Joker is a perfect example of why 3rd party characters (like HIM) don't belong in Super Smash Bros.

[Cutie Gwen]

The Tales series is a long runner to be sure, but it's not nearly on FF's or even DQ's level in terms of sales; heck, the franchise itself has pretty much been on hiatus the past 3 years, with the only new game on the horizon being an upcoming mobile game and it kinda being downgraded to crossover fodder with God Eater (as Yuri and Velvet are playable in that series' mobile game and the GE3 Switch port has Yuri and Estelle costumes).

Well he's replying to this thread so I'd say he's fit for debate-- moreso than most of the people I debate on smashfaqs, anyways.


More like most of the damn internet.

Fair point

I've known this guy for a few years, he cannot debate properly at all

 

[Nutty Sponge]

Nah, man. This.

- Captain Toad
- Skull Kid
- Cranky Kong
- Lyn
- Dixie Kong
- Sukapon
- Ashley
- Min Min

Pokémon and a new IP character are just icing on the cake.

Imagine thinking that you should add Skull Kid and Captain Toad over Cloud, Snake, or Joker

 

[Opossum]

Imagine thinking that you should add Skull Kid and Captain Toad over Cloud, Snake, or Joker

In fairness to Captain Toad specifically, he's easily among the biggest Nintendo characters not playable yet. He's made consistent appearances since Galaxy and has his own spin-off game.

Still not a reason to snub Joker, Cloud, or Snake, but he at least has a lot of merit as a choice.

 

[Deleted member]

I've known this guy for a few years, he cannot debate properly at all

If I am honest, my problem when it comes to debates in general is that while I can bring some good points, most of the time I see other persons explaining them better.

I know that you were not talking about me, but for some reason I wanted to share this thought I got.

Imagine thinking that you should add Skull Kid and Captain Toad over Cloud, Snake, or Joker

And I would prefer Pauline more than Captain Toad, if I am honest.

 

[Creamfrazzz]

Third parties are more important to Nintendo than even some of their own franchises.

So to say ''I don't think they belong" is essentially saying ''Well, **** a huge part of Nintendo's history."

And like someone said before? I'd rather have an important hit third party character than ''Hi, I'm Lanky Kong."

I completely agree that the third party character thing is far more exciting excpecially since I'm rooting for nightmare for soul caliber but honestly lanky Kong would be pretty cool

 

[Deleted member]

Imagine thinking that you should add Skull Kid and Captain Toad over Cloud, Snake, or Joker

I would easily trade Cloud, Snake AND Joker for playable Skull Kid OR Lyn. Don't be so surprised that people have different preferences than you.

 

[Cutie Gwen]

I would easily trade Cloud, Snake AND Joker for playable Skull Kid OR Lyn. Don't be so surprised that people have different preferences than you.

Ok but the general public doesn't share your preference

 

[Deleted member]

Ok but the general public doesn't share your preference

Is the general public buying and playing Super Smash Bros. and purchasing DLC for it? What percentage of Smash players do you think are primarily Nintendo fans? Do you think there are more Nintendo fans who would enjoy playing as Joker over Skull Kid? I mean, before you make such a bold claim, at least conduct a poll or something.

 

[PhantomShab]

Honestly gotta agree at this point. Bayonetta and Joker really lowered the bar for 3rd party characters and have no place standing next to the rest of the otherwise iconic 3rd party lineup. With Joker there's not even anything to shill this time. His own game isn't even coming to the Switch lmao. He was just picked because Sakurai is a Persona 5 fanboy and nothing else.

 

[EricTheGamerman]

Thanks everyone for your input; turns out a lot of people have opinions on this as the thread is still going. There was some talk about 3rd party A-listers versus Nintendo D-listers, and while I think we've gotten most of the 1st party heavy hitters at this point, the funny thing is that every character, no matter how "popular" (or rather unpopular) outside of Smash, has its fans. So if Nintendo were to add another "D-list character" like Ice Climbers, Pit, Dark Pit, Captain Falcon, Piranha Plant, Ness, Lucas, Duck Hunt etc. people would still flock to them and appreciate them (especially if they're good competitively, which is all that a large portion of the playerbase really cares about--you see any Bayonetta players online anymore?).

I know Sakurai calls 3rd party characters "guests" and very likely they won't all return in the future, but at the same time, when a character enters the fray in Super Smash Bros., it cements them in Smash and, to a lesser extent, gaming history. Like magic, their popularity soars and interest surrounding them increases significantly. This was further illustrated when all characters, no matter how irrelevant today, returned in Smash Ultimate. Characters like Young Link, Pichu or Snake would likely not be in Ultimate today if not for the fact that they had previously been in Smash. So because of that, they're kind of part of this Smash Bros. family. And because of that I think some people take more seriously who should get the honor of being part of this family or not; there are no take-backs.

Really, I'm all for 3rd parties as long as I feel their inclusion makes sense and they feel at home or that it's deserved or that fans of the series really want them--and not because someone begged Sakurai as a personal favor, or because freelancer Sakurai particularly enjoyed a PlayStation exclusive game and has the power to add its main character into Nintendo's flagship title. I mean at the end of the day it's his game so he can do what he wants, but that doesn't mean I can't have my own opinion on it.

I don't think your point about how popularity in Smash exists for every character helps your argument. Sure, you're completely right that every Smash character gets elevated, but that's just proof of how big Smash is and its own abilities to make people care about characters. Does a character like Mach Rider (I don't have anything against Mach Rider, but they're just an easy target for this discussion) really deserve that elevation? I think it's useless to talk about "deserving" in most instances, but if you're going to make a point about honors being a big issue, then I'm going to say most third parties take the definitive lead in that department over increasingly obscure Nintendo characters. If I'm making a video game hall of fame and deciding to show off more of gaming history, I'm going to pick third parties in that instance, and Sakurai has expressed interest in doing just that. Sure, you can include any character in Smash and they'll develop larger, but in terms of impact and interest, why not cast a wider net that potentially introduces new customers or satisfies other groups of people? Why settle for only successful character when you can develop a more successful character with more hype and media coverage? And as a developer, you want to continue to create buzz for your game, and while any character will again create some by nature of fighting games, you generally need to keep pushing the limits of things and making inclusions that cause a stir.

And third parties "making sense" is about as subjective a statement as you can make. There's going to be a wide (and there actively is as seen in this thread) variety of opinions and thoughts on that subject. You talk about preferences, and indeed, that's the very point of most of our disagreement with you. You're allowed to have your preferences and opinions on Smash characters, but positioning those as more objective stances with which to criticize Sakurai really doesn't work. Especially when a significant portion of people disagree and people are increasingly pushing for third parties of all shapes and sizes in Smash. You also named the title, "Why Joker is a perfect example of why 3rd Party Characters don't belong in Super Smash Bros." Which seems to be pretty definitive in how you're trying to push a narrative when there isn't really evidence that can be pushed in support of that thesis statement. It's extremely difficult to establish objectivity in video games given just how much can come down to personal preference and decision making. It's the most inherently fluid entertainment medium in that regard with such a wide range of possibilities.

