Last DLC Pack has divided the community.

[Arthur97]

I really don't like the mentality that not being third party qualifies as disappointing. Yeah, it's subjective, but it still rubs me the wrong way.

Also, how is Terry iconic? Maybe in dedicated fighting game circuits, but gaming as a whole? Fewer people may have actively wanted Terry than wanted the Byleths.

For that matter, I'd question Joker's status as iconic.

 

[Extremmefan]

Can't say I like that mentality either, but I see where he's coming from.

However I don't think that should stop Mario, whose characters are almost always legacy or at least well-settled additions, and if anything both Pokemon and FE would benefit a lot from getting newcomers that aren't from the latest game. FE already got a clone that way, but I guess him being from the already most represented game in the franchise kinda makes that hard to notice, so it'd be appreciated if it got a different non-Awakening character in the same way.

… Though in both cases I don't see it happening short of having Ridley/KRool levels of demand, unless we're talking clones in which case it's still Daisy/DarkSamus levels of demand that I'd see as the necessary amount, and that's still pretty big. (I say this in the context of Nintendo rarely listening to demand so for them to notice it'd have to be pretty massive especially without the Ballot. Reminder Daisy had an entire movement for her to be treated better in general, and I'd presume Dark Samus had a lot of background votes)

And yea Terry and Joker are iconic to specific communities, but they're still mainstays that had more time to settle in than Byleth (well, Terry for sure, idk about Joker's case though).
But I don't really think the "Gaming hall of fame" mentality is all that good either. Third-parties need to have settled in by themselves, not necessarily their specific protagonists. If anything when Smash started the "gaming hall of fame" idea was but a dream, and I think the developpers have already achieved that several times over since Brawl, so asking for Nintendo characters should be fair game as much as asking for more third-parties is.

 

[Cutie Gwen]

I really don't like the mentality that not being third party qualifies as disappointing. Yeah, it's subjective, but it still rubs me the wrong way.
.

Bruh I love Byleth but their hate's so obviously not because they're not third party

 

[Pwnz0rz Man]

I really don't like the mentality that not being third party qualifies as disappointing. Yeah, it's subjective, but it still rubs me the wrong way.

Also, how is Terry iconic? Maybe in dedicated fighting game circuits, but gaming as a whole? Fewer people may have actively wanted Terry than wanted the Byleths.

For that matter, I'd question Joker's status as iconic.

People weren't disappointed because Byleth isn't third party. People were disappointed because Byleth is a Fire Emblem character with no history and little personality (like most of the FE Lordlings) put into the game as advertising for their most recent game in the franchise (like everyone's most favorite character Corrin). The fact that he's yet another blue haired sword wielder is icing on the disappointment cake.

How is Terry Iconic? He's the mascot for an entire company for starters. He is to SNK what Ryu is to Capcom and we all know or should all know that if Megaman wasn't so adorable, Ryu would be the face of that company purely because of how iconic he is. He means more to fighting game fans, yes, but the same is true of Ryu/Ken and at no point could it be argued that they're not iconic characters in their own rights.

I'm not sure I would argue that Joker himself is iconic, but his spinoff (Persona) and the franchise that it spun off from (Shin Megami Tensei) is. He's just the most recent and at the moment, most recognized protagonist. I suppose if they really wanted to represent Persona, they could have gone with Jack Frost, but they probably want to sell more copies of P5 related stuff so allowed Joker instead since you'll use him more than a low/mid level Persona like Jack.

 

[Extremmefan]

People were disappointed because Byleth is a Fire Emblem character with no history and little personality (like most of the FE Lordlings) put into the game as advertising for their most recent game in the franchise (like everyone's most favorite character Corrin). The fact that he's yet another blue haired sword wielder is icing on the disappointment cake.

Slight disagreement there: the lords do have personality, it's just that their personality is being stoic (mostly. Roy is more of an idealist but he's the one that screams more anyways). However blank slate type characters like Robin, Corrin, and Byleth are supposed to not even have that, so that people can insert themselves into them (though whether Robin does a good job at that is… a bit debatable tbh, but that does make him the more interesting of the three overall, and probably proves why it didn't feel like many had an issue with him back during his inclusion since he didn't really feel all that blank anyways).

 

[Cutie Gwen]

Slight disagreement there: the lords do have personality, it's just that their personality is being stoic (mostly. Roy is more of an idealist but he's the one that screams more anyways). However blank slate type characters like Robin, Corrin, and Byleth are supposed to not even have that, so that people can insert themselves into them (though whether Robin does a good job at that is… a bit debatable tbh, but that does make him the more interesting of the three overall, and probably proves why it didn't feel like many had an issue with him back during his inclusion since he didn't really feel all that blank anyways).

Oddly enough Byleth's Smash portrayal has so much personality that they automatically become a goofier character than most, which is cool as it seems like the Smash team based Byleth's personality on how twitter memed them, especially seen with the fishing and tea time gags, but it's ****ing hilarious how they took a character who's entire personality was literally not having one and making them this big ass goofball, I love it

 

[Pwnz0rz Man]

Slight disagreement there: the lords do have personality, it's just that their personality is being stoic (mostly. Roy is more of an idealist but he's the one that screams more anyways). However blank slate type characters like Robin, Corrin, and Byleth are supposed to not even have that, so that people can insert themselves into them (though whether Robin does a good job at that is… a bit debatable tbh, but that does make him the more interesting of the three overall, and probably proves why it didn't feel like many had an issue with him back during his inclusion since he didn't really feel all that blank anyways).

They do have personality, but not typically that much. Roy in his origin game was bland, as are all the avatar characters introduced from Smash 4 onwards.

 

[Arthur97]

People weren't disappointed because Byleth isn't third party. People were disappointed because Byleth is a Fire Emblem character with no history and little personality (like most of the FE Lordlings) put into the game as advertising for their most recent game in the franchise (like everyone's most favorite character Corrin). The fact that he's yet another blue haired sword wielder is icing on the disappointment cake.

How is Terry Iconic? He's the mascot for an entire company for starters. He is to SNK what Ryu is to Capcom and we all know or should all know that if Megaman wasn't so adorable, Ryu would be the face of that company purely because of how iconic he is. He means more to fighting game fans, yes, but the same is true of Ryu/Ken and at no point could it be argued that they're not iconic characters in their own rights.

I'm not sure I would argue that Joker himself is iconic, but his spinoff (Persona) and the franchise that it spun off from (Shin Megami Tensei) is. He's just the most recent and at the moment, most recognized protagonist. I suppose if they really wanted to represent Persona, they could have gone with Jack Frost, but they probably want to sell more copies of P5 related stuff so allowed Joker instead since you'll use him more than a low/mid level Persona like Jack.

