those marketing reasons either haha, so it ended up making a lot of people gain a strong dislike for the franchise.

Honestly, tossing so much Fire Emblem at my face kind of turned me away from wanting to play the franchise, because 1. I'm stubborn and feel like if I play one I'd have lost a dumb "game" I have going on, I'm not playing Fire Emblem just because they advertised it in Smash so much lol and 2. I don't want to spend money on something that might give them more reasons to add even more Fire Emblem characters when I don't want any more. Also yeah, both of my reasons are stupid and that last reason is pure paranoia speaking, but I did call Corrin happening because I felt Fire Emblem's representation made no sense and despite there being five FE characters I felt they might actually do it since they already went passed what you'd think would be the limit. I thought it was possible we'd get the bias/marketing pick, and it ended up happening, so yeah, with that in mind I feel a little justified in being paranoid lol.
Just a little justified though, I'm definitely more paranoid than what's reasonable haha.

Also btw this is offtopic but I bet we're going to get 2 more Fire Emblem newcomers at least, Black Knight for base game, whoever the Three Houses main character is for DLC.

I'm well aware that people hate FE. My concern was why they were taking it out on other people, as if these people were responsible for their troubles.

I believe you but I honestly haven't seen any of this (except on 4chan, but who and what doesn't get hate there haha), if anything I've seen the opposite here (in the past I've gotten some really angry replies for saying Fire Emblem is overrepresented and/or that Corrin wasn't a good pick imo lol). Either way though, taking our anger out on people who like Fire Emblem is ridiculous and unwarranted, they had nothing to do with the decision to add insertFireEmblemcharacterhere and just because they like something someone else (or even say, a majority) dislikes, that doesn't actually give us some moral right to bash them. Also, just to make it clear, I don't hate the people who are actually responsible for Fire Emblem's representation in Smash (probably Intelligent Systems and Sakurai) either, I just dislike their decisions.

 

[Kirbyfan391]

Yeah. Just not always on this website. I see FE fans getting just as much hate as FE itself. It's really unnerving.

Oh if that is so, then that sucks. Well, Smash speculation can get heated and somewhat emotional at times lol, not that surprised if that happens once in a while. I'll take your word for it though. I don't think hating the fandom itself is constructive or even makes sense, I can see heavily disagreeing with people who are fine with the FE situation, but it's a waste to exert actual hate towards them even then.

Tbh, I guess I'm in a somewhat privileged point to say that, I am an FE fan in general(mostly of the older variety), but all I really wanted was Roy, he was my most wanted character in general, so when he was in Smash 4, it eased the blow for everything else in terms of FE, which I wouldn't say I was overall happy over. But I can see why say, K Rool fans or Ridley fans would've been miffed pre-Ultimate. And actually, I think I saw Chrom get way less hate now than in Smash 4 days! I think the former two being revealed already helped with that significantly. So I think the "other characters deserve it more" argument may be the one that matters most.

 

[Crystanium]

Do you consider Banjo and Conker Mario characters since they debuted in Diddy Kong Racing?

I don't consider cameo appearances, so no.

At the end of the day, the DK and Wario series have their own characters, settings, gameplay, and tone completely separate from the mainline Mario series, so the fact that a couple of Kongs show up in Mario spin-offs once in a while doesn't really have much bearing in anything.

I'm not even talking about spin-offs. Mario stopped DK on more than one occasion in canon. See Donkey Kong (1981) and Donkey Kong Jr. (1982). They're in the same universe.

Nobody looks at K. Rool and thinks "Mario character" except hypernerds on the internet obsessed with continuity that even Nintendo doesn't care about.

It sounds to me like you're becoming a tad salty.

Just because you don't like the examples don't mean they don't work. I get it. You want to be right. That doesn't mean you can just ignore the things that prove your wrong.

It has nothing with not liking the examples. I explained why they don't work. I think you're projecting. I think maybe you should step back and take a breather because it sounds like you're becoming emotionally invested in this.

 

[staindgrey]

Because it's grossly overrepresented in proportion to other Nintendo series, it's gotten a lot more popular recently but it's recent game sales are still roughly Kirby tier, so it's not THAT popular, and it didn't have the same strong sales legacy as franchises like Donkey Kong, Metroid and Kirby did before it for such a long time. Outside of marketing reasons it's weird that it has so many characters and thing is, many of us (including me) don't like those marketing reasons either haha, so it ended up making a lot of people gain a strong dislike for the franchise.