Again, personal preference is fine. Dissenting opinions are fine. But voicing an opinion does not mean you are free of criticism for how you position that opinion or debate regarding the nature of an opinion.

And what kind of question are you asking in, "Is the general public buying and playing Super Smash Bros. and buying DLC"? Of course they are, the game sold 13.81 million units in the span of four months. Smash 4 DLC was the most profitable Nintendo DLC of the Wii U era. There is sales data to back up Smash just selling extremely well, and that requires more than just the hardcore fans to make those kinds of numbers. And online polls are not great indicators of realities since they're heavily influenced by response bias and the sources they originate from. The general public, on average, is more likely to know characters like Cloud, Snake, and Joker because of the media coverage they have received and the sells their games have seen. Skull Kid maybe gets some marketing due to the prevalence of Majora's Mask specifically, but you'll be a lot more hard pressed to find individuals who remember Lyn outside of a Smash context if they even know that.

 

[Cutie Gwen]

Is the general public buying and playing Super Smash Bros. and purchasing DLC for it? What percentage of Smash players do you think are primarily Nintendo fans? Do you think there are more Nintendo fans who would enjoy playing as Joker over Skull Kid? I mean, before you make such a bold claim, at least conduct a poll or something.

Considering Brawl ended up becoming the best selling fighting game until Ultimate finally came out, I'd say that's proof enough. Not to mention I'm primarily a Nintendo fan and have no desire to buy Persona 5 but was excited all the same at his inclusion. I think it's safe to say more Nintendo fans would enjoy a character who has more obvious moveset potential than a character you'd have to make up one for from the ground up. Polls are meaningless here as one can choose to limit where the poll goes. Not to mention it's already done, the crowd reactions to Snake finally coming back to Smash and the crowd reactions to Joker show it too. In fact, let me get you a good example

Warning, swear words
Superbutterbuns is a fairly popular youtuber and outside of Smash, she doesn't have much videos about Nintendo. Meaning her subscribers likely aren't exclusively Nintendo fans like you

 

[Nutty Sponge]

I would easily trade Cloud, Snake AND Joker for playable Skull Kid OR Lyn. Don't be so surprised that people have different preferences than you.

Take this into a business perspective, would people rather buy Snake or Skull Kid?

 

[UserKev]

In fairness to Captain Toad specifically, he's easily among the biggest Nintendo characters not playable yet. He's made consistent appearances since Galaxy and has his own spin-off game.

Still not a reason to snub Joker, Cloud, or Snake, but he at least has a lot of merit as a choice.

This is a bit one sided since users with different arguments are snubbing "D list Nintendo characters" tho.

 

[Cosmic77]

I think I have better way of explaining why some people (myself included) aren't fond of most third-parties

Growing up, I was a Nintendo fan through and through, just like many other Smash fans. I've always seemed to have a strong connection with many of Nintendo's franchises, ranging from the older classics like Super Mario and The Legend of Zelda to some younger ones like Animal Crossing and Splatoon. So when I know a new Smash game is coming out, I look forward to getting newcomers from these franchises, regardless of whether or not they classify as "A and B listers". If I know the character, and if I played the game they originated from, there's a good chance I'll be excited.

Now on the flip-side of this, I don't really have an expansive knowledge of most third-party franchises. My last PlayStation was the PS2, and I've barely even touched an Xbox console. I've actually heard of most third-parties through Smash speculation. So what am I getting at? There are tons of potential third-parties out there who could offer a really unique playstyle, but I have little to no connection with most of them. The last few third-parties have really emphasized this. My knowledge of Bayonetta was limited to what I saw in Nintendo Directs, I've never played a Castlevania game, and I didn't even know there were four other Persona games that came out prior to P5. And if the rumors are true, I wouldn't have even known Erdrick's name before his reveal if I didn't log on here frequently. Right now, I'm at a point where I'm genuinely hoping Steve gets in Smash just so I can at least have one third-party who I'm familiar with.

After a while, it just gets depressing whenever a rumor springs up about another third-party getting in. You can't help but feel that you probably won't know squat about the character they end up choosing. If it was someone like Pac-Man or Sonic (AKA a character who even random people at Walmart would recognize), then I'd probably be way more optimistic. For now though, I'm rooting exclusively for the first-parties. I feel like I'll have a better chance of getting a character whom I have a little history with this way. You're more than welcome to disagree with my opinions, but that's just my perspective on Smash newcomers.

 

[Opossum]

This is a bit one sided since users with different arguments are snubbing "D list Nintendo characters" tho.

I'd say that's a false equivalence. I absolutely love Captain Toad, would welcome him with open arms, and think he has numerous merits that warrant playability. Mario characters have a lot of recognition and brand appeal.

However, with that said, he's still a Mario character, and we have a lot of those. So while I think Captain Toad is easily among the top three Nintendo All-Stars not in the game at least, I still think megaton third party announcements trump him.

 

[osby]

Now on the flip-side of this, I don't really have an expansive knowledge of most third-party franchises. My last PlayStation was the PS2, and I've barely even touched an Xbox console. I've actually heard of most third-parties through Smash speculation. So what am I getting at? There are tons of potential third-parties out there who could offer a really unique playstyle, but I have little to no connection with most of them. The last few third-parties have really emphasized this. My knowledge of Bayonetta was limited to what I saw in Nintendo Directs, I've never played a Castlevania game, and I didn't even know there were four other Persona games that came out prior to P5. And if the rumors are true, I wouldn't have even known Erdrick's name before his reveal if I didn't log on here frequently. Right now, I'm at a point where I'm genuinely hoping Steve gets in Smash just so I can at least have one third-party who I'm familiar with.

Actually, there were five Persona games before Persona 5.

 

[Deleted member]

Actually, there were five Persona games before Persona 5.

That’s only counting main titles?
I ask this since the spin offs make the number of Persona games higher than 5.

 

[Cosmic77]

Actually, there were five Persona games before Persona 5.

And if that's true, then you're emphasizing my point. Joker is unique, he's got a great moveset, but I don't know squat about him or the Persona series. A few surprises here and there are nice, but it's hard for me to get excited for a character when I know virtually nothing about them. That's been the case for me with the last few third-parties we've gotten.

 

[osby]

That’s only counting main titles?
I ask this since the spin offs make the number of Persona games higher than 5.

