Official Newcomer/DLC Speculation Discussion

[SMAASH! Puppy]

I don't think Smash will go all out with the whole general gaming crossover thing until maybe the next game I think.

Ya'know, if they were to do a reboot, that'd probably be the way to do it.

EDIT: Still might not sit well with most people, but it would at least justify the idea.

 

[Proceleon]

How about

"Spring Man Bounces Back!"

or

"Spring Man Springs Into Action!"

or

"Spring Man Springs Free Of Assist Trophy Hell!"

Alright, I'm double-dipping here, but whatever:
"Misango braces for battle!"
(Geddit? Cause his ARMS are made outta bracelets?)

"Lola Pop dishes out dessert!" (I figured it would fit with the whole "candy clown" motif)

Really? Why would it not be this?
[Insert Character] takes up ARMS!

 

[Shroob]

All I'm going to say is, this community would have a literal meltdown were it to get a PC/Mobile 'rep'.

Fear the days where a character from League of Legends or a character from something like Dragalia Lost/Fate Grand Order are potentially rumored to be coming.

 

[Scoliosis Jones]

If the series is going in a direction that the fanbase is split on, that's still an identity crisis. Is what Smash is becoming really Smash, or something else? I don't think it's as clear cut as you put it. For a crossover that purports being about all gaming, we still get tons of Nintendo newcomers, and the argument could be made for several of the third party characters that they're honorary Nintendo characters. If the game itself doesn't go all in with a new direction, it's only natural that the audience doesn't either.

But even if we assume that Smash is no longer restricted to Nintendo, that there's no question about it, and that it's now just a gaming icons crossover. That means there's an even higher bar for characters. A character must be iconic to get in, and being iconic means that people must recognize you. Therefore, the logic goes that if I don't recognize a character, then it isn't iconic.

If you tell people a crossover is between iconic characters, the expectation is that they'll know the character, not that they will be learning new things.

The idea that characters are "honorary Nintendo characters" is purported by the Smash fans themselves. Simon Belmont is not a Nintendo character, but a Konami character. Sonic is SEGA. Mega Man is Capcom. They aren't suddenly Nintendo characters just because the Smash fans deem them "worthy" of being a Nintendo character. But that's the thing too...according to the fanbase, it's an "honor" to be considered "Nintendo" whereas the games they came from are amazing without having a connection to Nintendo in the first place. Metal Gear and Final Fantasy VII come to mind here.

Iconic means different things to different people, so saying the bar is set for a particular icon doesn't really mean much. What's iconic to some folks who played in the NES/SNES days might look like Simon Belmont, while somebody whose first console was the Wii could see Bandanna Waddle Dee on the same level.

Granted, the impact Castlevania has had on a gaming as a whole speaks for itself in ways certain others don't, but that's for another time.

It's impossible for everyone to know every character. If one person doesn't know who Samus is, does that mean she isn't an icon despite millions of others knowing who she is? No, that's not what it means.

In general I find the 'icon' discussion to more or less go nowhere though, so I'll drop it there.

 

[Will]

What if the next Smash game includes non-gaming characters? What if it includes extreme gore? What if it includes nudity? Would you so easily dismiss complaints about those changes?

Imagine being so scared of a letter rating getting in a game with a different letter rating.

 

[Schnee117]

Fear the days where a character from League of Legends or a character from something like Dragalia Lost/Fate Grand Order are potentially rumored to be coming.

Hitagi is stirring somewhere

 

[BernkastelWitch]

All I'm going to say is, this community would have a literal meltdown were it to get a PC/Mobile 'rep'.

Fear the days where a character from League of Legends or a character from something like Dragalia Lost/Fate Grand Order are potentially rumored to be coming.

To be fair, a good portion of the community has meltdowns over just about anyone who ain't the most commonly discussed characters for different reasons.

 

[I.D.]

Sometimes I feel like Reggie ****ed it up a bit with his GREATEST GAMING CROSSOVER EVER comment which in retrospect was little more than a generic hype statement. I said this a while ago but if that was their objective it's really weird there's only one western owned character in their 80+ character roster, it makes it clear they aren't even willing to go outside their comfort zone.