Metroid has never been an amazing seller either. Prime broke two million sales lifetime, but Prime 2, Prime 3, Prime Hunters and Other M all barely broke a million. Also, for comparison's sake, FE Awakening and Fates each outsold DKCR: Tropical Freeze on both the Wii U and Switch.

Something to keep in mind when arguing over-representation is that Fire Emblem is a series designed to be character driven with a ****load of characters. A game like Metroid, to stick with that example, has so little to choose from in terms of character representation, unless we want to take the Hunters characters that no one remembers the names of or the hunters from Prime 3. That's why we have Samus in her suit, Samus not in her suit, Dark Samus, and Ridley. By comparison, FE simply has way more to choose from, much like Pokemon.

I personally disagree with the characters chosen, as they don't fully represent the FE series as a whole-- which spans Marth's, Alm's, Seliph's, Leif's, Ephraim's, Roy's, Ike's, Robin's and Corrin's distinct worlds with their own character ensembles. But I'd say the number of characters is actually about correct. The series spans fifteen main title games, all story-driven with massive amounts of characters that people get attached to while playing. This is fairly unique to Nintendo, whose staples include "save the princess from the castle again," "save the princess from Ganon again," "save the bananas from _____ again," etc.

 

[StormC]

I don't consider cameo appearances, so no.

What's a "cameo appearance?" Conker and Banjo are fully playable characters in Diddy Kong Racing, which is the first game they ever appeared in. Tiptup later appears in Banjo-Kazooie after Diddy Kong Racing, intensifying the in-universe relationship.

I'm not even talking about spin-offs. Mario stopped DK on more than one occasion in canon. See Donkey Kong (1981) and Donkey Kong Jr. (1982). They're in the same universe.

Of course they're in the same universe, I never argued otherwise. But they are distinct series. The Donkey Kong characters are part of the Donkey Kong series, not the Mario series. Considering the DK cast Mario characters is an arbitrary distinction.

It sounds to me like you're becoming a tad salty.

Not at all. Keep in mind I also fall into the category of "hypernerds on the internet obsessed with continuity that even Nintendo doesn't care about."

 

[Crystanium]

What's a "cameo appearance?" Conker and Banjo are fully playable characters in Diddy Kong Racing, which is the first game they ever appeared in. Tiptup later appears in Banjo-Kazooie after Diddy Kong Racing, intensifying the in-universe relationship.

A cameo appearance is what you probably would consider a spin-off. It's not part of canon. Blue Falcon is in Mario Kart, for example, although F-Zero and Mario aren't connected.

Of course they're in the same universe, I never argued otherwise. But they are distinct series. The Donkey Kong characters are part of the Donkey Kong series, not the Mario series. Considering the DK cast Mario characters is an arbitrary distinction.

You can be distinct, and still share the same universe. Even if you removed the Donkey Kong characters, there are still more Mario characters.

 

[Quillion]

I find that Pokémon, Fire Emblem, and Zelda all face similar issues of having a whole bunch of flavor-of-the-month characters while having few-to-no "anchor" characters that could safely be a face for the whole franchise a la Mario or even MOTHER/EarthBound. It's just not possible to be fair to these three series by having an upper limit to the franchise representatives that they have.

The problem is that Sakurai has explicitly stated that he doesn't like cutting characters out because he finds it hurts the fandom.

"Whether it's a minor character or a character that is one of the most highly skilled and most played," Sakurai said, "if that character is removed from the game, the people who live for that character in Smash Bros. are going to have their feelings hurt.

"I think we have to really consider that, so I take a very serious, hard look at that and have empathy for the players who look for these type of characters when we're making these decisions."

Of course, there's also the opposite problem that when one-shots are past their time in the spotlight, this angers other fans who don't want them in the game anymore and want newer characters instead.

Here's something I posted on the Zelda one-shot character thread quite some time ago:

I don't think the Zelda, Pokémon, and Fire Emblem reps should be hard reset every game, but I also don't want them to accumulate them with no restriction. Here's my take:

• The staple Zelda cast should be Link, Toon Link, Zelda, and Ganondorf. Sheik shouldn't be a staple, IMO, but she is now. There should be room for a single one-shot (two if Sheik can go).
• The staple Pokémon should be Pikachu, Charizard, Mewtwo, and Lucario. Jigglypuff shouldn't be a staple (again IMO, but if it gets upgraded to secondary mascot like Eevee, I wouldn't mind), but it is now. There should be room for two current-gen Pokémon (three if Jigglypuff can go).
• Fire Emblem is trickier, but I think the staple cast should be Marth, Roy, Ike, and Lyn. There should be room for three current-gen Fire Emblem characters.