Yep. Main titles are:

1. Persona
2. Persona 2: Innocent Sin
3. Persona 2: Eternal Punishment
4. Persona 3
5. Persona 4
6. Persona 5

 

[Deleted member]

A few surprises here and there are nice, but it's hard for me to get excited for a character when I know virtually nothing about them.

Tbf, Melee did exactly that with Fire Emblem and it was actually a neat move.

 

[Deleted member]

I don't think your point about how popularity in Smash exists for every character helps your argument. Sure, you're completely right that every Smash character gets elevated, but that's just proof of how big Smash is and its own abilities to make people care about characters. Does a character like Mach Rider (I don't have anything against Mach Rider, but they're just an easy target for this discussion) really deserve that elevation? I think it's useless to talk about "deserving" in most instances, but if you're going to make a point about honors being a big issue, then I'm going to say most third parties take the definitive lead in that department over increasingly obscure Nintendo characters. If I'm making a video game hall of fame and deciding to show off more of gaming history, I'm going to pick third parties in that instance, and Sakurai has expressed interest in doing just that. Sure, you can include any character in Smash and they'll develop larger, but in terms of impact and interest, why not cast a wider net that potentially introduces new customers or satisfies other groups of people? Why settle for only successful character when you can develop a more successful character with more hype and media coverage? And as a developer, you want to continue to create buzz for your game, and while any character will again create some by nature of fighting games, you generally need to keep pushing the limits of things and making inclusions that cause a stir.

And third parties "making sense" is about as subjective a statement as you can make. There's going to be a wide (and there actively is as seen in this thread) variety of opinions and thoughts on that subject. You talk about preferences, and indeed, that's the very point of most of our disagreement with you. You're allowed to have your preferences and opinions on Smash characters, but positioning those as more objective stances with which to criticize Sakurai really doesn't work. Especially when a significant portion of people disagree and people are increasingly pushing for third parties of all shapes and sizes in Smash. You also named the title, "Why Joker is a perfect example of why 3rd Party Characters don't belong in Super Smash Bros." Which seems to be pretty definitive in how you're trying to push a narrative when there isn't really evidence that can be pushed in support of that thesis statement. It's extremely difficult to establish objectivity in video games given just how much can come down to personal preference and decision making. It's the most inherently fluid entertainment medium in that regard with such a wide range of possibilities.

Again, personal preference is fine. Dissenting opinions are fine. But voicing an opinion does not mean you are free of criticism for how you position that opinion or debate regarding the nature of an opinion.

And what kind of question are you asking in, "Is the general public buying and playing Super Smash Bros. and buying DLC"? Of course they are, the game sold 13.81 million units in the span of four months. Smash 4 DLC was the most profitable Nintendo DLC of the Wii U era. There is sales data to back up Smash just selling extremely well, and that requires more than just the hardcore fans to make those kinds of numbers. And online polls are not great indicators of realities since they're heavily influenced by response bias and the sources they originate from. The general public, on average, is more likely to know characters like Cloud, Snake, and Joker because of the media coverage they have received and the sells their games have seen. Skull Kid maybe gets some marketing due to the prevalence of Majora's Mask specifically, but you'll be a lot more hard pressed to find individuals who remember Lyn outside of a Smash context if they even know that.

Actually, my point about every character being popular does help my argument, and it directly tears down a certain counter argument.

Third parties "making sense" may seem subjective, but then why is it that there seems to be a lot of agreement about Joker, Snake and Cloud in particular not fitting into Smash (for example, practically no one says Sonic or Mega Man is a bad fit)? Again, since every character has its fans, I understand that it's always "fighting words" to say a certain character doesn't belong. But it's really not that hard to figure out why those three stick out. I bet if I give you some time you'll think of some reasons.

Never said I was going to be free of criticism; obviously my post was going to be controversial and stir up debate and heated opinions. By the way you misquoted my post's title.

As for your last paragraph....sure the game has sold well. But you forgot that I included "and playing". I have reason to believe that there are more than a few people who bought the game and hardly play it. Personal experience + GSP evidence seems to indicate this. As for the Wii U era DLC, we can safely assume that those numbers came from practically only Nintendo super fans, since basically no one else was interested in the system. The Switch, on the other hand, is definitely the new Wii in the sense that it's the 'cool new piece of gaming hardware you gotta get if you wanna be hip'.

So again, from that perspective, and coming off of the news that Persona 5 will not be coming to Switch anytime soon, it was clear that Joker was Sakurai's personal pick and not a character catering to the audience of those who bought Smash Ultimate. If Persona 5 comes to Switch in the future, then my opinion will probably change and I'll view it as a win for everyone, as I initially did.

A lot of video game characters are well-known and can generate hype and excitement. You think King K. Rool (who I personally believe was the true winner of the Smash ballot) generated no significant hype despite being MIA for years? Fans would love plenty more 1st party characters, or more deserving 3rd party additions like Banjo & Kazooie. Does the "general public" care much about Mewtwo? No, but perhaps you don't recall the tremendous fan demand that convinced Sakurai to bring him back. Whereas, despite the dedicated Snake fans, most people were not demanding his return to Smash because they knew he didn't really fit in anyway. A lot of people have had a problem with Bayonetta as well and I can understand where they're coming from. She's relatively new, comes from an M-rated series, etc. BUT Nintendo essentially saved and adopted her series so she gets a pass from me.

The crux of my argument is that catering to fans will also be good for business. I cited myself as an example of not wanting to buy Joker because I have no reason to be a fan of him unless I am also a PlayStation owner into the Persona series, which I am not. And I'm not going to buy Persona 5 Scramble either. Nor would I ever recommend a non-Zelda fan to buy Hyrule Warriors. If Daisy had been DLC and cost $60, my wallet would have caught fire for how fast I would have pulled that thing out.

 

[Cutie Gwen]

And if that's true, then you're emphasizing my point. Joker is unique, he's got a great moveset, but I don't know squat about him or the Persona series. A few surprises here and there are nice, but it's hard for me to get excited for a character when I know virtually nothing about them. That's been the case for me with the last few third-parties we've gotten.

To be fair that's on your end too for seemingly only limiting yourself to games made by Nintendo. You don't need to own non Nintendo consoles either as Nintendo can have strong third party support, the lack thereof infamously severely harming the Wii U


Also I just remembered Alpharad, one of the more prominent Smashtubers, was very vocal about wanting Bayonetta and Joker a LOT to the point both of them were his most wanted characters

 

[Deleted member]

To be fair that's on your end too for seemingly only limiting yourself to games made by Nintendo. You don't need to own non Nintendo consoles either as Nintendo can have strong third party support, the lack thereof infamously severely harming the Wii U

That’s actually a pretty great point.

