Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
It appears that you are using ad block :'(
Hey, we get it. However this website is run by and for the community... and it needs ads in order to keep running.
Please disable your adblock on Smashboards, or go premium to hide all advertisements and this notice. Alternatively, this ad may have just failed to load. Woops!
I don't see why people would get too worried over Sakurai stepping down. Miyamoto started Zelda, Aonuma took the helm, and most people agree that it's been even better under Aonuma's leadership. There's definitely an Aonuma for Sakurai out there.
That part is rather true, especially since Zelda was very fine with him in charge. Sure there were a few games that had mixed reception (Skyward Sword and Spirit Tracks for example), but the games still made plenty of many money and Aonuma still gave us solid titles until Zelda U come out. I wouldn't be surprised if any member of Sakurai's team grew interested in the idea after the old man's vocal tiredness.
If Sakurai doesn't sign on for a new game, it'll be a shame, because the game where's he held some control over its design have been solid mechanically, with a distinct flavor. I also think his vision and what Smash 4, the total package, actually is on its whole, is a very-well made and thought-through game. Not perfect, obviously, but it's the most focused game in series yet.
That's not to say other semi-famous directors / producers / designers won't have a good idea about what the goals of a potential sequel would be.. If another person takes helm, and Smash gets a different flavor, be it being more competitive or whatever else, I'd be interested to see how that pans out.
A good exercise I'd recommend for some, is to analyse the difference between Kirby Super Star (Sakurai-directed) and Kirby Dream Land 3 (not Sakurai-directed).
A good exercise I'd recommend for some, is to analyse the difference between Kirby Super Star (Sakurai-directed) and Kirby Dream Land 3 (not Sakurai-directed).
Forces you to collect many pieces of a "special item" to get partake in the true Final Boss and ear the good ending.
Creates some completely new characters that would eventually be forgotten in future titles (Adeleine, ect.)
Incredibly darker antagonist and tone compared to previous and future titles (Just compared Zero/Dark Matter to guys like Magolor and Nightmare).
Introduce some concepts or abilities that would eventually be forgotten (Copy Ability Fusion, Animal Buddy System, ect).
Some these things were changed or forgotten for the better or worse. Though I'd argue that there are some post-Sakurai games other than those from Shimomura that were fantastic like Kirby Triple Deluxe and Kirby's Return to Dreamland. Then there's the more debatable post-Sakurai Kirby games that are "love it or hate it" like like Kirby Mass Attack and Kirby's Epic Yarn.
Regardless of his questionable grasp of what makes competitive gameplay fun, it doesn't matter because basically everything he's done has been absurdly high quality. Every smash game, regardless of any higher level issues, is insanely well made and fun on a whole bunch of levels. Single modes could qualify as entire games in their own right, and I'd hate to see that pride in workmanship and attention to detail go.
This would NEVER happen, besides maybe more Sonic characters which I don't really mind too much, they have some interesting characters. But Shrek and Goku? Are you serious?
On topic: I wouldn't mind it, we already have the "perfect" Smash game, and a wide spread in between catering to both casuals and unintentionally the competitive side.
I doubt there would be a middle ground in how well recieved the game would be, but there's more hope for a competitive side to the game without him.
I don't see why people would get too worried over Sakurai stepping down. Miyamoto started Zelda, Aonuma took the helm, and most people agree that it's been even better under Aonuma's leadership. There's definitely an Aonuma for Sakurai out there.
I guess so... but the controls was a let down... I'm referring to Phantom Hourglass, Spirit Tracks, and Skyward Sword. Please don't muck up Zelda Wii U controls and let me use the control stick and ABXY buttons instead of forcing me to use motion controls and touchscreen.
I guess so... but the controls was a let down... I'm referring to Phantom Hourglass, Spirit Tracks, and Skyward Sword. Please don't muck up Zelda Wii U controls and let me use the control stick and ABXY buttons instead of forcing me to use motion controls and touchscreen.