 

[Deleted member]

Here's the problem with FE characters in smash. It's a similiar to pokemon's problem, but somehow more severe. Each generation they're going to likely add a new character or even few due to popularity and demand.

Except at least Pokemon bring in some variety. Fire Emblem, ehhhh... I mean some do such as Robin, Ike, and Corrin(evem though I dislile Corrin), but the fact that there's 3 clones of Marth really says something. Most Fire Emblem protagonists are essentially the same on paper. Which is all that really matters in smash, it's easy to see why that a non FE fan would think FE characters are mostly the same in personality.

It's only because FE has different stories and characters that you even need to bring in so many characters. Because well, there's so many protagonists. And protagonists are seen as something that should be bound to be in smash.

I don't really mind the FE roster too much since I know they're not putting that much into the clones that would seem like wastes of slots, but I don't think they're being prioritized over any normal characters.

Still, it is annoying that people think that any character that wields a sword should either be a clone or not in the game because there's too many. Regardless of what else that character has to bring to the table.

 

[staindgrey]

Most Fire Emblem protagonists are essentially the same on paper.

Unless you're referring specifically to Lords, FE protagonists are so not the same on paper. Just the ones we've gotten in Smash.

You could get a Pegasus Knight who uses a lance on a flying horse, or a cleric who attacks with a magic staff, or a mage who uses very different spells from Robin, sans sword, or an armored axe user, or any from of shapeshifter from the manakete to the taguel.

It just so happens that all the characters picked for Smash-- three of whom were essentially picked because of their likeness to Marth making them easier additions-- are swordsmen. The series has so much more than that to pick from.

 

[Deleted member]

Unless you're referring specifically to Lords, FE protagonists are so not the same on paper. Just the ones we've gotten in Smash.

You could get a Pegasus Knight who uses a lance on a flying horse, or a cleric who attacks with a magic staff, or a mage who uses very different spells from Robin, sans sword, or an armored axe user, or any from of shapeshifter from the manakete to the taguel.

It just so happens that all the characters picked for Smash-- three of whom were essentially picked because of their likeness to Marth making them easier additions-- are swordsmen. The series has so much more than that to pick from.

I'm talking specifically about the lords. Since they're the only ones who've even been in smash so far and I was talking about, well, the characters in smash. Aside from two of the three(last I recalled) avatars, they're all lords and I can see why people who aren't familiar with them would think they're practically the same character for the most part.

 

[staindgrey]

I'm talking specifically about the lords. Since they're the only ones who've even been in smash so far and I was talking about, well, the characters in smash. Aside from two of the three(last I recalled) avatars, they're all lords and I can see why people who aren't familiar with them would think they're practically the same character for the most part.

The way you phrased your sentence made it sound like you were generalizing all of Fire Emblem's protagonists, not specifically the Smash inclusions.

 

[Deleted member]

The way you phrased your sentence made it sound like you were generalizing all of Fire Emblem's protagonists, not specifically the Smash inclusions.

Well then it's exactly that, just bad phrasing on my part. Especially in my mind when I say protagonists, I mean THE protagonist. Which is most often a lord or an avatar.

But I did say non-fans for a reason, as in they only know the characters from smash.

 

[Oddball]

It has nothing with not liking the examples. I explained why they don't work. I think you're projecting. I think maybe you should step back and take a breather because it sounds like you're becoming emotionally invested in this.

I would have to care about your opinion to be emotionally invested in it. I don't.

I'm just pointing out that you have a bad habbit of finding reasons why things "don't count" whenever they contradict your opinions.

 

[Crystanium]

I would have to care about your opinion to be emotionally invested in it. I don't.

I'm just pointing out that you have a bad habbit of finding reasons why things "don't count" whenever they contradict your opinions.

One of the best ways to show you care about one's opinion is by responding to it. It indicates that such opinion is worthy of your time and attention.

 

[Oddball]

One of the best ways to show you care about one's opinion is by responding to it. It indicates that such opinion is worthy of your time and attention.

It only take a brief moment to swat an insert that's buzzing around your head. It's in no way a sign that you value it's attention.

However we're going off topic now and I feel I'm giving you more attention than you're due.


...


So, how about those Fire Emblem characters, guys?

 

[Troykv]

Most Fire Emblem protagonists are essentially the same on paper. Which is all that really matters in smash, it's easy to see why that a non FE fan would think FE characters are mostly the same in personality.