Nintendo has been trying to prevent the mistakes of the Wii U while marketing the Switch, and stuff like the relationship with Microsoft and the mobile games show that Nintendo wants to look more open and wide to more demographics.
And thus, they want to attract the attention of people who may not own a Switch yet or don’t know what to pick for it. Joker being in Smash would be in that case a way to introduce Persona fans to many Nintendo IPs present in the game.

Ngl, you brought up a fantastic point.

 

[Deleted member]

Actually, my point about every character being popular does help my argument, and it directly tears down a certain counter argument.

Third parties "making sense" may seem subjective, but then why is it that there seems to be a lot of agreement about Joker, Snake and Cloud in particular not fitting into Smash (for example, practically no one says Sonic or Mega Man is a bad fit)? Again, since every character has its fans, I understand that it's always "fighting words" to say a certain character doesn't belong. But it's really not that hard to figure out why those three stick out. I bet if I give you some time you'll think of some reasons.

Never said I was going to be free of criticism; obviously my post was going to be controversial and stir up debate and heated opinions. By the way you misquoted my post's title.

As for your last paragraph....sure the game has sold well. But you forgot that I included "and playing". I have reason to believe that there are more than a few people who bought the game and hardly play it. Personal experience + GSP evidence seems to indicate this. As for the Wii U era DLC, we can safely assume that those numbers came from practically only Nintendo super fans, since basically no one else was interested in the system. The Switch, on the other hand, is definitely the new Wii in the sense that it's the 'cool new piece of gaming hardware you gotta get if you wanna be hip'.

So again, from that perspective, and coming off of the news that Persona 5 will not be coming to Switch anytime soon, it was clear that Joker was Sakurai's personal pick and not a character catering to the audience of those who bought Smash Ultimate. If Persona 5 comes to Switch in the future, then my opinion will probably change and I'll view it as a win for everyone, as I initially did.

A lot of video game characters are well-known and can generate hype and excitement. You think King K. Rool (who I personally believe was the true winner of the Smash ballot) generated no significant hype despite being MIA for years? Fans would love plenty more 1st party characters, or more deserving 3rd party additions like Banjo & Kazooie. Does the "general public" care much about Mewtwo? No, but perhaps you don't recall the tremendous fan demand that convinced Sakurai to bring him back. Whereas, despite the dedicated Snake fans, most people were not demanding his return to Smash because they knew he didn't really fit in anyway. A lot of people have had a problem with Bayonetta as well and I can understand where they're coming from. She's relatively new, comes from an M-rated series, etc. BUT Nintendo essentially saved and adopted her series so she gets a pass from me.

The crux of my argument is that catering to fans will also be good for business. I cited myself as an example of not wanting to buy Joker because I have no reason to be a fan of him unless I am also a PlayStation owner into the Persona series, which I am not. And I'm not going to buy Persona 5 Scramble either. Nor would I ever recommend a non-Zelda fan to buy Hyrule Warriors. If Daisy had been DLC and cost $60, my wallet would have caught fire for how fast I would have pulled that thing out.

Your post is operating on your feelings and assumptions regarding characters you like (K. Rool) and dislike (Snake) to further help your argument.

A lot of people wanted Snake back, and while K. Rool got a ton of votes (paraphrasing Sakurai) he was never specified as the winner.

Plus if we go by Snake not fitting, considering he is the first 3rd party character in Smash, I would say that given their inclusion already these type of characters are acceptable since then. (Plus I would argue that Snake totally fits given popularity, iconicness, moveset and just generally the absurd elements of MG being integrated with him)

 

[Nemuresu]

I think I have better way of explaining why some people (myself included) aren't fond of most third-parties

Growing up, I was a Nintendo fan through and through, just like many other Smash fans. I've always seemed to have a strong connection with many of Nintendo's franchises, ranging from the older classics like Super Mario and The Legend of Zelda to some younger ones like Animal Crossing and Splatoon. So when I know a new Smash game is coming out, I look forward to getting newcomers from these franchises, regardless of whether or not they classify as "A and B listers". If I know the character, and if I played the game they originated from, there's a good chance I'll be excited.

Now on the flip-side of this, I don't really have an expansive knowledge of most third-party franchises. My last PlayStation was the PS2, and I've barely even touched an Xbox console. I've actually heard of most third-parties through Smash speculation. So what am I getting at? There are tons of potential third-parties out there who could offer a really unique playstyle, but I have little to no connection with most of them. The last few third-parties have really emphasized this. My knowledge of Bayonetta was limited to what I saw in Nintendo Directs, I've never played a Castlevania game, and I didn't even know there were four other Persona games that came out prior to P5. And if the rumors are true, I wouldn't have even known Erdrick's name before his reveal if I didn't log on here frequently. Right now, I'm at a point where I'm genuinely hoping Steve gets in Smash just so I can at least have one third-party who I'm familiar with.

After a while, it just gets depressing whenever a rumor springs up about another third-party getting in. You can't help but feel that you probably won't know squat about the character they end up choosing.

If it was someone like Pac-Man or Sonic (AKA a character who even random people at Walmart would recognize), then I'd probably be way more optimistic. For now though, I'm rooting exclusively for the first-parties. I feel like I'll have a better chance of getting a character whom I have a little history with this way. You're more than welcome to disagree with my opinions, but that's just my perspective on Smash newcomers.

So you don't even try any games on Nintendo consoles that aren't made by the big N itself? Talking about having closed tastes.
It's not Nintendo's fault that you feel that way. The only one with power to change that is yourself and no one else, more so when you admit to have never played a Castlevania or Dragon Quest game even though they have been very prominent on Nintendo consoles.

 

[Deleted member]

Your post is operating on your feelings and assumptions regarding characters you like (K. Rool) and dislike (Snake) to further help your argument.

A lot of people wanted Snake back, and while K. Rool got a ton of votes (paraphrasing Sakurai) he was never specified as the winner.

Plus if we go by Snake not fitting, considering he is the first 3rd party character in Smash, I would say that given their inclusion already these type of characters are acceptable since then. (Plus I would argue that Snake totally fits given popularity, iconicness, moveset and just generally the absurd elements of MG being integrated with him)

And you seem to be operating on the assumption that I like King K. Rool. Spoiler: I do not. I don't dislike him either, but I would never say he doesn't fit in Smash Bros.

There are only two things that would make me change my mind about characters like Joker. 1. their games come to Nintendo platforms 2. Nintendo goes 3rd party

Cutie Gwen also said: "You don't need to own non Nintendo consoles either as Nintendo can have strong third party support, the lack thereof infamously severely harming the Wii U"
But see that's exactly my point. Right now, we DO need to own a non Nintendo console to understand and appreciate Joker. So his inclusion is great for PlayStation fans, kinda weird and not exciting for Nintendo fans. If it had been a win-win for both, that would have been great.