I don't think Sakurai is necessary to make a good Smash game. That's frankly a pretty naive viewpoint, especially considering Sakurai himself has made a lot of pretty ****ing stupid decisions.
But a new director for the games would probably be somebody sent directly from Nintendo and would have a lot less creative freedom than Sakurai would. People are acting like a new director would automatically fix every single bad decision Sakurai has made and make an incredible new Smash game that would totally blow all the others out of the water, but if anything it'd just result in a game that feels more like a "cash-in" than anything else. Nintendo would probably be too worried about staying true to Sakurai's vision or whatever and just make Smash 4 with more characters and game modes and no significant improvements.
If there were actually a chance of us getting a director who's passionate about the games and knows a lot about them and what makes them great, and who would be willing to fix the decisions that Sakurai is too stubborn to go back on (like making a Ganondorf that's actually based on Ganondorf in the Zelda games, for one ****ing thing) then yeah I'd totally be up for that. But honestly I'd rather just take my chances with Sakurai again.
This is something I wanted to point out. Both of these post are from the end of the Brawl and Smash4 updates. Take a look
Brawl
This Smash blog has spanned about 300 posts in almost 11 months, but now it is time to say goodbye.
Before creating this site, I knew I wanted it to be updated 5 days a week and support several languages. It was clear that this would be a massive scale for a website dedicated to a single game.
A lot of people around me were particularly concerned when I told them I planned to write blog posts while development was ongoing and continue to provide updates. Some argued, some just looked concerned, and others asked, "Can you really do this?!"
And all of the text in the articles was written by yours truly, Masahiro Sakurai. Make no mistake.
But the real credit for making the unthinkable possible should go to the Brawl staff who took screenshots and did follow-up work, and the Nintendo home-page staff who did the updates.
I also must thank the localization staff of Nintendo of America, who did the translation from Japanese to English, as well as the language specialists on the European production staff who handled the translation to several more languages.
I feel gratitude for those who helped that I can barely express in words. This site has been supported by so many staff members.
I created the Dojo with the intention of offering breaking news-type updates prior to the release of the game, and organizing the site so that it could be used as a database of features in the game after its release.
Now that Brawl is available, I am hoping that players will continue to use the site as a resource for information.
Also, there’s always a chance that I will need to update sometime in the future with some kind of announcement.
Pic of the day has continued since E3 2013, and I would like to bring this series to a close today. A total of 384 posts and roughly 500 screenshots have been posted, and there's even more screenshots if you count the ones I've posted for different regions.
The origins of pic of the day was sharing one picture a day of the game in development inside the company. It started out just as a small bonus for the staff.
However, once we started sharing pictures with the public, it was a much tougher process. We had to be more careful to choose appropriate pictures to post while keeping a consistant schedule regardless of how busy we got, all while some people only wanted new information from my posts.
It's nice to finally be able to get one weight off of my shoulders. But, we promised to create Mewtwo as a playable character, so I can't relax too much yet. I hope you'll look forward to Mewtwo joining the battle!
Notice anything? In the first one, you can get a sense of accomplishment. You can tell he's proud of what he did and he wouldn't have it any other way. In Smash 4, it's very negative. He goes on about how "It was only suppose to be a bonus. It was SOOOOO hard. People only wanted news." You can tell he is almost asking for pity.
I think the big difference here is energy and passion. In Brawl, Sakurai had a lot of passion. He wanted to do things like the DOJO, even if it was more than they needed to do. In Smash 4, he was doing it based on expectations (actually, that's really how the whole game feels). Brawl was 7 years ago, almost an entire decade. The guy was about 38 when Brawl released. He was(is) 44 was this game released. His response is one of being tired. I don't think he has the energy to do Smash Bros and he lacks the passion. He's just doing it because he has too, not because he's "a man on a mission." A lot of Smash 4 feels that way. It feels like they did it "just because." The modes and additions don't have that same flare that Brawl's additions had. In the end, I don't think Sakurai should do the next game. He doesn't have the energy, and, as a result, he wouldn't have his heart in it to make an amazing game. I think the series should go to someone who is really passionate about Smash and really wants to top the other games. Of course, they also need to make sure they keep Smash "pick up and play."
