"We can't get one Champion without getting all four."
I had to put this one first because it's the one I see the most. Truth be told, this is an argument I still don't quite understand. No one ever said the Champions were a package deal, yet everyone acts like these guys are four inseparable characters who can't exist without each other. Starter Pokemon have the same amount of importance, but did that stop Sakurai from cleaving Charizard from Squirtle and Ivysaur? Did Sakurai feel bad for picking Greninja and not Delphox? Obviously not. He picked the Pokemon that he felt like would be the best choice to represent the series. The Champions should be no different.
However, it seems like some people are convinced that the Pokemon situation is completely different, so allow me to approach this from a second perspective.
A popular belief is that the Champions would be better fit as Assist Trophies or as part of a new moveset for Link/Zelda. Now if you're someone who believes that adding a single Champion on the roster would be unfair, let me ask you this. Can you say with 100% absolute, concrete, unwavering confidence that if the Champions were to become Assist Trophies or part of a moveset,
all four Champions would be used in the same capacity? That means all four Champions would become Assist Trophies, and all four Champions would be used in Link or Zelda's new moveset. If you can't confidently say this, then how is this any different than having one or two Champions on the roster? If your reasoning behind not thinking a Champion should be on the roster is because it wouldn't be fair, then how would making Mipha be the only Assist Trophy or Revali's Gale be the only Champion ability in Link's new moveset be any better? The answer is, it's not.
The Champions are susceptible to the same problem, regardless of how you integrate them in Smash.
"There are dozens of more memorable Zelda characters Sakurai could add, so why would he choose Mipha or any of the other Champions?"
I don't entirely disagree with this statement. Mipha's time in the spotlight was rather brief compared to other Zelda characters, and I think there are plenty of more memorable Zelda characters out there. However, this is why I don't think the argument works. What characters are you comparing Mipha to? Probably Skull Kid, Impa, Midna, and Tingle, right? Here's the thing -
these guys have existed anywhere from 10 to 20 years. How old is Mipha? Barely even a year old. Obviously Mipha can't compete with the likes of these guys. They've had years and years to appear in games, merch, and other forms of media, whereas Mipha is currently relying entirely on the promotion from BotW. She might not seem iconic now, but that doesn't mean she lacks the potential to be iconic in the future.
To put it simply, Mipha is young. She has plenty of time to grow and build herself an image before we can actually say she isn't iconic or popular enough.
"(Insert Zelda character here) is WAY more unique than Mipha!"
This is entirely subjective. I've seen people find ways to incorporate BotW elements into Impa's moveset and make her sound like one of the most unique additions we could ever get. But when it comes to Mipha, an actual character from BotW? It's like their creativity hits a brick wall. "What could she do besides stabbing people with her weird shiny fork?"
Just because you think a character would or wouldn't be unique doesn't mean they'll be reflected that way in Smash. Need proof? Look at Ganondorf. Then look at Ice Climbers.
The only thing that matters here is Sakurai himself. It's who would HE see potential in, not who WE would see potential in. This goes back to my point about Mipha never being able to be considered for Smash before. A lot of people say things like, "Impa would be Sakurai's first choice for the next Zelda rep because she's recurring and has the most to offer." That may or may not be true, but keep in mind that this would be Impa's fourth opportunity to get in Smash. If Impa really is the most obvious choice to Sakurai, why hasn't he added her yet? This certainly isn't the best time he could've added her, and the fact that she's been around for so long and still hasn't become playable tells me that Sakurai has some hesitations with adding her. Since we know for a fact that Sakurai has never been able to reject Mipha, there's currently nothing to indicate that he's either against the character or doesn't see potential in her. Of course, that also means that there's nothing to indicate that he's in favor of the character either, but it's still a good position to be in regardless.
"Who cares if BotW was popular? Not every Zelda game needs to be represented on the roster."
Very true. Not every Zelda game needs to be represented on the roster. And at this point, that's been the case for the past 15 years. Not counting designs, Wind Waker (2002) was the last game to get a character on the roster.