 

[Deleted member]

I can understand the idea of some people only sticking to Switch games due to economical or money-related stuff that deny them from picking other consoles for a while.

However, if someone can afford more than one console, but is attached too much to one alone and rejecting other options... That’s something more debatable.

Cutie Gwen also said: "You don't need to own non Nintendo consoles either as Nintendo can have strong third party support, the lack thereof infamously severely harming the Wii U"
But see that's exactly my point. Right now, we DO need to own a non Nintendo console to understand and appreciate Joker. So his inclusion is great for PlayStation fans, kinda weird and not exciting for Nintendo fans. If it had been a win-win for both, that would have been great.

Not really?
We have PQ2 and P5 Scramble on Nintendo consoles to check stuff regarding the character outside of Playstation stuff.

 

[Nemuresu]

Cutie Gwen also said: "You don't need to own non Nintendo consoles either as Nintendo can have strong third party support, the lack thereof infamously severely harming the Wii U"
But see that's exactly my point. Right now, we DO need to own a non Nintendo console to understand and appreciate Joker. So his inclusion is great for PlayStation fans, kinda weird and not exciting for Nintendo fans. If it had been a win-win for both, that would have been great.

And your greatest mistake is to think people invest money in every single franchise that has a playable character in Smash. A lot don't.

 

[Deleted member]

I can understand the idea of some people only sticking to Switch games due to economical or money-related stuff that deny them from picking other consoles for a while.

However, if someone can afford more than one console, but is attached too much to one alone and rejecting other options... That’s something more debatable.


Not really?
We have PQ2 and P5 Scramble on Nintendo consoles to check stuff regarding the character outside of Playstation stuff.

But they're spinoffs? I mean Hyrule Warriors has a story too but that's not really a good entry point into the Zelda lore.

And your greatest mistake is to think people invest money in every single franchise that has a playable character in Smash. A lot don't.

If that is my greatest mistake....then I guess I can live with that.

 

[Deleted member]

And you seem to be operating on the assumption that I like King K. Rool. Spoiler: I do not. I don't dislike him either, but I would never say he doesn't fit in Smash Bros.

There are only two things that would make me change my mind about characters like Joker. 1. their games come to Nintendo platforms 2. Nintendo goes 3rd party

Cutie Gwen also said: "You don't need to own non Nintendo consoles either as Nintendo can have strong third party support, the lack thereof infamously severely harming the Wii U"
But see that's exactly my point. Right now, we DO need to own a non Nintendo console to understand and appreciate Joker. So his inclusion is great for PlayStation fans, kinda weird and not exciting for Nintendo fans. If it had been a win-win for both, that would have been great.

You didn't answered the part of my post regarding making incorrect assumptions. You only said the K. Rool part to dismiss my whole argument like nothing.

If we go by Sakurai comments, Bayonetta and Simon were very popular in the ballot just like K. Rool and Ridley.

You are changing the argument with fitting and never rebutted why Snake doesn't fit, is it because he is not cartoony? We have a few MG games on Nintendo systems (including a remake of MGS on the Gamecube) so you seem to be cherrypicking arguments regarding X character that you dont like as not fitting.

Plus PQ2 is a thing and is being released to the 3DS, and P5S is coming to the Switch. So you can get to know more about Joker and Persona with them.

 

[Cosmic77]

To be fair that's on your end too for seemingly only limiting yourself to games made by Nintendo. You don't need to own non Nintendo consoles either as Nintendo can have strong third party support, the lack thereof infamously severely harming the Wii U

But it's not like I've missed out on games that only people living under a rock wouldn't have heard of. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume a lot of casual gamers learned about Bayonetta and Castlevania through Smash. Smashboards has a tendency to overexaggerate how iconic these characters really are.

I can see the appeal of some of these more niche or inactive third-parties getting in Smash, but I don't buy into the idea that characters like Joker are what the silent majority are looking for. Most people couldn't even tell you which company owns which character, let alone appreciate a character they might not know the same way a longtime Smash fan would.

Regardless of how much people whine about him, I actually think Steve is a closer step in the right direction. Just about everyone knows what Minecraft is, and Steve is far more capable of bringing people together than Bayonetta, Simon, or Joker ever could.

So you don't even try any games on Nintendo consoles that aren't made by the big N itself? Talking about having closed tastes.
It's not Nintendo's fault that you feel that way. The only one with power to change that is yourself and no one else, more so when you admit to have never played a Castlevania or Dragon Quest game even though they have been very prominent on Nintendo consoles.

Please show me exactly where in that post I said I only play games made by Nintendo.

You're putting words in my mouth. Of course I've played games that weren't developed by Nintendo. It's just that most of the games I play are first-party. It's unfair to say, "LOL you don't specifically play Dragon Quest even though it's on Nintendo consoles!? It's your own fault for not playing those games!"

 

[The DanMan051]

I think the point some people have hit is that if they seriously dislike 3rd parties and aren't content with what's already here in Ultimate, it might be time to consider bowing out because it's no longer appealing to them anymore and they're in a distinct minority.

 

[Nemuresu]

Please show me exactly where in that post I said I only play games made by Nintendo.

Here:

Growing up, I was a Nintendo fan through and through, just like many other Smash fans. I've always seemed to have a strong connection with many of Nintendo's franchises, ranging from the older classics like Super Mario and The Legend of Zelda to some younger ones like Animal Crossing and Splatoon. So when I know a new Smash game is coming out, I look forward to getting newcomers from these franchises, regardless of whether or not they classify as "A and B listers". If I know the character, and if I played the game they originated from, there's a good chance I'll be excited.

Did I dismiss that Minecraft part? Yes and no. Yes because my comment generalized too much (which I'll admit was a mistake), and no because of the implication of you barely touching non-Nintendo games is still there.

It's unfair to say, "LOL you don't specifically play Dragon Quest even though it's on Nintendo consoles!? It's your own fault for not playing those games!"

It's not when you act like these franchises didn't exist to you until you looked at people speculating about Smash. These games have been available on Nintendo consoles for years and built their own communities on quite a long time too, that to go out and say these guys are nobodies just means you're not bothering to look beyond your comfort zone.

 

[Cutie Gwen]

Your post is operating on your feelings and assumptions regarding characters you like (K. Rool) and dislike (Snake) to further help your argument.

A lot of people wanted Snake back, and while K. Rool got a ton of votes (paraphrasing Sakurai) he was never specified as the winner.