I know it isn't solely because of that (I'm not blind), but just look and see how many people across the internet bring that up. It seems to be factoring in there somewhere. Also, have you actually played the games, or are you just assuming they have little personality? I mean, yeah, the Byleths don't (I think that might actually be a plot point), but what of the others? Also, Joker is a thing in the same pack despite having variable personality syndrome meaning that outside his own game, he has little to no personality.

Uh, People know Ryu far, far more than Terry. Terry just wasn't that well known. Just look at all the people who had no idea who he was when he was announced. And, yes, he's a mascot for a company, but that company is SNK. It's not quite as bad as comparing your local mart's mascot to Mickey Mouse, but being a company mascot does not instantly make you iconic. Let's not pretend Terry is even close to Ryu, Mega Man, Sonic and the like. And especially not Mario (but that's a pretty high bar). How can he be iconic if so many people had no idea who he was?

The thing is, they make it very clear he's only repping P5, at which point, the iconic argument is hurt.

They do have personality, but not typically that much. Roy in his origin game was bland, as are all the avatar characters introduced from Smash 4 onwards.

Again, have you ever played them? The Robins are terrible avatars. You know why? Because they have too much personality. They are defined characters essentially. More than that, they actually have somewhat different personalities from each other.

Also, since when did the Smash community care about personality? Especially when they love Joker so much.

 

[Pwnz0rz Man]

I know it isn't solely because of that (I'm not blind), but just look and see how many people across the internet bring that up. It seems to be factoring in there somewhere. Also, have you actually played the games, or are you just assuming they have little personality? I mean, yeah, the Byleths don't (I think that might actually be a plot point), but what of the others? Also, Joker is a thing in the same pack despite having variable personality syndrome meaning that outside his own game, he has little to no personality.

At no point did I say it was purely due to personality, I think you're grasping at straws with Joker here considering I laid out my opinion on their status.

Uh, People know Ryu far, far more than Terry. Terry just wasn't that well known. Just look at all the people who had no idea who he was when he was announced. And, yes, he's a mascot for a company, but that company is SNK. It's not quite as bad as comparing your local mart's mascot to Mickey Mouse, but being a company mascot does not instantly make you iconic. Let's not pretend Terry is even close to Ryu, Mega Man, Sonic and the like. And especially not Mario (but that's a pretty high bar). How can he be iconic if so many people had no idea who he was?

Simple answer? Smash fans are ignorant of fighting game history as a generality. They tend to only really recognize the obvious modern characters and probably have no idea who anybody is outside of the little bubble they experience with EVO every year (if they even bother with the non-Smash games at all).

The thing is, they make it very clear he's only repping P5, at which point, the iconic argument is hurt.

I didn't say he was iconic, so I have no idea what you're arguing. It's also inaccurate that his inclusion is only repping P5, as his stage references not only P5, but P4, and P3. The stage is just as integral to the character as the character themselves.

Again, have you ever played them? The Robins are terrible avatars. You know why? Because they have too much personality. They are defined characters essentially. More than that, they actually have somewhat different personalities from each other.

Also, since when did the Smash community care about personality? Especially when they love Joker so much.

You're really laser focusing on personality, as if that was the only thing I said. I know you acknowledged it wasn't, but you completely gloss over the rest and just hammer that repeatedly.

 

[Oddball]

Uh, People know Ryu far, far more than Terry. Terry just wasn't that well known. Just look at all the people who had no idea who he was when he was announced. And, yes, he's a mascot for a company, but that company is SNK. It's not quite as bad as comparing your local mart's mascot to Mickey Mouse, but being a company mascot does not instantly make you iconic. Let's not pretend Terry is even close to Ryu, Mega Man, Sonic and the like. And especially not Mario (but that's a pretty high bar). How can he be iconic if so many people had no idea who he was?

Let's not pretend the same things are popular with every single age group.

There's a lot of young people out there that don't know Twisted Sister or Alice in Chains. That doesn't mean they AREN'T rock icons it's just that young people tend to gravitate towards whatever's new. Doesn't mean the old stuff isn't classic. (I don't want to make the arguement that just because it's old it's good. There's a lot of old garbage too.)

 

[Pwnz0rz Man]

Let's not pretend the same things are popular with every single age group.

There's a lot of young people out there that don't know Twisted Sister or Alice in Chains. That doesn't mean they AREN'T rock icons it's just that young people tend to gravitate towards whatever's new. Doesn't mean the old stuff isn't classic. (I don't want to make the arguement that just because it's old it's good. There's a lot of old garbage too.)

A certain SNES/Genesis era Bobcat is definitely proof that old =/= good.

 

[Oddball]

A certain SNES/Genesis era Bobcat is definitely proof that old =/= good.

The first Bubsy game was actually kinda fun.

I will not even pretend to defend the others.

 

[Tortfeasor]

A certain SNES/Genesis era Bobcat is definitely proof that old =/= good.

Bubsy for Smash?

 

[Arthur97]

At no point did I say it was purely due to personality, I think you're grasping at straws with Joker here considering I laid out my opinion on their status.

Simple answer? Smash fans are ignorant of fighting game history as a generality. They tend to only really recognize the obvious modern characters and probably have no idea who anybody is outside of the little bubble they experience with EVO every year (if they even bother with the non-Smash games at all).

I didn't say he was iconic, so I have no idea what you're arguing. It's also inaccurate that his inclusion is only repping P5, as his stage references not only P5, but P4, and P3. The stage is just as integral to the character as the character themselves.

You're really laser focusing on personality, as if that was the only thing I said. I know you acknowledged it wasn't, but you completely gloss over the rest and just hammer that repeatedly.

I was pointing out how bad of an argument that was, but, fine, you want to address the others? Fine.

Advertising? Probably one of the most legitimate ones, but can't that also be said for Greninja? Or even Hero? No one seems to cry advertisement there. Also, advertisement is not necessarily bad.

No History? Joker is extremely new with little history. Greninja, once again, was added from conceptual material. Bayonetta? Yes, had a history, but not a particularly long or successful one.

Sword fighter? Are you kidding me? Okay, forgetting for a moment the other three weapons, why is using a sword a bad thing? More fighters are melee fighters than sword fighters. Complaining about how they beat up their opponents seems trivial. Where were the complaints that Terry was just another guy who punched and kicked?

Fire Emblem? There we are! Though, this too isn't a fair metric. As has been pointed out, Fire Emblem changes protagonists almost every game. Most of the others don't. Like it or not, Fire Emblem has earned its keep and is in a unique position compared to most of the bigger franchises. Of course, this isn't helped by some individuals who insist that all of them except the Robins are just some variation on Marth when in actuality, even Roy is fairly different. Of course, that would require logical thought on their parts to realize.

Let's not pretend the same things are popular with every single age group.