This is something I've seen a lot of people say whenever they see someone supporting a Champion. It's not so much about thinking a successful game like BotW needs to get represented on the roster as much as it is thinking that BotW has the best shot of getting a newcomer compared to the other Zelda games. Even though I like Mipha as a character and think she'd be a great addition, I also think she has a better shot than a majority of the Zelda cast. There's nothing wrong with supporting a character because you think they'd be likely. As a matter of fact, most of the Gen VII Pokemon we want in Smash got as much support as they did just because we all think they're likely to be added. If likeliness wasn't something we took into consideration when we support characters, then maybe we'd all still be clamoring for Zoroark and Sceptile.
If this is the argument you're using, then your main problem is likely being able to see the Champions as unique or playable characters, rather than simply just thinking BotW doesn't need a character. For that, I'd recommend looking at some movesets for the Champions and listen to what some of the supporters have to say. See if your opinion changed any after that.
"There are four Champions in BotW. What makes Mipha more likely than them?"
Now this is one argument I struggle with. All four Champions have equal importance. All four Champions have moveset potential. All four Champions have gotten equal promotion. The only thing Mipha has that separates herself from the rest is her popularity, and unfortunately, there likely wasn't enough time for that to be a factor unless she was added later in development. Honestly, Sakurai could get away with adding any of the four Champions (although some will probably be met with a warmer welcome than others
).
That being said, I can still explain why I would think Mipha would be more likely than the other three.
First off, the iconicness of the Zora race. Zoras have been in the LoZ series since the very first game, and they've continued to make appearances since then. They've appeared in plenty of popular Zelda games, such as Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask, Wind Waker, Twilight Princess, A Link Between Worlds, and of course, Breath of the Wild. Their history easily trumps the likes of the Gerudo and (especially) the Rito, and the only Champion race that has a longer, broader history than the Zora is the Gorons. Needless to say, the Zora species are a staple of the Zelda series, and I think that's something that gives Mipha an advantage over some of the other Champions.
Second, there's Eiji Aonuma himself. The Zora are one of his, if not his most, favorite races in the Zelda series. An example of this can be seen in a recent interview by Nintendo UK. When asked if he would rather be a
Zora, a
Goron, or a Deku Scrub, Aonuma responded by smiling and holding up a Zora mask to his face (at the very least, this hints to us that Aonuma would likely prefer Mipha over Daruk). Another example of this can be found in a interview following BotW's second DLC pack. In this interview, Aonuma is directly asked who his favorite Champion was. His answer?
Mipha (although he claims it might have previously been Urbosa). If Sakurai was having a difficult time choosing which Champion to add in Smash, I have no doubt that Aonuma would be a strong advocate for Mipha, should he have any involvement in Sakurai's decision.
My third and last point, the Zora themselves and how they were treated in BotW. This part is entirely subjective and shouldn't be taken as a solid argument, but I think it's still worth mentioning, especially if you've played BotW before. When players get to the part of BotW where Link is told by Impa that he needs to free the Divine Beasts, the one that most happen to free first is Vah Ruta. This almost seems intentional, as the area Link needs to find to begin the Zora arc (Lanayru Wetlands and Lanayru Tower) is extremely close to Kakarico Village and Hateno Village (the places Link is told to go to after completing the first area of the game). There's also plenty of Zora NPCs sprinkled around the nearby area, automatically telling you exactly where to go when you walk near them, something that wasn't done with the other three arcs. While there's nothing to verify it, I think the Zora were intended to be the first of the four races players find when playing BotW. If that's truly the case, this gives Mipha a slight edge over the other three, as the Zora arc would supposed to have intended to be the player's first impression of freeing the Champions and the Divine Beasts. Then there's also the amount of effort put into the Zora arc. A lot of people agree that the Zora arc is the best of the four arcs, and that's because they feel like the other arcs (particularly the Rito and the Gorons) didn't feel as special or long as the Zora's. If the development team spent extra time on fleshing out the Zora arc, that might indicate that (1) they really liked that part of the game and wanted to perfect it as much as they could, or (2) that was the first area they completed, thereby giving them the more time to add on to it.