It's more of balancing FFA vs 1v1, I think. Probably the best way to go about that is making FFA and 1v1 customs. Traditional Din's is the custom for FFA, and a mine or something for 1v1s basically. Then you could make customs specifically for bad matchups, like Ness vs Rosalina. Maybe even add custom moves to cover holes in a character's moveset with balance patches?
Ridley would be playable. The game could be a F2P micro-transaction filled unbalanced mess, yet people would call it the best smash game ever because Ridley is playable.
Sakurai is hands down my favorite game developer and if he chooses to walk away from Smash...it will be a very sad day but I'm not worried about the series if a future installment is made without him.
One thing I learned in life is that there is always someone equally talented or better if simply given the opportunity (Example: Mark Ruffalo taking over as the Hulk for Marvel). Also if Sakurai is okay with the person taking over then I'm fine with it as well.
Also since this is my first post, it's nice to meet all my fellow Smash fans!
Also, no Melee bias whatsoever, but I think the style of Melee's Adventure mode should come back.
I always loved running through those levels, and it was cool how they integrated the fights within the levels.
You don't have to have a bunch of epic cutscenes to make something fun.
Hmm... This reminds me of a couple of things: Hideki Kamiya and Hideaki Itsuno, also Capcom and Ninja Theory, Hideo Kojima and Kenji Saito or basically, the rest of Kojima Productions, and Sucker Punch and Sanzaru Games.
Hideki Kamiya and Hideaki Itsuno here:
Let's start with Capcom. Hideki Kamiya created Devil May Cry, but for whatever reason (read: Capcom), they made him be an adviser for DMC2. DMC1 was well-received because it was very different and well-done. DMC2 had good ideas, but executed them horribly. Item-switching, a proto-Trickster style - the dodge button -, upgradable firearms which they removed in DMC4, customizable Devil Trigger which only made its appearance in DMC2, and a proto-Rain Storm move. Great, but the gameplay wasn't good, especially since you could max out Ebony & Ivory and kill everything by shooting and there was only one melee weapon which had different property variants... Also, they made Dante become gloomy, dark, quiet, and well, edgy. It wasn't the Dante in DMC1. So, DMC2 is hated and Kamiya becomes the savior to DMC despite this: DMC3 was developed under Itsuno who vastly improved the mechanics and DMC3 is considered the best DMC game second to DMC4/DMC1. DMC4 ends up all right considering Dante's gameplay was expanded and more free, but the game was designed around Nero who just ups and "replaces" Dante in the eyes of fans. Sure, Nero's combat is great, but people felt ripped off by Dante only back-tracking Nero's levels and that Nero only had three weapons, Red Queen, Blue Rose, and his Devil Bringer arm. The story was also wacky since Nero was confirmed as Vergil's son and basically, it was Bleach's plot of Ichigo saves Orihime - it didn't help that Nero was voiced by Johnny Yong Bosch and Kyrie was voiced by Stephanie Sheh.
So, Itsuno proved that he had what it takes to make good DMC games and continue the ideology of stylist combat and difficulty that challenges players, but it only took one game: DMC2 to kill anything he does. Different teams, but Itsuno had the right idea or well, knew what DMC could evolve into. Hell, Itsuno proved he could make an open-world RPG with hunting elements, awesome combat, and challenging gameplay; Dragon's Dogma. Just one game took away everything and some think that Kamiya is the saving grace of DMC despite him having little input on DMC3 which is what defines DMC for many.