Spoiler

I started supporting Micaiah despite don't having a lot of experience with Fire Emblem Radiant Dawn initially for reasons like these: She isn't a Marth; or even a Celica despite being a bit naive in her first chapters... She doesn't fight like a Sword Lord and she definitely doesn't look like a Sword Lord.

 

[Deleted member]

Spoiler

I started supporting Micaiah despite don't having a lot of experience with Fire Emblem Radiant Dawn initially for reasons like these: She isn't a Marth; or even a Celica despite being a bit naive in her first chapters... She doesn't fight like a Sword Lord and she definitely doesn't look like a Sword Lord.

Pretty much the same as I said before, I'm talking about the characters already in smash. Not the ones not in smash. I don't think a non fan would know about Micaiah.

 

[Troykv]

Pretty much the same as I said before, I'm talking about the characters already in smash. Not the ones not in smash. I don't think a non fan would know about Micahaiah.

I know; I just wanted to post something related to the fact most of the FE cast doesn't do anything particular for me; and I wanted something more special.

And the name is Micaiah xD (andthanksforthelike)

 

[Deleted member]

I know; I just wanted to post something related to the fact most of the FE cast doesn't do anything particular for me; and I wanted something more special.

And the name is Micaiah xD (andthanksforthelike)

Yeah, I'm a big fan of both of the Tellius games. The misspelling of Micaiah's name was a typo.

 

[Crystanium]

It only take a brief moment to swat an insert that's buzzing around your head. It's in no way a sign that you value it's attention.

However we're going off topic now and I feel I'm giving you more attention than you're due.


...


So, how about those Fire Emblem characters, guys?

I mean, you're the one who quoted me. So . . .

Too many FE characters. Marth, Ike, and Robin would be fine as is. They all play different. Corrin plays different, too, but was DLC.

 

[Izanagi97]

Metroid has never been an amazing seller either. Prime broke two million sales lifetime, but Prime 2, Prime 3, Prime Hunters and Other M all barely broke a million. Also, for comparison's sake, FE Awakening and Fates each outsold DKCR: Tropical Freeze on both the Wii U and Switch.

Something to keep in mind when arguing over-representation is that Fire Emblem is a series designed to be character driven with a ****load of characters. A game like Metroid, to stick with that example, has so little to choose from in terms of character representation, unless we want to take the Hunters characters that no one remembers the names of or the hunters from Prime 3. That's why we have Samus in her suit, Samus not in her suit, Dark Samus, and Ridley. By comparison, FE simply has way more to choose from, much like Pokemon.

I personally disagree with the characters chosen, as they don't fully represent the FE series as a whole-- which spans Marth's, Alm's, Seliph's, Leif's, Ephraim's, Roy's, Ike's, Robin's and Corrin's distinct worlds with their own character ensembles. But I'd say the number of characters is actually about correct. The series spans fifteen main title games, all story-driven with massive amounts of characters that people get attached to while playing. This is fairly unique to Nintendo, whose staples include "save the princess from the castle again," "save the princess from Ganon again," "save the bananas from _____ again," etc.

And that's not even getting in to the upcoming 16th game, the spin offs, the card game, and the mobile game.

 

[pupNapoleon]

For me, it is a combination of factors, culminating in the fact taht Fire Emblem is not one of the highest grossing media franchises of all time. To contast, Pokemon is number one (of any genre, not just gaming).

 

[Ryu Myuutsu]

You could get a Pegasus Knight who uses a lance on a flying horse, or a cleric who attacks with a magic staff, or a mage who uses very different spells from Robin, sans sword, or an armored axe user, or any from of shapeshifter from the manakete to the taguel.

The problem with that is that most of the protagonists don’t fill those archetypes, and as we’ve seen in Smash, only protagonists make it into the game as fighters. This is not something that was decided randomly, since all of the Smash FE characters are central to the narratives of their respective games.

When people propose to have a Pegasus Knight or Armored Knight for the sake of ‘representation’ then it gets much more tricky to choose. Pegasus Knights for instance come in trios in most games, so how do you decide who gets in over the others? Whoever you choose is going to feel much more random and a less organic pick than any lord from the series.

Let’s say you don’t care who is it as long as they are riding a Pegasus and holding a lance, wouldn’t that be undermining a fighter as a mere function rather than who they are as a character? We are supposed to care about that in Smash. Roy, Lucina and Chrom may be clones of some sort but they are in because people wanted to play as them; they care less about the weapon they use and more about who they are. And regarding magic, Robin does this quite nicely but people overlook him because reasons, and Corrin, as hated as he is, showcases his manakete abilities quite nicely.

