So because games don't sell as well as a nintendo all star mixup, they are unsuccessful? That's like saying that wii sports is more popular than Kart.
Not a good example. Both Mario kart and Wii Sports are very successful. They both got it right. Sonic and Sega All Star Racing is an example of getting it wrong (which, funny enough, was toted around as having "No Blue Shell").
The hard concept for people to get is "high selling games are right, bad selling are wrong." This is 99% of the time because they are emotionally invested. Kuma is the same way.
To believe what I'm saying is to believe that other fighting games should mimic Smash, not the other way around. Thus, Kuma tries to deny it the best he can, even going as far as to never respond to me again.
I want you to think about this:
As a Smash player, would top players like MewtwoKing and Ally look towards weak players?
Would Starcraft players like Boxer or Idra look at Bronze league players for advice?
Would Diago look at noobie Street Fighter players to get better?
Would a superbowl winning coach look at the playbook of a losing team (like the Tampa Bay Bucs?)
Would a wealthy and popular rock band like Avenge Sevenfold or Paramore (to throw out some names) look towards garage bands for help?
Would a teacher look to a student to learn more about the subject he teaches?
All of these would be no. It is only logically that the bottom look towards the top.
This is because the bottom people want to become like those at the top. The top are where they are and happy to stay there.
Despite what Kuma wants to think, Smash Brothers is at the top. The reason we have video games is they make money. Sales are what make more games. Street Fighter went dark for 10 years because its sales were too low.
Now let's look below.
I don't know if you bothered to read from Kuma's gameplay list, but I see nothing wrong with adding combo capability and a few cancels here and there to make one's efforts more rewarding.
Let's go back to what we mentioned earlier. Smash is the winner. If I need to prove it, look at sales. You'll notice Brawl is the best selling fighting game ever. Melee is second. Street Fighter 2 is 3rd, with Smash 64 close behind it. It is clearly the winner.
We can also say this: Smash did something right where the others have not. What it is? We can also tell that most of these "more combos, more competitiveness," comes from other fighting games (so much so that Kuma rips ideas from other games). Sakurai has mentioned on numerous occasions that Smash was made as a response to other hardcore fighting games. He's mentioned he made Brawl more accessible. So it's pretty clear what is going on.
Smash is successful, in part, because it is accessible.
So adding these things, which are the opposite, will not help the game. Again, no reason to look at the games that aren't selling are well (and it's not like 22 million for Mario kart vs 40+ million for Wii Sports. It's like 10 vs 2 AT BEST). They should look towards Smash.
I was going to change a response from Kuma as well. If I am reluctant to change and don't come up with anything new, then I will try to do that. Of course, another night. Starcraft playing killed it.
. . . .give or take about three. . or four. . . 