Capcom and Ninja Theory here:
Now let's head to DmC: Devil May Cry. Capcom wanted, for whatever reason, to reinvent DMC and called Ninja Theory to make this reboot-origin story-remake-spin-off-thing - it never really got an official classification. Ninja Theory took the heat for everything Capcom did. First off, Ninja Theory felt they should stay true to DMC and basically make DmC similar to DMC3 and DMC1 to fit that criteria as the beginning of Dante's story while also adding current day ideas, fashion, etc., hence, Dante being punkish and a rebel. Their early drafts had Dante of two things: more fantasy-like so he's more out there like DMC Dante, several of them looked like they came from The Witcher and the others were more like Fight Club or the Crow. Capcom would have none of that. They wanted everything to be different, so Ninja Theory had to comply. Contracts and money since they were hired to make the game not envision it however they wanted and ironically, they wanted DmC closer to DMC.
So, Ninja Theory knew what DMC fans wanted and wanted to deliver that along with making it more modern since it was supposed to be a "reboot". In a way, it would have been more like Christopher Nolan's adaption of Batman rather than Marvel's Noir series or even Marvel's Ultimate series. Capcom basically made Ninja Theory the scapegoat. Thankfully, Nintendo's not evil... yet.
Hideo Kojima and Metal Gear here:
Hideo Kojima wants to end Metal Gear Solid on his own terms which is why he's continuing Metal Gear Solid, scrapped Zone of the Enders for time being and killed Solid Snake so people couldn't mess with Solid Snake and establish Solid Snake's first, original story - someone else could do a remake, but it won't be the Solid Snake Kojima created. Kojima decided to leave Metal Gear to his team which lead to Rising and remember that Platinum Games had to take over? Yeah, the team were kind of confused since Kojima directed everything. The original concept was this mishmash of stealth, sword-play, no-kill, kill, and whatever else. It was cool in concept, but Kojima felt it wasn't going to work, so he had them design the blueprints - the story - and Platinum Games would handle the gameplay.
This is more of the director being too "guarded" with his ideas that his team only knows how to work the games and not how to make them. It's bad since they seem almost dependent on him. Sakurai was actually like that since he personally balanced Brawl and as everyone knows... Brawl's balancing is bad. It also took a huge toil on his health. Kojima had his team help which is good, but Sakurai only started having teams help when doctors told him to stop or else become crippled and probably Nintendo urging him to not kill himself like this.
So, I'm kind of afraid of future Metal Gear games without Kojima as a director or adviser. Someone really needs to know the series to do something or else risk tech demos over tech demos over tech demos.
Sucker Punch and Sanzaru Games.
Sucker Punch moved on to inFAMOUS and left Sly Cooper there. Sanzaru Games remastered/ported over the three PS2 Sly games and they felt there should be a Sly 4. Well, they demoed it to Sony and got approved along with Sucker Punch's approval. Here's the thing, they basically made Sly Cooper: Thieves in Time almost like how Sucker Punch would which meant that if Sly 4 did exist on the PS2, it would be this; it was just an updated Sly game with another story. Simple. So, they know how to make Sly games and the idea of it, but it's lacking in those things people expect from a sequel: vast improvements. It wasn't like going from PS2 Ratchet & Clank games to PS3 Ratchet & Clank games where there's goo physics, even more wacky weapons, etc., or how another developer can evolve the game while still keeping the core ideas; it was just another Sly game. They did a great job, but it wasn't exceptional. Sanzaru Games, however, have potential to continue and improve Sly Cooper.
So, I think it's less a shot in the dark and more of if the developers make an attempt to understand the game they're being passed down. Itsuno executed DMC2 poorly, but redeemed himself with DMC3 which defines DMC gameplay. He knew, learned, and evolved DMC. Ninja Theory researched the hell out of DMC, but Capcom said that was good, but we want something entirely different, but DMC. They understood that DMC needed deep, fun, and stylish combat, but they also wanted to put their story-focused, beautifully-created worlds, and a modern spin on it. That's fine, but Capcom basically made DmC what it is. Personally, if NT had free reign, I think DmC would have been more like DMC1. Sanzaru Games also understood and researched it and were able to continue it, but did some things to make Sly 4 innovative. Those are all good examples of a new developer taking on an old series even if something is holding them back.