There's a lot of young people out there that don't know Twisted Sister or Alice in Chains. That doesn't mean they AREN'T rock icons it's just that young people tend to gravitate towards whatever's new. Doesn't mean the old stuff isn't classic. (I don't want to make the arguement that just because it's old it's good. There's a lot of old garbage too.)

Like I said, let's not pretend that being a mascot makes you iconic either. Trust me, I don't tend to gravitate to the new (though, I'm probably something of an odd case for my age group). Still, outside of dedicated fighting circles, I would have a hard time calling Terry iconic. He doesn't carry the same broad appeal as the icons. I mean, I'm not even sure he's the most well known character from his own series. Calling him on par with Ryu is a stretch alone.

 

[Extremmefan]

Advertising? Probably one of the most legitimate ones, but can't that also be said for Greninja?

You have no idea how sad I am that people are only finding this now, if they even are. (I still stand by the idea that BW deserved a rep and XY either didn't or only did to a lesser extend)

Like I said, let's not pretend that being a mascot makes you iconic either. Trust me, I don't tend to gravitate to the new (though, I'm probably something of an odd case for my age group). Still, outside of dedicated fighting circles, I would have a hard time calling Terry iconic. He doesn't carry the same broad appeal as the icons. I mean, I'm not even sure he's the most well known character from his own series. Calling him on par with Ryu is a stretch alone.

As evidenced by the ton of content in his pack, Terry isn't just Terry (or just Fatal Fury for that matter), he's SNK as a whole here. And SNK is a name people have heard a lot when it comes to arcade cabinets (though I suppose out of those, people around here would be most familiar with Metal Slug, which, yes, is a SNK franchise as well). I would call Terry himself a mascot, but not iconic, but I would however call SNK iconic of video games as a whole (though moreso arcade cabinets, to be more precise), as a direct competitor to Capcom even.

 

[Pwnz0rz Man]

I was pointing out how bad of an argument that was, but, fine, you want to address the others? Fine.

Advertising? Probably one of the most legitimate ones, but can't that also be said for Greninja? Or even Hero? No one seems to cry advertisement there. Also, advertisement is not necessarily bad.

Never said it was inherently bad, but it's not the first time that they've specifically advertised new FE games via DLC in Smash. It's kind of an annoyance to me that they keep pushing FE through DLC that we end up paying for. It's happened twice now, and I'm just kind of dreading it happening whenever the next Smash game comes out.

No History? Joker is extremely new with little history. Greninja, once again, was added from conceptual material. Bayonetta? Yes, had a history, but not a particularly long or successful one.

I think Joker's appeal is more the addition of Persona in general than anything specifically related to him, a series that had no Smash representation until Ultimate. Greninja wasn't DLC, I don't really care. Bayonetta was a new series rep for a franchise that only got to continue because Nintendo made it possible.

Sword fighter? Are you kidding me? Okay, forgetting for a moment the other three weapons, why is using a sword a bad thing? More fighters are melee fighters than sword fighters. Complaining about how they beat up their opponents seems trivial. Where were the complaints that Terry was just another guy who punched and kicked?

Not forgetting at all that they use other weapons, but more swords from Fire Emblem strikes me and many others as boring considering every single other FE rep has a sword. For a series that bases much of it's strategy on the weapon triangle, the lack of inspiration from that triangle for the most part is disappointing.

Fire Emblem? There we are! Though, this too isn't a fair metric. As has been pointed out, Fire Emblem changes protagonists almost every game. Most of the others don't. Like it or not, Fire Emblem has earned its keep and is in a unique position compared to most of the bigger franchises. Of course, this isn't helped by some individuals who insist that all of them except the Robins are just some variation on Marth when in actuality, even Roy is fairly different. Of course, that would require logical thought on their parts to realize.

The Robins were the biggest departure from the typical Fire Emblem Smash formula, and I appreciate that about them in gameplay. Unfortunately, the majority of the characters in base Ultimate from FE are essentially Marth. You've got base Marth, his original clone of Roy, the blatant clone that is Lucina, and another clone that is Chrom. I'm aware that Lucina had a reason for being the same and that Chrom has one move that's basically different from being a clone of a clone. You could say they're still glorified Marths though. They have differences, but to the casual observer, they're basically interchangeable in the same way people call Dragonball characters Goku. You've got Green Goku, Nerd Goku, Sword Goku, Bald Goku, Three-Eyed Goku, Mime Goku...so it's more like Marth, Red-haired Marth, Girl Marth, other Marth, etc.

Like I said, let's not pretend that being a mascot makes you iconic either. Trust me, I don't tend to gravitate to the new (though, I'm probably something of an odd case for my age group). Still, outside of dedicated fighting circles, I would have a hard time calling Terry iconic. He doesn't carry the same broad appeal as the icons. I mean, I'm not even sure he's the most well known character from his own series. Calling him on par with Ryu is a stretch alone.

Not the most well known character from his own series? Who would you argue is more well known in Fatal Fury/King of Fighters than Terry? He is functionally the Ryu of the Fatal Fury/King of Fighters universes, a man that travels the world looking for good fights. Albeit in Terry's defense, he has both more personality and more interesting relationships than Ryu has ever really had.

 

[Arthur97]

You have no idea how sad I am that people are only finding this now, if they even are. (I still stand by the idea that BW deserved a rep and XY either didn't or only did to a lesser extend)


As evidenced by the ton of content in his pack, Terry isn't just Terry (or just Fatal Fury for that matter), he's SNK as a whole here. And SNK is a name people have heard a lot when it comes to arcade cabinets (though I suppose out of those, people around here would be most familiar with Metal Slug, which, yes, is a SNK franchise as well). I would call Terry himself a mascot, but not iconic, but I would however call SNK iconic of video games as a whole (though moreso arcade cabinets, to be more precise), as a direct competitor to Capcom even.

Well, the fact they pretty much had to bring the whole company in (yet no Metal Slug spirits for some reason) should speak to Terry. It's also not like he's the first non-iconic third party either. Joker debate aside, Bayonetta is probably the worst offender. Two games in her whole franchise, the first of which did poorly and nearly doomed the whole franchise if Nintendo had not stepped in themselves. Though, this fact may be what really helps alleviate this along with the devs seemingly loyalty to the company.

But that is not really this pack. I will not argue DQ's place among the icons, and they do at least seem to rep the series to a decent degree. Banjo and Kazooie are legends among the Nintendo base, and really helped define 3D platformers along with Mario himself. Are they iconic overall? Eh, maybe not. They are in their genre to be certain, but I don't know if they can really be called gaming icons. I don't know, but they have the Nintendo merit.