"Mipha is just another one-shot character. She'll be no different than the rest."
Another good point. If Skull Kid, Midna, and Ghirahim couldn't make it in, why is Mipha different? Truth is, we might never understand why those guys never got in Smash. They had a lot of potential, yet failed to be anything more than an Assist Trophy. For a lot of people, Mipha is destined to follow that same path. While I can't give you a solid explanation on why the other one-shots were rejected, I can at least tell you why I think Mipha's situation differs from theirs.
Let's start with Skull Kid and Melee. Skull Kid was born at a rather unfortunate time to be considered for Smash. Before Melee came to be, Link was the only character on the roster. There were plenty of options to choose from, and adding Skull Kid was probably less of a priority than adding the main characters, Zelda and Ganondorf. By the time Brawl rolled around, it may have been too late for him. That's likely what held him back - a combination of bad timing and too much competition from other newcomers. Mipha doesn't really have this problem. Timing is definitely in her favor, and while she does have some stiff competition, none of them are anywhere close to being as important to the series as Zelda and Ganondorf. Yeah, there are some recurring choices that make more sense than Mipha (Impa, Tingle), but at the same time, they aren't exactly big enough to feel like the roster is incomplete without them.
Next is Midna and Brawl. I still don't quite understand why we didn't get this character. Timing was great, she fit the new TP theme, had a large role in her game, and she would've made a great addition to the roster. Instead, all we got in Brawl was a toony replacement for Young Link. The only explanation I can come up with here is that Sakurai may have felt like the Zelda series needed a break after getting four new characters in Melee (and this would help explain why Mario didn't get any true newcomers either). If that's the case, then Mipha definitely doesn't have the same problem as Midna. We've had a drought of Zelda newcomers for two games now, and fans are starting to feel as if Zelda is being neglected on the roster. Mipha won't be rejected because of over-saturation on the roster.
Last is Ghirahim and Smash 4. Honestly, this one shouldn't have come off as surprising. Even if timing was great, Skyward Sword was considered to be a subpar Zelda game. This game had mediocre sales, had mixed reception from fans, and was considered to be the worst 3D Zelda game in quite some time. Even if Zelda was due for another character, SS was definitely not the game Sakurai would've felt obligated to give a character to. Needless to say, BotW is the polar opposite of SS. Mipha will definitely not be rejected because Sakurai didn't feel like her game deserved a character, and you can quote me on that anytime you'd like.
Overall, I think Mipha lacks most of the things that might have held back the other one-shots. That's not to say Mipha doesn't have her own problems, because she definitely does. She has three other equally important counterparts who could easily steal that spot away from her. Still, there's not much reason to think history will repeat itself, or at least not in the same way it did with the other one-shots. If Mipha gets rejected, it'll likely be for a different reason than the others.
"Isn't it possible for Sakurai to just skip the Zelda series and not add anyone?"
This is the last argument I wanted to address. Short answer - yes, it is certainly possible. Sakurai could feel like there aren't any relevant Zelda characters worth adding and once again not give us anything.
However, I don't really see the point in doing so. Even if we can't agree on who should get added, there's a unified voice requesting more Zelda characters. What reason is there for Sakurai to wait even longer? Should he ask Aonuma to incorporate Impa into the next Zelda game so she's extremely relevant again by the time the
next Smash game rolls around? Should he wait until we get a new Zelda game with one-shot characters slightly more important to the story than the Champions? If Sakurai treats every Smash game like it's his last, why would he hold off on adding another Zelda rep, especially after a game as successful as BotW?
Despite popular opinion, I believe our best shot at getting a Zelda newcomer is now, because if something like BotW can't get us a newcomer, we sure as heck won't be getting anything from a future Zelda game.