The bad is just not knowing what to do like Kojima's team being handed Metal Gear which ultimately lead to Platinum Games making Revengeance since they understood what kind of gameplay could work for Raiden. That's all right since the new developers can learn if they make an effort.
Here's the worst: Not giving a damn. Nintendo would be against this, but what if SSB ended up as a literal party, fighting game, this really complex fighting game that has a huge learning curve and scares off tons of people, or horribly balanced, with bad move sets, tons of removed characters for no reason, and 75% of the cast are clones? That's just horrible. I don't think anything like that... Oh wait, yes there is: Bomberman: Act Zero. I think there might be another "sin" lurking about somewhere.
Honestly I couldn't care less for Sakurai, his directing style is outdated. People keep giving him love and forget the massive team Sm4sh was made with, don't you remember how big the credits are? The game feels great but Sakurai is just the director and honestly what I can see with the decision making done there were a lot of missed opportunities especially on integrating the 3DS and Wii U version and the character roster.
Hmm... This reminds me of a couple of things: Hideki Kamiya and Hideaki Itsuno, also Capcom and Ninja Theory, Hideo Kojima and Kenji Saito or basically, the rest of Kojima Productions, and Sucker Punch and Sanzaru Games.
Hideki Kamiya and Hideaki Itsuno here:
Let's start with Capcom. Hideki Kamiya created Devil May Cry, but for whatever reason (read: Capcom), they made him be an adviser for DMC2. DMC1 was well-received because it was very different and well-done. DMC2 had good ideas, but executed them horribly. Item-switching, a proto-Trickster style - the dodge button -, upgradable firearms which they removed in DMC4, customizable Devil Trigger which only made its appearance in DMC2, and a proto-Rain Storm move. Great, but the gameplay wasn't good, especially since you could max out Ebony & Ivory and kill everything by shooting and there was only one melee weapon which had different property variants... Also, they made Dante become gloomy, dark, quiet, and well, edgy. It wasn't the Dante in DMC1. So, DMC2 is hated and Kamiya becomes the savior to DMC despite this: DMC3 was developed under Itsuno who vastly improved the mechanics and DMC3 is considered the best DMC game second to DMC4/DMC1. DMC4 ends up all right considering Dante's gameplay was expanded and more free, but the game was designed around Nero who just ups and "replaces" Dante in the eyes of fans. Sure, Nero's combat is great, but people felt ripped off by Dante only back-tracking Nero's levels and that Nero only had three weapons, Red Queen, Blue Rose, and his Devil Bringer arm. The story was also wacky since Nero was confirmed as Vergil's son and basically, it was Bleach's plot of Ichigo saves Orihime - it didn't help that Nero was voiced by Johnny Yong Bosch and Kyrie was voiced by Stephanie Sheh.
So, Itsuno proved that he had what it takes to make good DMC games and continue the ideology of stylist combat and difficulty that challenges players, but it only took one game: DMC2 to kill anything he does. Different teams, but Itsuno had the right idea or well, knew what DMC could evolve into. Hell, Itsuno proved he could make an open-world RPG with hunting elements, awesome combat, and challenging gameplay; Dragon's Dogma. Just one game took away everything and some think that Kamiya is the saving grace of DMC despite him having little input on DMC3 which is what defines DMC for many.