The Robins were the biggest departure from the typical Fire Emblem Smash formula, and I appreciate that about them in gameplay. Unfortunately, the majority of the characters in base Ultimate from FE are essentially Marth. You've got base Marth, his original clone of Roy, the blatant clone that is Lucina, and another clone that is Chrom. I'm aware that Lucina had a reason for being the same and that Chrom has one move that's basically different from being a clone of a clone. You could say they're still glorified Marths though. They have differences, but to the casual observer, they're basically interchangeable in the same way people call Dragonball characters Goku. You've got Green Goku, Nerd Goku, Sword Goku, Bald Goku, Three-Eyed Goku, Mime Goku...so it's more like Marth, Red-haired Marth, Girl Marth, other Marth, etc.

Are you seriously calling Ike like Marth? The Corrins? Even Roy plays very differently from Marth and has several unique moves and/animations than Marth (jab, f-tilt, up-tilt, f-smash to name some). Even Lucina and Chrom are, ironically, two of the more unique echoes when it comes to gameplay (as Chrom also shared the even blade). The casual observer should step it up, but even then, there's little excuse for accusing Ike and the Corrins of being Marth derivatives, nor the Byleths that do finally use the whole weapon triangle. We get that, and people still complain about swords.

Not the most well known character from his own series? Who would you argue is more well known in Fatal Fury/King of Fighters than Terry? He is functionally the Ryu of the Fatal Fury/King of Fighters universes, a man that travels the world looking for good fights. Albeit in Terry's defense, he has both more personality and more interesting relationships than Ryu has ever really had.

Mai. Admittedly, there isn't much in the way of concretely proving either one, but she may very well do it.

Yes, he's the less popular Ryu of a less popular franchise that isn't as well known. Being "more interesting" doesn't change the fact he's not on Ryu's level and KoF just...isn't super popular casually.

 

[Pwnz0rz Man]

Are you seriously calling Ike like Marth? The Corrins? Even Roy plays very differently from Marth and has several unique moves and/animations than Marth (jab, f-tilt, up-tilt, f-smash to name some). Even Lucina and Chrom are, ironically, two of the more unique echoes when it comes to gameplay (as Chrom also shared the even blade). The casual observer should step it up, but even then, there's little excuse for accusing Ike and the Corrins of being Marth derivatives, nor the Byleths that do finally use the whole weapon triangle. We get that, and people still complain about swords.

Did I mention Ike or Corrin? You're jumping to conclusions that just aren't there. The only similarity they have to Marth is that they all have a counter down special and hair color in Ike's case. I mentioned the characters that I did and excluded the others for a reason that should be obvious.

Mai.

Yes, he's the less popular Ryu of a less popular franchise that isn't as well known. Being "more interesting" doesn't change the fact he's not on Ryu's level and KoF just...isn't super popular casually.

Mai is eye candy at best. Eye candy that prevented her from even having representation in Smash as a background character/spirit. You keep comparing him to Ryu when it's not an argument anybody is making. The only thing I said regarding Ryu is that for SNK he is functionally their Ryu.

 

[Cutie Gwen]

I was pointing out how bad of an argument that was, but, fine, you want to address the others? Fine.

Advertising? Probably one of the most legitimate ones, but can't that also be said for Greninja? Or even Hero? No one seems to cry advertisement there. Also, advertisement is not necessarily bad.

No History? Joker is extremely new with little history. Greninja, once again, was added from conceptual material. Bayonetta? Yes, had a history, but not a particularly long or successful one.

Sword fighter? Are you kidding me? Okay, forgetting for a moment the other three weapons, why is using a sword a bad thing? More fighters are melee fighters than sword fighters. Complaining about how they beat up their opponents seems trivial. Where were the complaints that Terry was just another guy who punched and kicked?

Fire Emblem? There we are! Though, this too isn't a fair metric. As has been pointed out, Fire Emblem changes protagonists almost every game. Most of the others don't. Like it or not, Fire Emblem has earned its keep and is in a unique position compared to most of the bigger franchises. Of course, this isn't helped by some individuals who insist that all of them except the Robins are just some variation on Marth when in actuality, even Roy is fairly different. Of course, that would require logical thought on their parts to realize.

Like I said, let's not pretend that being a mascot makes you iconic either. Trust me, I don't tend to gravitate to the new (though, I'm probably something of an odd case for my age group). Still, outside of dedicated fighting circles, I would have a hard time calling Terry iconic. He doesn't carry the same broad appeal as the icons. I mean, I'm not even sure he's the most well known character from his own series.

Dude Hero ABSOLUTELY got **** on and dismissed for being a 'shill pick'. Also people complain about swordies all the time, and while I agree the complaint is garbage as nobody seems to mind cartoony punchy dudes from platformers, let's not pretend this is a new complaint starting from Byleth

I know it isn't solely because of that (I'm not blind), but just look and see how many people across the internet bring that up. It seems to be factoring in there somewhere. Also, have you actually played the games, or are you just assuming they have little personality? I mean, yeah, the Byleths don't (I think that might actually be a plot point), but what of the others? Also, Joker is a thing in the same pack despite having variable personality syndrome meaning that outside his own game, he has little to no personality.

Uh, People know Ryu far, far more than Terry. Terry just wasn't that well known. Just look at all the people who had no idea who he was when he was announced. And, yes, he's a mascot for a company, but that company is SNK. It's not quite as bad as comparing your local mart's mascot to Mickey Mouse, but being a company mascot does not instantly make you iconic. Let's not pretend Terry is even close to Ryu, Mega Man, Sonic and the like. And especially not Mario (but that's a pretty high bar). How can he be iconic if so many people had no idea who he was?

The thing is, they make it very clear he's only repping P5, at which point, the iconic argument is hurt.

Again, have you ever played them? The Robins are terrible avatars. You know why? Because they have too much personality. They are defined characters essentially. More than that, they actually have somewhat different personalities from each other.

Also, since when did the Smash community care about personality? Especially when they love Joker so much.

More people knowing Terry means Terry isn't iconic? Well, more people know Mario than 95% of the Smash cast, therefore, they aren't iconic. If Banjo is iconic then Joker's absolutely iconic, seeing as Persona 5 sold about as much but has left such an impact on people that there's cosplays of the game's BATTLE MENU. I swear, Nintendo purists try to pretend anything that they didn't play on the SNES is obscure as hell, my casual as **** friends never play fighting games outside of Smash, Tekken and a smidge of Injustice but they thought "Oh **** Terry Bogard's gonna be in Smash? Hell yeah!", "Oh cool King of Fighters!" And "Yo I saw this guy on Death Battle". Just because they aren't Nintendo doesn't make them not iconic, they're certainly a hell of a lot more iconic than every original IP from the 3ds and Wii U era

Name any other game where people do this. The fact someone thought to do this and the fact that the menu is recognized as Persona 5 at a glance is proof it's iconic. "You never see it coming" memes were EVERYWHERE in 2017. Persona 5 is iconic, you just don't like it. It's ok to dislike it, I don't like Persona myself but don't kid yourself, Joker is more recognizable than a bunch of Smash characters

Well, the fact they pretty much had to bring the whole company in (yet no Metal Slug spirits for some reason) should speak to Terry. It's also not like he's the first non-iconic third party either. Joker debate aside, Bayonetta is probably the worst offender. Two games in her whole franchise, the first of which did poorly and nearly doomed the whole franchise if Nintendo had not stepped in themselves. Though, this fact may be what really helps alleviate this along with the devs seemingly loyalty to the company.