The idea of representation that a lot of people have in mind may actually be unhealthy to the game, not to mention that it might be impractical and not fun. Adding something like a non combat class such a cleric attacking with their staff just to say “hey look guys! I managed to do proper representation now!” doesn’t sound like an appealing idea. When it comes to representing, you have to understand that you can’t get everything you want. You’ll have to accept that compromises have to be made and you may even get something worthwhile. Just like Pokémon doesn’t need to have someone from each gen to get representation right, or Mario having all of his power ups, or Zelda having all of the items in the series; FE doesn’t need to have all of it’s weapons. The current lineup of lords does the franchises justice as it is now. And considering how many characters it got, the series isn’t exactly hurting for more. FE got its cake and ate it.

 

[Luigifan18]

The problem with that is that most of the protagonists don’t fill those archetypes, and as we’ve seen in Smash, only protagonists make it into the game as fighters. This is not something that was decided randomly, since all of the Smash FE characters are central to the narratives of their respective games.

When people propose to have a Pegasus Knight or Armored Knight for the sake of ‘representation’ then it gets much more tricky to choose. Pegasus Knights for instance come in trios in most games, so how do you decide who gets in over the others? Whoever you choose is going to feel much more random and a less organic pick than any lord from the series.

Let’s say you don’t care who is it as long as they are riding a Pegasus and holding a lance, wouldn’t that be undermining a fighter as a mere function rather than who they are as a character? We are supposed to care about that in Smash.

You are clearly overlooking Caeda. She isn't part of a Pegasus Knight trio (except in Fire Emblem Warriors), and as Marth's fiancé, she has considerably more plot importance than the average non-Lord unit. Hell, in Shadow Dragon, the ending gets changed entirely if she's dead!

 

[Frizz]

Caeda I wouldn't mind, but I feel like Anna would probably be the next best Fire Emblem rep.

 

[Luigifan18]

Continuing from my previous post, having a playable mounted unit would be a logistical nightmare. If you never let the rider and mount be separated, you get the absolutely ridiculous sight of the rider's horse somehow sticking to their feet when clinging to a ledge and the rider somehow pulling the horse up with him/her upon climbing up the ledge (as well as the poor horse most likely having its head clip through the ledge, which will inevitably lead to concussion jokes); alternatively, the horse itself would cling to the ledge, which looks even more ridiculous (not to mention physically impossible, considering that horses don’t have any, oh, I dunno, opposable thumbs) and begs the question of how the rider stays on its back when the horse is completely vertically-positioned (not to mention how the horse would climb up the ledge). If you allow the rider and horse to separate, you run into more problems. First of all, the rider's moveset and attributes with the horse are going to be different than the horseless attributes, which brings up the problems Zelda and Sheik had when they were two characters in one (and the problems Zelda retains as a result of the Melee dev team's horribly bungled attempt at Multiform Balance between her and Shiek), and then there's the question of how to return to the mounted moveset when the rider and mount are separated, which could be tricky to resolve (it’d most likely end up like Wario trying to use Wario Bike when the bike is present on-stage and nowhere near him). You also still have the ridiculous scenario of the pair clinging to a ledge while together, only now with the possibility of the irrealism of the scenario being resolved by dropping the horse to its doom (which means no more mounted moveset, and a lot of angry animal-lovers). Speaking of which, outside of the jackasses who'll drop horses into pits for fun, you also have the issue of the rider possibly having to sacrifice the horse in order to get to the ledge at all, depending on whether or not the devs go for the low-hanging fruit of making the Up+B involve the rider leaping off the horse like Mario ditching Yoshi in Super Mario World. And what do we do with the horse while the rider's not riding it? Does it just stand around, invincible, immobile, and not participating in the fight at all (and possibly being carried offscreen after being left on a moving platform by a careless or cruel player)? Do we have the horse try to assist its rider, Ice Climbers style, and potentially get KO'd by opponents? Do the rider and horse have essentially one hurtbox while the rider is on the horse (resulting in a massive hurtbox that gets hit easily), or do they each have their own hurtbox and take damage (and knockback) separately (resulting in the pair easily getting separated), or is the horse invulnerable while the rider is on it (bad idea, considering a lot of ground attacks would have trouble connecting)? Does the rider get knocked off the horse every time (s)he's launched while riding (which will force them into the unmounted moveset upon being launched (which will be incredibly annoying for those who prefer the mounted moveset), negate any weight difference between the mounted and unmounted movesets, and potentially leave the horse in a really unfortunate position (such as on a platform that's about to leave the screen)), or does the horse get launched with its rider (which will inevitably lead to the aforementioned horse-on-the-ledge shenanigans), or do the horse and rider get separated as they're launched (not only forcing a switch to the unmounted moveset, but in all likelihood KOing the horse)?