Plus if we go by Snake not fitting, considering he is the first 3rd party character in Smash, I would say that given their inclusion already these type of characters are acceptable since then. (Plus I would argue that Snake totally fits given popularity, iconicness, moveset and just generally the absurd elements of MG being integrated with him)

I somewhat disagree about Snake's moveset because it seems obvious that had he been included later, he'd have his own knife and gun. Hell, Project M gave him quite the revamp so that he'd use the tranquilizer that's a rather iconic part of playing Metal Gear games

Actually, my point about every character being popular does help my argument, and it directly tears down a certain counter argument.

Third parties "making sense" may seem subjective, but then why is it that there seems to be a lot of agreement about Joker, Snake and Cloud in particular not fitting into Smash (for example, practically no one says Sonic or Mega Man is a bad fit)? Again, since every character has its fans, I understand that it's always "fighting words" to say a certain character doesn't belong. But it's really not that hard to figure out why those three stick out. I bet if I give you some time you'll think of some reasons.

Never said I was going to be free of criticism; obviously my post was going to be controversial and stir up debate and heated opinions. By the way you misquoted my post's title.

As for your last paragraph....sure the game has sold well. But you forgot that I included "and playing". I have reason to believe that there are more than a few people who bought the game and hardly play it. Personal experience + GSP evidence seems to indicate this. As for the Wii U era DLC, we can safely assume that those numbers came from practically only Nintendo super fans, since basically no one else was interested in the system. The Switch, on the other hand, is definitely the new Wii in the sense that it's the 'cool new piece of gaming hardware you gotta get if you wanna be hip'.

So again, from that perspective, and coming off of the news that Persona 5 will not be coming to Switch anytime soon, it was clear that Joker was Sakurai's personal pick and not a character catering to the audience of those who bought Smash Ultimate. If Persona 5 comes to Switch in the future, then my opinion will probably change and I'll view it as a win for everyone, as I initially did.

A lot of video game characters are well-known and can generate hype and excitement. You think King K. Rool (who I personally believe was the true winner of the Smash ballot) generated no significant hype despite being MIA for years? Fans would love plenty more 1st party characters, or more deserving 3rd party additions like Banjo & Kazooie. Does the "general public" care much about Mewtwo? No, but perhaps you don't recall the tremendous fan demand that convinced Sakurai to bring him back. Whereas, despite the dedicated Snake fans, most people were not demanding his return to Smash because they knew he didn't really fit in anyway. A lot of people have had a problem with Bayonetta as well and I can understand where they're coming from. She's relatively new, comes from an M-rated series, etc. BUT Nintendo essentially saved and adopted her series so she gets a pass from me.

The crux of my argument is that catering to fans will also be good for business. I cited myself as an example of not wanting to buy Joker because I have no reason to be a fan of him unless I am also a PlayStation owner into the Persona series, which I am not. And I'm not going to buy Persona 5 Scramble either. Nor would I ever recommend a non-Zelda fan to buy Hyrule Warriors. If Daisy had been DLC and cost $60, my wallet would have caught fire for how fast I would have pulled that thing out.

*cracks knuckles*
The reason they seemed unfitting is due to their artstyles, they aren't cartoony like most of the cast. That being said Snake's debut game was Brawl, which used a more realistic look.

How does it matter how dedicated people are to constantly playing Smash? From a business standpoint Nintendo cares significantly more about the buyers who pay money for the DLC characters than those who play online every day. If anything that actually hurts you argument as it shows that a smaller percentage of Smash players are hardcore Smash fans (Not hardcore NINTENDO fans, those aren't the same and you haven't proved they are)

Again you're ignoring just how popular Persona 5 was and how it spread like wildfire, you could only avoid it by specifically going into echo chambers of hardcore Nintendo, Xbox or PC fans who refuse to try anything if it isn't on their system

Again, judging by live youtuber reactions, significantly more people were excited at Snake rather than anyone else. Not to downplay K.Rool or Ridley, but we didn't see people who are hardcore Smash fans loudly scream the lyrics to Metal Gear Solid 3's main theme for nothing. The casual audience didn't really know K.Rool that well. I saw the first 2 directs live with friends and while I do have friends who were giddy about K.Rool, most of us in that group were apathetic at best unlike "Holy **** they brought Snake back!" Also, how come Banjo Kazooie, a dead character owned by Nintendo's competition are 'deserving' yet your first post in the thread condemned Steve, who's owned by the same company but is actively promoted by Nintendo themselves? There's also your stance on Mewtwo here. Are you saying that had it not been for Smash fans, one of the most popular Pokemon in the franchise's history, said franchise also being THE most popular franchise of all time, wouldn't have come back? Considering Mewtwo was planned for 64 and Brawl, I beg to differ. Where is your proof Snake wasn't popular? Remember E3? Sakurai literally said "Back from popular demand" about Snake. He didn't say that about any of the veterans missing from Smash 4 and was specifically highlighted for it. Again, very telling of what Sakurai knows as he's the one with all the data

Your mindset for the crux of your argument lies solely on the idea that one exclusively plays games made by Nintendo, which isn't the case. Not to mention if you'd REALLY spend $60 on Peach The Third but not a character who DID appear on Nintendo before being confirmed for Smash who looks incredibly stylish while bringing music not many franchises could provide for a similar genre, then it's more evidence you're a Nintendo fanboy. Out of all my friends who I regularly play Smash with, only 2 of them have played and loved Persona 5 yet everyone else still loved his inclusion. A different friend of mine who refused to buy DLC since it's inception broke his rule which he kept for a decade because he really liked how Joker was implemented.

 

[Cosmic77]

I think the long and the short of it is that, if you seriously dislike 3rd parties and aren't content with what's already here in Ultimate, it might be time to consider bowing out because it's no longer appealing to you any more and you're in a distinct minority.

I think that's the point some people have hit.

I doubt many people genuinely believe we shouldn't have any third-parties. It's just that a lot of people aren't satisfied with the type of third-parties we're getting.


I dunno. Maybe I should just stop responding to this thread. Feels like no matter what I say or how detailed I get with my explanations, people just want to fire back at me with, "No, your opinions are awful, wrong, and bad. All third-parties are equal, everyone likes them, and the future of Smash should be lots and lots of third-parties."

I don't think Smash should focus on third-parties. I'll just leave it at that for now.

 

[Cutie Gwen]

And you seem to be operating on the assumption that I like King K. Rool. Spoiler: I do not. I don't dislike him either, but I would never say he doesn't fit in Smash Bros.