But that is not really this pack. I will not argue DQ's place among the icons, and they do at least seem to rep the series to a decent degree. Banjo and Kazooie are legends among the Nintendo base, and really helped define 3D platformers along with Mario himself. Are they iconic overall? Eh, maybe not. They are in their genre to be certain, but I don't know if they can really be called gaming icons. I don't know, but they have the Nintendo merit.


Are you seriously calling Ike like Marth? The Corrins? Even Roy plays very differently from Marth and has several unique moves and/animations than Marth (jab, f-tilt, up-tilt, f-smash to name some). Even Lucina and Chrom are, ironically, two of the more unique echoes when it comes to gameplay (as Chrom also shared the even blade). The casual observer should step it up, but even then, there's little excuse for accusing Ike and the Corrins of being Marth derivatives, nor the Byleths that do finally use the whole weapon triangle. We get that, and people still complain about swords.


Mai.

Yes, he's the less popular Ryu of a less popular franchise that isn't as well known. Being "more interesting" doesn't change the fact he's not on Ryu's level and KoF just...isn't super popular casually.

Wait so Banjo only being known and remembered among hardcore Nintendo fans counts as him being iconic enough yet Terry, one of the most iconic characters in fighting games from a franchise which helped heavily inspire Smash doesn't count? Nor does the darling JRPG of the 2010's that people refuse to shut up about count? Make up your mind, why does Banjo get hailed as a legend to a specific community but characters from more successful franchises not get that? Last I heard, Persona has sold about 11 million, which in terms of lifetime sales, outclasses Banjo's, especially as Persona 5 alone has sold more than half of Banjo's lifetime sales across 5 games.

 

[Arthur97]

Dude Hero ABSOLUTELY got **** on and dismissed for being a 'shill pick'. Also people complain about swordies all the time, and while I agree the complaint is garbage as nobody seems to mind cartoony punchy dudes from platformers, let's not pretend this is a new complaint starting from Byleth

More people knowing Terry means Terry isn't iconic? Well, more people know Mario than 95% of the Smash cast, therefore, they aren't iconic. If Banjo is iconic then Joker's absolutely iconic, seeing as Persona 5 sold about as much but has left such an impact on people that there's cosplays of the game's BATTLE MENU. I swear, Nintendo purists try to pretend anything that they didn't play on the SNES is obscure as hell, my casual as **** friends never play fighting games outside of Smash, Tekken and a smidge of Injustice but they thought "Oh **** Terry Bogard's gonna be in Smash? Hell yeah!", "Oh cool King of Fighters!" And "Yo I saw this guy on Death Battle". Just because they aren't Nintendo doesn't make them not iconic, they're certainly a hell of a lot more iconic than every original IP from the 3ds and Wii U era
View attachment 260206
Name any other game where people do this. The fact someone thought to do this and the fact that the menu is recognized as Persona 5 at a glance is proof it's iconic. "You never see it coming" memes were EVERYWHERE in 2017. Persona 5 is iconic, you just don't like it. It's ok to dislike it, I don't like Persona myself but don't kid yourself, Joker is more recognizable than a bunch of Smash characters

Wait so Banjo only being known and remembered among hardcore Nintendo fans counts as him being iconic enough yet Terry, one of the most iconic characters in fighting games from a franchise which helped heavily inspire Smash doesn't count? Nor does the darling JRPG of the 2010's that people refuse to shut up about count? Make up your mind, why does Banjo get hailed as a legend to a specific community but characters from more successful franchises not get that? Last I heard, Persona has sold about 11 million, which in terms of lifetime sales, outclasses Banjo's, especially as Persona 5 alone has sold more than half of Banjo's lifetime sales across 5 games.

No, I said Terry was known less.

Being popular doens't make you iconic. I never questioned it was popular, but it's too new to really call Joker himself iconic.

Banjo and Kazooie are Nintendo related, and this is a Nintendo game.

Terry is not reallye related to Nintendo, nor is he a gaming icon. he's a fighting game icon.

 

[Cutie Gwen]

No, I said Terry was known less.

Being popular doens't make you iconic. I never questioned it was popular, but it's too new to really call Joker himself iconic.

Banjo and Kazooie are Nintendo related, and this is a Nintendo game.

Terry is not reallye related to Nintendo, nor is he a gaming icon. he's a fighting game icon.

You post says "being a mascot doesn't make you iconic" and you were arguing about Terry, so yes, you DID say Terry wasn't iconic.

Again, the battle menu got a cosplay, how many UIs in gaming can say that? People who don't usually play JRPGs keep comparing all of them to Persona 5, it is an iconic game.

Sakurai, the man behind the roster, has said console wars don't matter at all and we have plenty of non Nintendo characters appear. If that 'Nintendo significance' was as important as you thought it was, we wouldn't have gotten Snake, Cloud or Joker yet here we are. Having 'Nintendo history' doesn't mean anything anymore and it started mattering less and less since Brawl. Banjo doesn't get to be a magical exception which automatically makes him iconic despite actually being less iconic just because you played him on the N64

So he's a gaming icon. Gotcha

 

[Pwnz0rz Man]

Terry is not really related to Nintendo, nor is he a gaming icon. he's a fighting game icon.

What's that word you used that came after fighting? I can't quite put my finger on it...it's on the tip of my tongue...

 

[meleebrawler]

I know that it was said the Byleth controversy would quickly blow over, but I didn't think it would happen so fast as to completely derail this thread.

Not that I'm complaining.

 

[KayaMarley]

At this point it doesn't really matter what you think of Byleth being in Smash because that character gameplay-wise is hot trash. Her moves are slow, inconsistent, and/or don't cover enough surface area to protect her. On top of that many of her attacks are super punishable.

I disagree completely, she's actually kinda broken, especially her recovery. Sure she can be punished pretty easily, but if you have good intuition and reaction speed it isnt really a problem. I recommend playing her more till you get her down.

I really don't like the mentality that not being third party qualifies as disappointing. Yeah, it's subjective, but it still rubs me the wrong way.

Also, how is Terry iconic? Maybe in dedicated fighting game circuits, but gaming as a whole? Fewer people may have actively wanted Terry than wanted the Byleths.

For that matter, I'd question Joker's status as iconic.