No matter what, you just create a complete logistical headache of a character who may be horribly imbalanced and could have an even worse form-switch-forcing shtick than Pokémon Trainer's old stamina system, with the added bonus of possible horse murder that is certain to get PETA's attention (read: unbridled wrath). Pokémon Black and Blue and Super Tanooki Skin were bad enough. Sure, PETA is made up of malicious, ignorant, idiotic, hypocritical, all-around absurd yahoos who shouldn't be taken seriously by anyone with a functional brain (I can provide statistics on their animal-murdering antics if you want), but the sad reality is, there will be enough people listening to them to potentially cause trouble for Nintendo. Hell, PETA and Nintendo recently got on good enough terms for PETA to release one of its propaganda games on the Nintendo Switch (yes, I'm serious; it involves anthropomorphic cats wreaking havoc upon a parody of the fast food industry). It's just not good business sense to stir up another controversy, and giving players the option to be utter ***** to (non-anthro) animals in a game as high-profile as Smash will definitely stir up controversy.

TL;DR: Nintendo has not featured any horse-riding Fire Emblem characters (or horse-riding characters, period) in Smash for several very good reasons. (Link, Zelda, and Ganondorf don't count, considering that we never see their horses in a Smash game.)

For me, it is a combination of factors, culminating in the fact taht Fire Emblem is not one of the highest grossing media franchises of all time. To contast, Pokemon is number one (of any genre, not just gaming).

People are dumping on Pokémon, too. Just an FYI.

Adding something like a non combat class such a cleric attacking with their staff just to say “hey look guys! I managed to do proper representation now!” doesn’t sound like an appealing idea.

A playable FE staff-user would be a stupid idea, for pretty much exactly the reasons you mentioned; one of them could be a great Assist Trophy, though.

 

[staindgrey]

The problem with that is that most of the protagonists don’t fill those archetypes, and as we’ve seen in Smash, only protagonists make it into the game as fighters. This is not something that was decided randomly, since all of the Smash FE characters are central to the narratives of their respective games.

When people propose to have a Pegasus Knight or Armored Knight for the sake of ‘representation’ then it gets much more tricky to choose. Pegasus Knights for instance come in trios in most games, so how do you decide who gets in over the others? Whoever you choose is going to feel much more random and a less organic pick than any lord from the series.

Let’s say you don’t care who is it as long as they are riding a Pegasus and holding a lance, wouldn’t that be undermining a fighter as a mere function rather than who they are as a character? We are supposed to care about that in Smash. Roy, Lucina and Chrom may be clones of some sort but they are in because people wanted to play as them; they care less about the weapon they use and more about who they are. And regarding magic, Robin does this quite nicely but people overlook him because reasons, and Corrin, as hated as he is, showcases his manakete abilities quite nicely.

The idea of representation that a lot of people have in mind may actually be unhealthy to the game, not to mention that it might be impractical and not fun. Adding something like a non combat class such a cleric attacking with their staff just to say “hey look guys! I managed to do proper representation now!” doesn’t sound like an appealing idea. When it comes to representing, you have to understand that you can’t get everything you want. You’ll have to accept that compromises have to be made and you may even get something worthwhile. Just like Pokémon doesn’t need to have someone from each gen to get representation right, or Mario having all of his power ups, or Zelda having all of the items in the series; FE doesn’t need to have all of it’s weapons. The current lineup of lords does the franchises justice as it is now. And considering how many characters it got, the series isn’t exactly hurting for more. FE got its cake and ate it.

I fully understand what you're getting at, and can agree on many points, but I'd still argue against the idea that the lords are the only ones who can be considered, or that FE as a series is properly represented as is. As FE Heroes and Warriors have shown, there is an appeal to FE characters who aren't Marth, Lucina and Roy. As the series becomes more popular, we're no longer restricted to specifically lords, and unlike other franchises with large representation, like Mario and Pokemon, Fire Emblem is explicitly showcasing its swordsmen alone. It would be like Pokemon restricting itself to electric pokemon due to Pikachu's popularity.