There are only two things that would make me change my mind about characters like Joker. 1. their games come to Nintendo platforms 2. Nintendo goes 3rd party

Cutie Gwen also said: "You don't need to own non Nintendo consoles either as Nintendo can have strong third party support, the lack thereof infamously severely harming the Wii U"
But see that's exactly my point. Right now, we DO need to own a non Nintendo console to understand and appreciate Joker. So his inclusion is great for PlayStation fans, kinda weird and not exciting for Nintendo fans. If it had been a win-win for both, that would have been great.

You're using my quote the wrong way because you're using it to act like people who are fans of Nintendo and people who played and enjoyed Persona 5 are mutually exclusive. They are NOT. Being a Nintendo fan does NOT mean you EXCLUSIVELY play Nintendo games. For the love of all that is good, stop implying they're mutually exclusive

But it's not like I've missed out on games that only people living under a rock wouldn't have heard of. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume a lot of casual gamers learned about Bayonetta and Castlevania through Smash. Smashboards has a tendency to overexaggerate how iconic these characters really are.

I can see the appeal of some of these more niche or inactive third-parties getting in Smash, but I don't buy into the idea that characters like Joker are what the silent majority are looking for. Most people couldn't even tell you which company owns which character, let alone appreciate a character they might not know the same way a longtime Smash fan would.

Regardless of how much people whine about him, I actually think Steve is a closer step in the right direction. Just about everyone knows what Minecraft is, and Steve is far more capable of bringing people together than Bayonetta, Simon, or Joker ever could.



Please show me exactly where in that post I said I only play games made by Nintendo.

You're putting words in my mouth. Of course I've played games that weren't developed by Nintendo. It's just that most of the games I play are first-party. It's unfair to say, "LOL you don't specifically play Dragon Quest even though it's on Nintendo consoles!? It's your own fault for not playing those games!"

CastleVania was HUGE in the 90's and has remained one of the NES' most iconic titles, not to mention the CastleVania franchise still went on for a long time. The last game that wasn't pachinko or anything was 2014 and since then it even got an incredibly well-received Netflix show, which had many people assume Trevor would have been the echo before it was revealed that character who saved Simon was Richter.

 

[The DanMan051]

I doubt many people genuinely believe we shouldn't have any third-parties. It's just that a lot of people aren't satisfied with the type of third-parties we're getting.


I dunno. Maybe I should just stop responding to this thread. Feels like no matter what I say or how detailed I get with my explanations, people just want to fire back at me with, "No, your opinions are awful, wrong, and bad. All third-parties are equal, everyone likes them, and the future of Smash should be lots and lots of third-parties."

I don't think Smash should focus on third-parties. I'll just leave it at that for now.

For a vocal minority, yeah. I'm throwing around that word way too much for someone with an avi of a character who debuted in a spinoff VN of a fighting game.

At this point it's probably best to just step away and re-evaluate your position/reformulate how you express it. You're free not to like them, but it's incredibly reductive to argue that there shouldn't be more; 3rd party characters are a win-win for Nintendo and (99% of) the playerbase.
Especially when the stance goes against the very word of the game director, who's explicitly said that Smash is now more of a celebration of gaming in general and not just a Nintendo club.

Recognizing when you can't win an argument and stepping away from it is a virtue that few people have.

 

[Mogisthelioma]

None of those characters you listed would excite me more than most third party additions.

I don't play ARMS or Splatoon (Octoling most likely being a semi-clone at most to boot unless something changes), Astral Chain could bomb (remember when Codename Steam was supposed to be a new huge thing?), a mobile gaming character isn't exactly top of the list for console owners, Sword and Shield will be forgotten by the time the next Smash game launches nor can we predict if any the future mons will be a big hit necessarily, agreed on BWD and Toad (prefer ordinary over Captain personally) as they are part of the 2-3 I vaguely mentioned.

As for Rex, that ship has sailed unless wave 2 happens and saves him. DLC spirit board and the mii costume being a purchase bonus really put a dent on Xenoblade 2 in Smash.

Their point still stands. You may not be excited for some of those first party picks,but plenty of people still are (myself included).

 

[EricTheGamerman]

Actually, my point about every character being popular does help my argument, and it directly tears down a certain counter argument.

You're going to need to explain how that helps your argument and tears down others. Every character working to some extent doesn't diminish the larger popularity of more publicly recognizable icons.

Third parties "making sense" may seem subjective, but then why is it that there seems to be a lot of agreement about Joker, Snake and Cloud in particular not fitting into Smash (for example, practically no one says Sonic or Mega Man is a bad fit)? Again, since every character has its fans, I understand that it's always "fighting words" to say a certain character doesn't belong. But it's really not that hard to figure out why those three stick out. I bet if I give you some time you'll think of some reasons.

Because there are two more elitist mindsets that go around that people use to justify their arbitrary distinctions of third parties working and not working in Smash. The first of which being that only highly requested characters deserve to get into Smash and that any thing that doesn't place spectacularly on polls for their first inclusion doesn't deserve to be in the game (Though Cloud was popular and Snake became extremely popular as a veteran). The second and the arguably more problematic stance of "Only third parties that fit the vision of Smash." It's an elitist mindset of only being willing to tolerate third parties in more limited capacities and in ways in which they "seem deserving." Snake was the first third party in Smash, so all the bull**** criteria of "important Nintendo relationships" never existed in the first place. The only person capable of defining Smash is the creator and continued director of the franchise. And he says that Snake, Joker, and Cloud belong in Smash, so the absolutely do. Several of these people don't like third parties to begin and were willing to tolerate certain ones for their own personal criteria. They're misguided in believing Smash to be some sort of Nintendo exclusive franchise when Sakurai has expressed interest in adding third parties for 18 years of the the game's 20 year history. And this particular subsection is a particularly vocal minority. A "lot of agreement" likely comes from a lot of Echo chamber related internet Smash fandom. Beyond the Smash fandom, I've never seen a single comment about the third parties chosen in Smash as in anyway problematic except for Bayonetta...

Never said I was going to be free of criticism; obviously my post was going to be controversial and stir up debate and heated opinions. By the way you misquoted my post's title.

As for your last paragraph....sure the game has sold well. But you forgot that I included "and playing". I have reason to believe that there are more than a few people who bought the game and hardly play it. Personal experience + GSP evidence seems to indicate this. As for the Wii U era DLC, we can safely assume that those numbers came from practically only Nintendo super fans, since basically no one else was interested in the system. The Switch, on the other hand, is definitely the new Wii in the sense that it's the 'cool new piece of gaming hardware you gotta get if you wanna be hip'.

Did you just reference GSP? An online stat that references player skill in a mode that is well known to be super problematic and additionally costs money to access on an unproven service, which only around a 1/3 of Switch owners have currently invested in. Yeah, not a great metric to prove much of anything about who continues to play Smash. Not to mention how popular Smash remains as a couch co-op game. And I can't speak to personal experience because mine has been the exact opposite, but again, not a compelling metric.