If you really don't see how these characters are icons within gaming as a whole, then I honestly have to question your knowledge as a gamer, not to be rude. King of Fighters, while retro, was huge for fighting games, and since fighting games are huge within the gaming industry (this should be obvious, christ) then that means the lead character from that game is going to be iconic. Joker is also an icon not because of who he is but because of what he represents. Persona has been huge for years, and the series as a whole has done extremely well with the inclusion of 5 (hence Joker). so yeah, your kinda wrong on this one.

 

[Pwnz0rz Man]

I disagree completely, she's actually kinda broken, especially her recovery. Sure she can be punished pretty easily, but if you have good intuition and reaction speed it isnt really a problem. I recommend playing her more till you get her down.

It's a tether, I'm not sure if tether recovery and broken really go hand in hand. It's more threatening when someone comes off stage at you, but her aerial mobility is crap and her jump is crap. I think recovery wise, she's got it about as bad or worse than the Belmonts.

 

[KayaMarley]

It's a tether, I'm not sure if tether recovery and broken really go hand in hand. It's more threatening when someone comes off stage at you, but her aerial mobility is crap and her jump is crap. I think recovery wise, she's got it about as bad or worse than the Belmonts.

I'm sorry but im dying rn. how is her recovery anywhere near as bad as simons? and i disagree entirely with her jump being bad. the only real downsides are her speed and her side air lacking verticality, but the range is so good that it makes up for it. I also wish her nair was a little larger of a radius but it works as is. you sure your not just salty over her being added in? not trying to write you off but this statement about her recovery is making me seriously wonder.. It's literally joker's but better, and joker has one of the best recoveries in the game, so im a little confused as to how exactly this compares to one of the worst. smh.

 

[Pwnz0rz Man]

I'm sorry but im dying rn. how is her recovery anywhere near as bad as simons? and i disagree entirely with her jump being bad. the only real downsides are her speed and her side air lacking verticality, but the range is so good that it makes up for it. I also wish her nair was a little larger of a radius but it works as is. you sure your not just salty over her being added in? not trying to write you off but this statement about her recovery is making me seriously wonder.. It's literally joker's but better, and joker has one of the best recoveries in the game, so im a little confused as to how exactly this compares to one of the worst. smh.

Her disadvantage state is pretty bad from everything I've seen so far and her recovery feels pretty one dimensional on top of that as most tethers do. It's range is impressive, but range is not everything. I don't feel she has anywhere near the capacity for mixups in recovery Joker does (since he was the example you cited). Recovery is not only in coming back to the ledge, but returning to neutral after being sent up into the air safely. Joker has more options at his disposal to deal with pesky characters underneath you, a situation I don't think she can deal with well at all.

 

[KayaMarley]

Her disadvantage state is pretty bad from everything I've seen so far and her recovery feels pretty one dimensional on top of that as most tethers do. It's range is impressive, but range is not everything. I don't feel she has anywhere near the capacity for mixups in recovery Joker does (since he was the example you cited). Recovery is not only in coming back to the ledge, but returning to neutral after being sent up into the air safely. Joker has more options at his disposal to deal with pesky characters underneath you, a situation I don't think she can deal with well at all.

lol i know how recoveries work. tethers are great, and she actually has more potential due to the range of her attacks, being able to grapple and kick off opponents, walls and grapple the ledge. It's by far the easiest character to recover with in the game. as for coming down from above, as long as your timing is right, it isnt too difficult, it can be hard though depending on the character, but not awful by any means.

 

[Pwnz0rz Man]

lol i know how recoveries work. tethers are great, and she actually has more potential due to the range of her attacks, being able to grapple and kick off opponents, walls and grapple the ledge. It's by far the easiest character to recover with in the game. as for coming down from above, as long as your timing is right, it isnt too difficult, it can be hard though depending on the character, but not awful by any means.

Easiest to recover with in the whole game? Are you forgetting about a certain character's guaranteed recovery skill? It's not always available, but in terms of ease, Hero's Zoom takes that title. Easiest tether? Maybe.

As long as your timing is right, nothing is difficult. I feel that her overall lack of speed will make her pretty easy to deal with once she's in the air and susceptible to combos/reads and her weight will only lead to aiding in those kills.

 

[Lacrimosa]

Easiest to recover with in the whole game? Are you forgetting about a certain character's guaranteed recovery skill? It's not always available, but in terms of ease, Hero's Zoom takes that title. Easiest tether? Maybe.

As long as your timing is right, nothing is difficult. I feel that her overall lack of speed will make her pretty easy to deal with once she's in the air and susceptible to combos/reads and her weight will only lead to aiding in those kills.

In term of actual recovery that isn't RNG dependant, you can give the title to , then , then and . GnW has so much versatility, is super fast and has a hitbox. Teleport are also kinda broken in this game. Zelda's still has a hitbox but they have a lot of mix-up so you don't get 2-framed and imo it's really easy to do. (This isn't about best recovery because otherwise would be there but even Esam has sometimes issues with this move)

Thing with Byleth is that you may not want to go off-stage against her at any time. She seems to have some mobility issues, so I assume she can get pinned onto the ledge quite easily by most characters. Recovering may not be the problem but getting off the ledge could very well be a problem.

 

[Cutie Gwen]

I know that it was said the Byleth controversy would quickly blow over, but I didn't think it would happen so fast as to completely derail this thread.

Not that I'm complaining.

Almost like this is the same thing we saw as when we got Plant. Or Bayonetta. Or when Smash 4 leaked. Or when Brawl leaked

 

[KayaMarley]

Easiest to recover with in the whole game? Are you forgetting about a certain character's guaranteed recovery skill? It's not always available, but in terms of ease, Hero's Zoom takes that title. Easiest tether? Maybe.

As long as your timing is right, nothing is difficult. I feel that her overall lack of speed will make her pretty easy to deal with once she's in the air and susceptible to combos/reads and her weight will only lead to aiding in those kills.

lmao thats an rng ability you don't have control over when it comes out, not an Up B recovery. what a dumb comparison. yes Byleth's is by far the easiest recovery in the game. you can literally recover from just about anywhere off stage, and the amount of attacks, most with large AOE that you can use on your way back makes it so easy. Be honest, you havent even played the character, or are just bad with her, though i don't know how you could be bad at her recovery, it's literally easy mode. also that's a pretty bad argument for why byleth is trash, saying that "as long as timing is right." to me, that just sounds like you don't actually have any solid reason as to why she's bad. The only actual thing you have said is about her having trouble in the air, which i already stated, i mean they had to nerf her somehow. it's a big flaw, but it doesn't make the character bad. maybe stop getting hit so much? don't know what to tell you on that one. this is a character that combo's really well, and can get kills at 20% - 45% easy. and she isn't ganondorf slow with her attacks, which is a huge plus. This character is solid af no matter how you look at it. now for the obligatory "get gud." lmao

 