Capcom and Ninja Theory here:
Now let's head to DmC: Devil May Cry. Capcom wanted, for whatever reason, to reinvent DMC and called Ninja Theory to make this reboot-origin story-remake-spin-off-thing - it never really got an official classification. Ninja Theory took the heat for everything Capcom did. First off, Ninja Theory felt they should stay true to DMC and basically make DmC similar to DMC3 and DMC1 to fit that criteria as the beginning of Dante's story while also adding current day ideas, fashion, etc., hence, Dante being punkish and a rebel. Their early drafts had Dante of two things: more fantasy-like so he's more out there like DMC Dante, several of them looked like they came from The Witcher and the others were more like Fight Club or the Crow. Capcom would have none of that. They wanted everything to be different, so Ninja Theory had to comply. Contracts and money since they were hired to make the game not envision it however they wanted and ironically, they wanted DmC closer to DMC.
So, Ninja Theory knew what DMC fans wanted and wanted to deliver that along with making it more modern since it was supposed to be a "reboot". In a way, it would have been more like Christopher Nolan's adaption of Batman rather than Marvel's Noir series or even Marvel's Ultimate series. Capcom basically made Ninja Theory the scapegoat. Thankfully, Nintendo's not evil... yet.
Hideo Kojima and Metal Gear here:
Hideo Kojima wants to end Metal Gear Solid on his own terms which is why he's continuing Metal Gear Solid, scrapped Zone of the Enders for time being and killed Solid Snake so people couldn't mess with Solid Snake and establish Solid Snake's first, original story - someone else could do a remake, but it won't be the Solid Snake Kojima created. Kojima decided to leave Metal Gear to his team which lead to Rising and remember that Platinum Games had to take over? Yeah, the team were kind of confused since Kojima directed everything. The original concept was this mishmash of stealth, sword-play, no-kill, kill, and whatever else. It was cool in concept, but Kojima felt it wasn't going to work, so he had them design the blueprints - the story - and Platinum Games would handle the gameplay.
This is more of the director being too "guarded" with his ideas that his team only knows how to work the games and not how to make them. It's bad since they seem almost dependent on him. Sakurai was actually like that since he personally balanced Brawl and as everyone knows... Brawl's balancing is bad. It also took a huge toil on his health. Kojima had his team help which is good, but Sakurai only started having teams help when doctors told him to stop or else become crippled and probably Nintendo urging him to not kill himself like this.
So, I'm kind of afraid of future Metal Gear games without Kojima as a director or adviser. Someone really needs to know the series to do something or else risk tech demos over tech demos over tech demos.
Sucker Punch and Sanzaru Games.
Sucker Punch moved on to inFAMOUS and left Sly Cooper there. Sanzaru Games remastered/ported over the three PS2 Sly games and they felt there should be a Sly 4. Well, they demoed it to Sony and got approved along with Sucker Punch's approval. Here's the thing, they basically made Sly Cooper: Thieves in Time almost like how Sucker Punch would which meant that if Sly 4 did exist on the PS2, it would be this; it was just an updated Sly game with another story. Simple. So, they know how to make Sly games and the idea of it, but it's lacking in those things people expect from a sequel: vast improvements. It wasn't like going from PS2 Ratchet & Clank games to PS3 Ratchet & Clank games where there's goo physics, even more wacky weapons, etc., or how another developer can evolve the game while still keeping the core ideas; it was just another Sly game. They did a great job, but it wasn't exceptional. Sanzaru Games, however, have potential to continue and improve Sly Cooper.
So, I think it's less a shot in the dark and more of if the developers make an attempt to understand the game they're being passed down. Itsuno executed DMC2 poorly, but redeemed himself with DMC3 which defines DMC gameplay. He knew, learned, and evolved DMC. Ninja Theory researched the hell out of DMC, but Capcom said that was good, but we want something entirely different, but DMC. They understood that DMC needed deep, fun, and stylish combat, but they also wanted to put their story-focused, beautifully-created worlds, and a modern spin on it. That's fine, but Capcom basically made DmC what it is. Personally, if NT had free reign, I think DmC would have been more like DMC1. Sanzaru Games also understood and researched it and were able to continue it, but did some things to make Sly 4 innovative. Those are all good examples of a new developer taking on an old series even if something is holding them back.
