if i were really a troll id go to ic and snake and stuff....
I inspected most of your posts, since I noticed you haven't posted much. You seem to be a "veteran campaign" type guy. Hey, I can understand that. We all wish some characters weren't cut. But to me, I'd prefer if the DLC was "NOT" nothing but characters that have been in Smash before.. That would be absolutely boring to have no new faces at all, especially with all the options there are.
We also all have our opinions and preferences. To me, I see Roy as nothing but a clone, whose niche in the Fire emblem line up has since been filled. (And lets face it. Save for a final smash, not much would change about the guy.. We have proof from Mewtwo. That is why I am against characters that have been in the game returning.. at least DLC wise. They would just have tweaks to their old movesets, and that FS. Thats it. Would it be cool to, as an example, have a young link with a new moveset based around his masks? Yes. However since he has been in smash before, they would more than likely take the lazy route and rehash his old stuff.)
Both Ridley and K. Rool have their followings for a reason. Despite his supposed disconfirmation, Ridley is an iconic recurring villain in the series. K. Rool is also a popular recurring villain (save for a few recent titles), with a fairly large move pool. We as smashers like to try to detract from other campaigns only out of fear. We have this mentality that <insert character here> could "steal" the slot of <insert character here.>.. Because of this, fans can get very hostile towards threats to their soo precious character they want to see in the game. It was a bad mentality during the game's production, and it is still a bad mentality now.
As for Lucina/Dark Pit.. I am aware of their history myself, despite people's ignorant belief that they were slot hogs (which isn't a thing by the way folks..) They were a last minute thing. Made from alternate costumes of the respective characters they are clones of. They are easy to make at that. It wouldn't make any difference if these sort of clones weren't in the game, as it wouldn't effect work time in any way.. I have no idea why people like to think like that.
Anyways, I have really started to think that "number of titles" in a franchise, or age of a franchise is moot in this. Kid Icarus for example only had 2 titles before Pit joined brawl. Then we also have Dark pit who was technically only a thing for one title. Heck Shulk's game Xenoblade was not only fairly young (I mean it was a wii title after all), but it was also technically the first and only game in it's series. (With the sequel not being out yet, and it being a spiritual sequel at that.. Also not counting the remake of the first either.) So under the logic fans like to use to detract characters, Shulk shouldn't have been in the game at all, since he "broke the rules"..
To me, this is all fair game. The only rule here is the character has to be a video game character. That's it. Nintendo has specified all video game characters are eligible for the ballot. This includes 3rd party characters, indie characters... any character to be honest. In my opinion if the character fits, and if there is large enough fan demand for it, they WILL have DLC made for them. This is going to be paid DLC after all... They wouldn't make DLC of a character that isn't going to be bought and downloaded very much. Splatoon is a hyped franchise, with much fan hype. It's fairly positively viewed in regards to the demo, so it should be received fairly well. Plus, their game comes out in less than a week. So there you have it. A video game to call their own, and a fan following. Sounds like a suitable campaign to me.
It's not an "obsession" by the way. It's a fanbase. Just like what you see for Fire emblem, and what you see for Starfox. Considering how you have actively willingly gone into the Inkling and K. Rool campaigns just to try to downplay them, it's not a surprise you would be met with hate, and anger.