[Pwnz0rz Man]

lmao thats an rng ability you don't have control over when it comes out, not an Up B recovery. what a dumb comparison. yes Byleth's is by far the easiest recovery in the game. you can literally recover from just about anywhere off stage, and the amount of attacks, most with large AOE that you can use on your way back makes it so easy. Be honest, you havent even played the character, or are just bad with her, though i don't know how you could be bad at her recovery, it's literally easy mode. also that's a pretty bad argument for why byleth is trash, saying that "as long as timing is right." to me, that just sounds like you don't actually have any solid reason as to why she's bad. The only actual thing you have said is about her having trouble in the air, which i already stated, i mean they had to nerf her somehow. it's a big flaw, but it doesn't make the character bad. maybe stop getting hit so much? don't know what to tell you on that one. this is a character that combo's really well, and can get kills at 20% - 45% easy. and she isn't ganondorf slow with her attacks, which is a huge plus. This character is solid af no matter how you look at it. now for the obligatory "get gud." lmao

You understand the difference between reliability and ease, right? By far, Zoom is the easiest recovery in the game as it's literally a guaranteed recovery from anywhere except directly under the stage. I said it wasn't always available, as it's an RNG, but it is the easiest when it's available.

Lacrimosa mentioned even more recoveries easier than Byleth's, including Mr. Game and Watch's Fire Escape, Zelda, Mewtwo, Palutena's teleports. Also mentioned was Pikachu's quick attack which perhaps not easier, is far more powerful as a pure recovery tactic as well as a way more useful tool on stage.

I think you're too personally invested in the character, since you're making silly arguments of "be honest, you're bad, or you never used her." I referenced your "timing is right" because it's a ridiculous standard. If your timing is literally right, you can succeed 99.9% of the time in most actions Smash wise. It's a silly thing to argue in my opinion. I didn't say the character was bad, but that I don't think their recovery is that great and their disadvantage state is pretty bad. Do you deny that?

 

[MaddaD]

lmao thats an rng ability you don't have control over when it comes out, not an Up B recovery. what a dumb comparison.

The fact that it's RNG has nothing to do with being the best recovery ability in the entire game. It purely situational but a strong pick if you desperately need it.

I'd imagine most people would say a move that lets you recover almost instantly from anywhere off stage is better than a tether.

yes Byleth's is by far the easiest recovery in the game. you can literally recover from just about anywhere off stage, and the amount of attacks, most with large AOE that you can use on your way back makes it so easy.

That's a nice tether you got there. It'd be a shame if you ran into a hitbox. A real damn shame.
also lol horizontal recovery

Be honest, you havent even played the character, or are just bad with her, though i don't know how you could be bad at her recovery, it's literally easy mode.

Click Me!

this is a character that combo's really well, and can get kills at 20% - 45% easy. and she isn't ganondorf slow with her attacks, which is a huge plus. This character is solid af no matter how you look at it.

Most of Byleth's KO worthy attacks don't even start KO'ing effectively until post 60% or so, unless you land a Tipper / Down-B at the ledge somehow.
Byleth also is easily punishable on the ground for most of their attacks having tremendous end lag, along with having a bad neutral game if she gets launched.

A pretty good kit overall, but certainly not as amazing as you believe.

 

[channel_KYX]

That's a nice tether you got there. It'd be a shame if you ran into a hitbox. A real damn shame.

To be fair, it's pretty hard to challenge By's recovery. There is always the real risk you get spiked by up-b aka the regular recovery attempt. Plus, the range is enormous, If they hang all the way down at almost the blast zone, you won't be able to contest them.
Maybe I need to git gud, but I didn't find a reliable way to annoy them yet.

 

[Woosmeister]

Normal people have moved on, and whether they like playing Byleth or not, instead of talking about a "divided" community lol

 

[Pwnz0rz Man]

Normal people have moved on, and whether they like playing Byleth or not, instead of talking about a "divided" community lol

Ain't nothing "normal" about the Smash community. Whatchu talkin bout?

 

[KayaMarley]

You understand the difference between reliability and ease, right? By far, Zoom is the easiest recovery in the game as it's literally a guaranteed recovery from anywhere except directly under the stage. I said it wasn't always available, as it's an RNG, but it is the easiest when it's available.

Lacrimosa mentioned even more recoveries easier than Byleth's, including Mr. Game and Watch's Fire Escape, Zelda, Mewtwo, Palutena's teleports. Also mentioned was Pikachu's quick attack which perhaps not easier, is far more powerful as a pure recovery tactic as well as a way more useful tool on stage.

I think you're too personally invested in the character, since you're making silly arguments of "be honest, you're bad, or you never used her." I referenced your "timing is right" because it's a ridiculous standard. If your timing is literally right, you can succeed 99.9% of the time in most actions Smash wise. It's a silly thing to argue in my opinion. I didn't say the character was bad, but that I don't think their recovery is that great and their disadvantage state is pretty bad. Do you deny that?

Yeah i kinda disagree with a lot of that. you cant use zoom as an argument at all for this because it's rng. you literally talk about reliability and then say, but the RNG is fine as an example. you try to call me out on my wording yet you cant even follow your own. regardless, I do feel that Byleth's recovery is much easier to use, and i really dont see how it isnt. its reliable 100% of the time, reaches from pretty much anywhere, can grapple the stage for a kick up into another one in case you miss, it's probably the most reliable recovery in the game. your arguments don't work because they are literally wrong. and no it's not a matter of being attached lol, i havent ever even played any fire emblem game before so chill, I'm simply pointing out that if you actually think it's as bad or even worse than simon's, then you clearly havent played her, as that by fact is untrue. your quick to hide behind things like wording but you can't even see the illogical exaggerations your using. And naw, searching through a list that may or may not have zoom while falling, most likely out of range for your actually recovery, with the only way to exit being a stall on your recovery, is NOT reliable or ease, it's actually the exact opposite. the only one making a silly argument is you. So yeah I feel you just are either salty she's in, are bad with her and can't wrap your head around her recovery (or maybe just tethers in general by the sound of it), or you just don't actually know what your talking about. I know that sounds like a cop out way to end an argument, but there really isn't much else to argue. it clearly isn't as bad as you think it is, and it's by act one of the better recoveries in the game. i'm not saying it doesn't have it's flaws, the game is literally designed in a way where every thing has a flaw so nothing is impossible to prevent, but that doesn't mean it's bad. I'm surprised i even have to say that.

The fact that it's RNG has nothing to do with being the best recovery ability in the entire game. It purely situational but a strong pick if you desperately need it.

I'd imagine most people would say a move that lets you recover almost instantly from anywhere off stage is better than a tether.


That's a nice tether you got there. It'd be a shame if you ran into a hitbox. A real damn shame.
also lol horizontal recovery


Click Me!


Most of Byleth's KO worthy attacks don't even start KO'ing effectively until post 60% or so, unless you land a Tipper / Down-B at the ledge somehow.
Byleth also is easily punishable on the ground for most of their attacks having tremendous end lag, along with having a bad neutral game if she gets launched.