The bad is just not knowing what to do like Kojima's team being handed Metal Gear which ultimately lead to Platinum Games making Revengeance since they understood what kind of gameplay could work for Raiden. That's all right since the new developers can learn if they make an effort.
Here's the worst: Not giving a damn. Nintendo would be against this, but what if SSB ended up as a literal party, fighting game, this really complex fighting game that has a huge learning curve and scares off tons of people, or horribly balanced, with bad move sets, tons of removed characters for no reason, and 75% of the cast are clones? That's just horrible. I don't think anything like that... Oh wait, yes there is: Bomberman: Act Zero. I think there might be another "sin" lurking about somewhere.
I was seriously trying hard to forget that game even exists. Good thing Hudson took the White Bomber back in the right direction until the series was discontinued around 2014 with the Windows Phone Bomberman. Some Gamefaqs users believe the the next Smash might as well be PlayStation All Stars if things didn't get in the right direction with this new developer. Though I can tell that it wouldn't be that bad since the higher ups at Nintendo would want the new guy to research on Smash or even watch how the old games are played to see how things should work.
As for things like newcomers or items, he would probably have to look at every Nintendo game that is released in between the time of Smash Wii U and any other titles that might be released in the early years of Nintendo X console before the possible release of Smash 6. There are cases on where he would have to pick characters based on uniqueness like Sakurai would, look at someone based on "muh relevance" in regards to new IP's or an already repped franchise, or even any commonly requested character from the fanbase themselves. The last one is something that he should consider along with incorporating his own ideas that could work with the game since Smash is all about "the ultimate fanservice" to Nintendo fans that are or aren't fans of the franchise. There are cases where the fans could receive what they would love (8-Player Smash, highly requested newcomers, ect.) or things that they would hate (Smash Tour, lack of a good campaign mode, ect.), but there's literally no such thging as a perfect game whethr Sakurai is involved or not.
It's just Sakurai recycling concepts from his previous games, to be honest.
The Challenge grid has been a Sakurai game thing since Kirby Air Ride.
Smash Run itself is based on City Trial from Kirby Air Ride.
The Intensity difficulty system was introduced in Kid Icarus: Uprising and is reused in this game.
The menus have similar designs since Kirby Air Ride. Apparently, they're designed by his wife.
A chunk of the enemies in Smash Run are imported from his two previous projects: Super Smash Bros. Brawl (Subspace enemies and some Mario enemies) and Kid Icarus: Uprising. The majority of them are still made up for this game (some recycled models aside), though.
I guess it's the way he does things. I think it's more of a game design ideology/philosophy rather than "over-representation" or "bias towards his own games".
I don't think he cares from what games the things are, as long as they work well on Smash Bros.'s gameplay.
Having played KIU a lot, that game also has a lot of stuff recycled from Smash, such as a Smart Bomb item that acts identically the one found in Smash. The game itself also has similar mechanics to Smash.
The same developer (or group of developers) reusing ideas and importing stuff from previous projects is not unheard of and it's actually a common practice in the area.
And trust me that I know what I'm talking about. I've programmed stuff myself and know that reusing code and assets from previous works helps on saving time for next projects.
Yeah, this is pretty much everything that I've noticed in any games he's worked on.
Sakurai's main priority with Smash is still its gameplay, hence most of the newcomers bringing new fighting styles to the table. He doesn't think about staying true to every series to the extent that the fans do. He isn't like us at all. It's not possible for a game like Smash to cater to every Nintendo game's whim.
Part of it still does have to be there, sure, but references to other games in Smash are more or less an added bonus, not the most important part of the game that takes precedence over gameplay. (And they don't) Smash Bros. isn't the be-all and end-all of Nintendo franchises.
Also, people give him too much credit. Just because he's an icon in Nintendo circles doesn't mean that every decision in the game was his to make. He doesn't do trophies and music, for one.