Smash is in a unique situation, because many fans of these characters are fans of them in Smash, rather than in their own games. People know Marth and Roy from Melee, before any Fire Emblem game had ever been translated to English. Despite being clones, people picked their favorites, and many clamored for Roy to return-- many of whom, I'd definitely argue, have never even played Roy's lone FE game. Now we have a clone of Marth, a different clone of Marth, and a clone of Marth's original clone. Smash's history has dictated the pallet of swordsmen and their popularity, not the other way around.

Hector and Caeda are well-known axe and Pegasus users who could easily supplant Chrom or Lucina should those have never been an option. Tharja seems to be the most well-known Awakening character outside of the lords, with a fervent fanbase that would be extremely excited to see her and her new mage moveset that doesn't resolve around Robin's sword. Same with Micaiah, to a lesser degree. Azura represents Fates while having a unique moveset centered around her lance, dancing and water. All of these things are possibilities if we don't start with a base of "Marth, Roy, Lucina and Chrom are all here already".

As a FE fan, I'm appreciative of FE's character count, since it shows that Nintendo is investing in the series. But I still can't help but be disappointed by the character choices and how they've led to a general backlash against the "anime swordsmen" reputation it's earned. I even played a lot of Lucina in the last game, so I understand fans liking who's there now. But it's still a wasted opportunity to use more than just swords. Even Robin is a sword user, despite being a mage. Even Corrin is a sword user, despite also being a shapeshifter. I like their movesets individually-- a lot, actually, I think Sakurai did a fantastic job with both-- but taking them in with the rest of the FE cast makes each character more and more derivative. I'm just disappointed in that. That's all.

 

[Luigifan18]

I should mention that an Armor Knight wouldn't be too hard to design as a Smash character. They'd use a lance (unless it's Hector, who would use an axe (most likely Armads), or the Black Knight, who would use his sword, Alondite), and they'd be extremely big, strong, heavy, and slow. Take Bowser in Melee, then exaggerate everything about him — his strengths and his weaknesses — and you have the general idea. Though, obviously, the Armor Knight's attacks would be entirely different from Bowser's (a few, like the Up Smash, might be shared with the existing Fire Emblem characters). Sadly, the Armor Knight's “Melee-Bowser-cranked-to-11” attributes (possibly including frame data) would result in the Armor Knight being thoroughly useless in high-level play, making Kirby in Melee look like a top-tier character in comparison. Is it any wonder the Fire Emblem series' representation in Smash has stuck with quick, nimble swordsmen? Smash is the kind of game where being a Fragile Speedster is completely better in every possible way than being a Mighty Glacier (and I do mean every possible way — high attack power is meaningless if you can never land a hit, and being big and hard to knock around is actually a detriment due to it resulting in taking more hits... I exaggerate, of course, but every single game has generally had the quick and nimble characters at the top of the tier list and the big and slow characters at the bottom). Then again, the previous sentence is only true for 1-on-1 itemless battles. The same attributes that lead to the downfall of Bowser and Ganondorf builds in competitive play tend to be absolutely incredible in causal play; it's a lot harder to pay attention to enemies and properly dodge attacks in free-for-alls, due to having a lot of threats to focus on, so high attack power becomes more important due to attacks landing more easily, and high weight becomes an asset for the same reason.

 

[Diem]

People are just triggered that their character of choice may not be in or already is deconfirmed basically.

You can tell when people are already going after both Pokemon and Mario (the 2 biggest faces of Nintendo) as having too many characters in a Nintendo fighting game. Who do they support? Dead franchises, much smaller franchises with small character pools, 3rd party nobodies, new franchises that haven't proved to survive time, etc. Instead of realizing they are supporting small fries that will get scrap slots, they expect the world to cater to their niche picks over what's actually hugely popular and recognizable.

As long as the franchise offers exciting character, I'm all for them getting more in. Pokemon excels at this and Mario does as well besides the Dr. and Daisy. But both were low effort additions. I mean we could get a little mushroom guy using explorer stuff, a tall and thin weirdo using sports stuff and vines, or a weaponized doll. And we could also get a siren mermaid, a wrestler cat heel, a edgy archer owl, or a rock wolf. All solid additions.

Fire Emblem has struggled with this, but 3 of their additions were low effort ones anyways. People are hyping Edelgard who would be another Roy or Corrin for promotion and may bomb... and she uses swords... and axes. So still risk of another sword. Claude and Dimitri have unique weapons, but all know waifu on the front is the one people will rally for and the only one with a chance. Another white haired female sword user more than likely.