A pretty good kit overall, but certainly not as amazing as you believe.

It isn't good if you can't reliably use it, since thats the point we were arguing. it also can screw you really badly if you can't get it, so no id say it's awful. like we were both saying, anythings good if you use it right.

Can't get hit if you instantly press the button after the tether connects. it's when you wait that your in trouble. try it sometime. and what do you mean by horizontal recovery? its about as vertical as it gets.

within the context of what he was saying, yeah i'd assume he's never played her or is just bad at the game. it wasnt to be condescending, it was an actual question.

you definitely can KO pretty easily at 40%, without being near the edge. you CAN get it at 25%, but that's kinda hard, which is why i gave the range i did. but yes, most moves are basically guaranteed a kill at 60% or higher, which is still insane. nah she's as good as I think she is, and considering how much everyone hates FE in smash, it's not surprising this is a pointless argument, but still, facts are facts. and since the other guy said something about it too, I feel it's necessary to mention that I have never played a fire emblem game in my life.

 

[Pwnz0rz Man]

Yeah i kinda disagree with a lot of that. you cant use zoom as an argument at all for this because it's rng. you literally talk about reliability and then say, but the RNG is fine as an example. you try to call me out on my wording yet you cant even follow your own. regardless, I do feel that Byleth's recovery is much easier to use, and i really dont see how it isnt. its reliable 100% of the time, reaches from pretty much anywhere, can grapple the stage for a kick up into another one in case you miss, it's probably the most reliable recovery in the game.

You lost me at the first part. Reading comprehension, do you have it? Reliably is not the same as ease. The ease of Zoom cannot be understated as it...ahem LITERALLY GETS YOU BACK ON THE STAGE FROM ANYWHERE EXCEPT DIRECTLY UNDER THE STAGE. I don't think you understand my arguments enough to even argue against them, and they're not complicated ideas.

Allow me to try to chisel this into your mind.

Reliability is being able to count on something working the majority of the time, ease is the simplicity of the action. Zoom is not reliable, however when it is available, it is absolutely the easiest way to recover (that's to say nothing of the impending heart attack from trying to quickly tap the button so you don't fall to your death). It's one of the very few ways you don't have to interact with your opponent to get back onto the stage, and that lack of necessary interaction makes it so simple a caveman could do it, thus EASE.

your arguments don't work because they are literally wrong. and no it's not a matter of being attached lol, i havent ever even played any fire emblem game before so chill

I didn't say you did, I said you seem to be too personally attached to this character as you're coming at arguing in the way a hysteric parent would if you said something negatively about their child.

I'm simply pointing out that if you actually think it's as bad or even worse than simon's,

If that were your argument, you may have had a point. I was probably a tad hasty in saying that, it's better than Simon's, but I'm still not of the opinion her recovery is all that great as tethers are generally not very good.

then you clearly havent played her, as that by fact is untrue. your quick to hide behind things like wording but you can't even see the illogical exaggerations your using. And naw, searching through a list that may or may not have zoom while falling, most likely out of range for your actually recovery, with the only way to exit being a stall on your recovery, is NOT reliable or ease, it's actually the exact opposite. the only one making a silly argument is you.

A situation being stressful does not negate the ease of the action. Like trying to open your car with a key while you're being chased by someone, the action of unlocking the car is not made more difficult, you're just more stressed out by the situation so you make mistakes in your hurry.

So yeah I feel you just are either salty she's in, are bad with her and can't wrap your head around her recovery (or maybe just tethers in general by the sound of it), or you just don't actually know what your talking about.

What's to wrap my head around? Tethers are one dimensional recoveries that set you into a specific trajectory. The only thing unique about hers is that she can use it to wall jump, which I don't see getting used that often except in counterpick stages with walls.

I know that sounds like a cop out way to end an argument, but there really isn't much else to argue. it clearly isn't as bad as you think it is, and it's by act one of the better recoveries in the game. i'm not saying it doesn't have it's flaws, the game is literally designed in a way where every thing has a flaw so nothing is impossible to prevent, but that doesn't mean it's bad. I'm surprised i even have to say that.

The problem with your argument is that you have no real argument. At no point have you said anything more than "you must be bad because it's not bad, it's good, your wrong." That isn't an argument, it's an assertion. I'm completely open to the idea that I could be wrong, but you haven't presented anything except contradiction. Also, not entirely related, but it might do you some good, please learn to structure your paragraphs if you're going to argue with people on forums. Sifting through what you wrote is literally giving me a headache.

 

[MaddaD]

To be fair, it's pretty hard to challenge By's recovery. There is always the real risk you get spiked by up-b aka the regular recovery attempt. Plus, the range is enormous, If they hang all the way down at almost the blast zone, you won't be able to contest them.

It really depends on the situation, but it's normally fairly obvious what Byleth will do when they're trying to get back on the stage. The angle they recover at is odd, but predictable once you get to know it. Normally multihit moves (like Byleth Nair, ironically) make it pretty easy to knock her off when recovering from tether

It isn't good if you can't reliably use it, since thats the point we were arguing. it also can screw you really badly if you can't get it, so no id say it's awful. like we were both saying, anythings good if you use it right.

I understood the point, it's just that Pwn's point was that Zoom outclasses Byleth's recovery IF YOU CAN GET IT. And if you're pressing Down B when Hero is at ledge level off screen, you better have just forgotten that Up-Special is a move that exists.

Most tethers are seen as pretty lackluster recovery options by many for the reason below v

Can't get hit if you instantly press the button after the tether connects. it's when you wait that your in trouble. try it sometime. and what do you mean by horizontal recovery? its about as vertical as it gets.

You can get knocked out of your tether no matter how fast you mash the button, since i-frames don't come out until you touch the ledge physically. Most players are either expecting you to do just that, or will challenge it outright depending on the match up.

what do you mean by horizontal recovery? its about as vertical as it gets.

lol byleth horizontal recovery

Spoiler: Explanation

The move's main weakness. That it's vertical recovery is wild, but horizontally is lackluster unless you're close to the stage ledge.

within the context of what he was saying, yeah i'd assume he's never played her or is just bad at the game. it wasnt to be condescending, it was an actual question.

You sure, boss?
Are you REALLY sure?
Considering the post replies, this is sus

nah she's as good as I think she is, and considering how much everyone hates FE in smash, it's not surprising this is a pointless argument, but still, facts are facts.

If the argument was pointless, then why are you even bothering to respond? The majority of your responses to both of us is literally
"here's my point"
"I don't agree, here's why"
"why don't you actually play the character?"

It's also incredibly cute how you're insinuating that because we don't agree that we hate FE characters. Really gets that brain bogglin'. Gets that noggin joggin'.

facts are facts.

We'll let you know when you find one.