Smash 4 was on more than just the Wii U, so that DLC also encompasses 3DS sales which was a much more prevalent system with a wider consumer base and Smash 3DS sold almost 10 million units. And even if it was just Wii U sales, it still sold incredibly well for a console with such a low install base given that it sold over 5 million units and people bought the system just for Smash or in part because of Smash. There's no way to say that only "hardcore" gamers and Smash fans bought the DLC from that era. You're also acting like only hardcore fans of stuff will buy DLC when DLC across the entire industry and microtransactions make an absolute killing in terms of revenue. Plenty of people look to buy new content for their favorite games and it's just an accepted cost of society/business these days unfortunately.

So again, from that perspective, and coming off of the news that Persona 5 will not be coming to Switch anytime soon, it was clear that Joker was Sakurai's personal pick and not a character catering to the audience of those who bought Smash Ultimate. If Persona 5 comes to Switch in the future, then my opinion will probably change and I'll view it as a win for everyone, as I initially did.

A lot of video game characters are well-known and can generate hype and excitement. You think King K. Rool (who I personally believe was the true winner of the Smash ballot) generated no significant hype despite being MIA for years? Fans would love plenty more 1st party characters, or more deserving 3rd party additions like Banjo & Kazooie. Does the "general public" care much about Mewtwo? No, but perhaps you don't recall the tremendous fan demand that convinced Sakurai to bring him back. Whereas, despite the dedicated Snake fans, most people were not demanding his return to Smash because they knew he didn't really fit in anyway. A lot of people have had a problem with Bayonetta as well and I can understand where they're coming from. She's relatively new, comes from an M-rated series, etc. BUT Nintendo essentially saved and adopted her series so she gets a pass from me.

The crux of my argument is that catering to fans will also be good for business. I cited myself as an example of not wanting to buy Joker because I have no reason to be a fan of him unless I am also a PlayStation owner into the Persona series, which I am not. And I'm not going to buy Persona 5 Scramble either. Nor would I ever recommend a non-Zelda fan to buy Hyrule Warriors.

Or maybe Sakurai made a pick that appealed to a different demographic of fans to try to attract different people to Smash with a unique character? One that had some popularity in Smash communities even if he wasn't taking away a top 20 fan request award. Sakurai can add a personal pick and cater to additional audiences. You're also entirely discounting the possibility that someone can just be interested in Persona related content and not need to play Persona 5. Persona Q came out a few years ago on 3DS and may have gotten some fans interested in more content. Maybe they're just interested in Persona because it has gotten the absolute highest praise I've seen given to a JRPG in recent memory. Maybe the trailer just seemed really cool. There's lot of additional scenarios that are perfectly valid reasons for an individual to be interested in Persona content beyond specifically 5 and even more so with the upcoming Persona 5 Scramble and Persona Q2 releases.

And Snake was absolutely requested a ton to return, what revisionist history are you trying to pull off? Here's the famous character poll you must have seen at some point and Snake's clearly one of the top choices [collapse="Spoiler"]

[/collapse] Even if I don't always agree with using polls like many Smash fans do, they do show that some characters are at least popular in some contexts. The same fan demand that brought Mewtwo back was the same fan demand that brought all the veterans back, Snake included. And he was very clearly positioned as the high point of "Everyone is Here!" for a reason.

I'm not saying first party additions can't generate hype, but I am saying that we're getting fewer and fewer that can generate major hype these days. King K. Rool and Ridley were notable absences with years of requests which contributed to their hype, but there's fewer and fewer characters in that situation. And the more obscure you get, the less that they'll cause hype. Yes, any character will cause an amount of hype, but you'll certainly be seeing diminishing returns as we finish off what notable characters we have left. Catering to fans is good business to an extent, but only catering to them is also a mistake and there needs to be a balance as in anything. We're one character from the Fighter's Pass into DLC, so we'll have to wait to see how that balance goes, but even without another major fan pick, Ultimate has been the game with the most attention paid to fan desire in Smash history and made major fan requests in multiple aspects of the game come true. I mean, look at my picture above, six of the top ten characters from that poll made it into fan demand, five of which in Ultimate specifically. I'm not saying there aren't third parties left that can't create hype, but I am saying we've done a lot of fulfillment already and the first parties we currently have are getting less and less notable. You have to be able to cater to multiple audiences and make choices that create buzz and attention around your game. Sometimes that's fan related picks, sometimes that's more general choices that appeal to wider or different audiences.

If you don't wanna buy a spin-off that's fine, but it's perfectly reasonable to recommend people buy spin-offs too. There are different reasons for buying them or calling attention to them as they're supposed to be different games. But they can still introduce new people to a game. You're way too focused on whether or not someone has/can play Persona 5 in this argument.

If Daisy had been DLC and cost $60, my wallet would have caught fire for how fast I would have pulled that thing out.

And what does this have to do with anything that's been mentioned other than demonstrating you're willing to pay an absurd amount of money for a personal preference? Every character probably has a person like you in this situation who will flock to a character, but that means you want to get more people interested which usually requires a larger fan base. If you can get more people willing to buy your product, that's only beneficial, especially if those people don't already own a Switch and Ultimate since that's even more revenue and way past what they'd get selling a single first party DLC fan favorite to a person who already owns a Switch and Ultimate...

 

[Cosmic77]

For a vocal minority, yeah. I'm throwing around that word way too much for someone with an avi of a character who debuted in a spinoff VN of a fighting game.

At this point it's probably best to just step away and re-evaluate your position/reformulate how you express it. You're free not to like them, but it's incredibly reductive to argue that there shouldn't be more; 3rd party characters are a win-win for Nintendo and (99% of) the playerbase.
Especially when the stance goes against the very word of the game director, who's explicitly said that Smash is now more of a celebration of gaming in general and not just a Nintendo club.

Recognizing when you can't win an argument and stepping away from it is a virtue that few people have.

...You kinda ignored my point about not liking the type third-parties we're currently getting. Actually, I've pointed out multiple times that I'm fine with third-parties if they're extremely iconic and well known. Pretty sure I keep using Steve as an example.

You're right though. I'm not gonna win this argument, or at least not if people keep putting words in my mouth. Everything I say gets twisted into something negative, extreme, and flat-out wrong, like "I only play Nintendo games and nothing else so I don't think third-parties should be in", and "Third-parties are bad. We shouldn't have any at all."


People are getting way too hostile. No, despite how some of you might feel, there's not a right and wrong answer to this topic. Just respect other people's opinions and agree to disagree instead of typing out these long demeaning responses.