Yeah, some people have problems separating what they want from what makes sense in the grand scheme of things. Not that the two are always mutually exclusive, and often if enough people want something, it then becomes something that makes sense (most of the additions in Ultimate, for example). Mario and Pokémon are Nintendo's two biggest franchises, and overall the biggest franchises in gaming history, so of course they get a bunch of characters and content. For anyone to complain "Oh, another Pokémon character, when's Nintendo gonna stop being so blind and put Lip in the game already?" they'd have to be completely delusional.

Chibi-Robo and Dark Samus are my top two most-wanted characters. Even when there was all the circumstantial evidence for Dark Samus's inclusion before she was announced, I still didn't consider it with any kind of certainty. Because I know where Metroid falls into the grand scheme of things. It's not as popular as Legend of Zelda, Kirby, or even Fire Emblem. To expect Dark Samus after we finally got Ridley would be insane. I never would have come close to expecting it if not for Samus's lack of an alt color.

The problem with Fire Emblem occurs when you consider how reasonable its representation is for its significance. Mario and Pokémon make sense, but Fire Emblem comes third, ahead of Legend of Zelda, Kirby, and Donkey Kong. At that point, it's not unreasonable to see that Fire Emblem's content is less about its popularity and success, but more about it just being shown favoritism. How did Legend of Zelda not get a single newcomer in Smash 4, but Fire Emblem got 2-3? And one of them was added before their game was even released!

And as I said before, unlike Pokémon and Mario, whose individual characters all have unique appearances and interesting gameplay possibilities, all Fire Emblem characters are fantasy anime styled. Fire Emblem has 7 characters, and 4 of them are a blue-haired anime character with a sword. Corrin and Robin are the most unique of the cast, but also the least popular. Only Ike, Robin, and Corrin aren't Marth clones.

If you were to assign fighters to each series by degree of their popularity, then Mario and Pokémon being at the top make complete sense. Fire Emblem being third does not.

 

[Izanagi97]

I should mention that an Armor Knight wouldn't be too hard to design as a Smash character. They'd use a lance (unless it's Hector, who would use an axe (most likely Armads), or the Black Knight, who would use his sword, Alondite), and they'd be extremely big, strong, heavy, and slow. Take Bowser in Melee, then exaggerate everything about him — his strengths and his weaknesses — and you have the general idea. Though, obviously, the Armor Knight's attacks would be entirely different from Bowser's (a few, like the Up Smash, might be shared with the existing Fire Emblem characters). Sadly, the Armor Knight's “Melee-Bowser-cranked-to-11” attributes (possibly including frame data) would result in the Armor Knight being thoroughly useless in high-level play, making Kirby in Melee look like a top-tier character in comparison. Is it any wonder the Fire Emblem series' representation in Smash has stuck with quick, nimble swordsmen? Smash is the kind of game where being a Fragile Speedster is completely better in every possible way than being a Mighty Glacier (and I do mean every possible way — high attack power is meaningless if you can never land a hit, and being big and hard to knock around is actually a detriment due to it resulting in taking more hits... I exaggerate, of course, but every single game has generally had the quick and nimble characters at the top of the tier list and the big and slow characters at the bottom). Then again, the previous sentence is only true for 1-on-1 itemless battles. The same attributes that lead to the downfall of Bowser and Ganondorf builds in competitive play tend to be absolutely incredible in causal play; it's a lot harder to pay attention to enemies and properly dodge attacks in free-for-alls, due to having a lot of threats to focus on, so high attack power becomes more important due to attacks landing more easily, and high weight becomes an asset for the same reason.

That and I'm pretty sure the only way a slow but strong character could work is if they have powerful zoning tools (Snake from brawl is an example, though I'd say that it's the zoning on top of the DACUS and his janky hitboxes.... That reminds, I wonder if his weight will be lowered in Ultimate to be more proportionate since he was only that bulky due to his original design being bigger and they just didn't adjust the hitboxes and the weight)

 

[Mogisthelioma]

That and I'm pretty sure the only way a slow but strong character could work is if they have powerful zoning tools (Snake from brawl is an example, though I'd say that it's the zoning on top of the DACUS and his janky hitboxes.... That reminds, I wonder if his weight will be lowered in Ultimate to be more proportionate since he was only that bulky due to his original design being bigger and they just didn't adjust the hitboxes and the weight)

Oh no please I forgot about DACUS now I'm having nightmares