 

[Shroob]

Hitagi is stirring somewhere

Hitagi said KataLINA

League has KataRINA



Oh yeah, it's all coming together.

 

[Schnee117]

To be fair, a good portion of the community has meltdowns over just about anyone who ain't the most commonly discussed characters for different reasons.

Yeah but the way people talk about PC games and especially mobile games is something else.

 

[Will]

All I'm going to say is, this community would have a literal meltdown were it to get a PC/Mobile 'rep'.

Fear the days where a character from League of Legends or a character from something like Dragalia Lost/Fate Grand Order are potentially rumored to be coming.

They've been in fake rumors since the game came out. Like, why are people so angwy about it?

Do they think Nintendo shouldn't have rights to choose the characters they want in a game they own and make?

 

[Shroob]

They've been in fake rumors since the game came out. Like, why are people so angwy about it?

Do they think Nintendo shouldn't have rights to choose the characters they want in a game they own and make?

"Noooo you can't just put characters from cheap mobile game TRASH alongside such iconic and recognizable characters!"

"Haha, gacha go whirrrrrrrrrr."

 

[Will]

"Noooo you can't just put characters from cheap mobile game TRASH alongside such iconic and recognizable characters!"

"Haha, gacha go whirrrrrrrrrr."

It took everything in my power to not make that image in my last reply and here you are just doing it like a madman.

 

[Dark Bagel]

Really? Why would it not be this?
[Insert Character] takes up ARMS!

Yeah, this is probably the best way to go as far as an official Smash tagline, but I get the impression that the challenge was to make unique taglines based off our particular ARMS characters of choice and what their individual themes are.

 

[GoodGrief741]

Well guys, sorry, I had to google who Link was back in 2008, the Zelda franchise isn't iconic, it sells worse than the niche **** that is my current avi too, RIP

If what you're implying is that there is such a thing as being objectively iconic that really doesn't help your point.

Yes, the only vision Smash seems to not grasp is the vision is Nintendo allstars, which let's be real, was NEVER true even in

So Smash has never actually been able to fulfill its vision? That contradicts your previous statement that it has a clear one.

The idea that characters are "honorary Nintendo characters" is purported by the Smash fans themselves. Simon Belmont is not a Nintendo character, but a Konami character. Sonic is SEGA. Mega Man is Capcom. They aren't suddenly Nintendo characters just because the Smash fans deem them "worthy" of being a Nintendo character. But that's the thing too...according to the fanbase, it's an "honor" to be considered "Nintendo" whereas the games they came from are amazing without having a connection to Nintendo in the first place. Metal Gear and Final Fantasy VII come to mind here.

Iconic means different things to different people, so saying the bar is set for a particular icon doesn't really mean much. What's iconic to some folks who played in the NES/SNES days might look like Simon Belmont, while somebody whose first console was the Wii could see Bandanna Waddle Dee on the same level.

Granted, the impact Castlevania has had on a gaming as a whole speaks for itself in ways certain others don't, but that's for another time.

It's impossible for everyone to know every character. If one person doesn't know who Samus is, does that mean she isn't an icon despite millions of others knowing who she is? No, that's not what it means.

In general I find the 'icon' discussion to more or less go nowhere though, so I'll drop it there.

My point wasn't to discuss what icons are, it's explaining that just telling people to Google a character isn't enough, that it stems from deeper issues, and that we as a community need to take a different approach than just shunning or ignoring people's complaints when they don't know a character.

 

[Cosmic77]

I know you dislike third parties but really PP, Byleth, and "an ARMS character" seem like they created the least excitement among DLC characters and that's coming from someone who loved Byleth.

I don't think it's strictly third party characters Nintendo "didn't do enough to convince hundreds of other people to purchase".

It wasn't targeted at third-parties. In fact, I actually took out Byleth and replaced him with Terry because I was afraid people would interpret that as a jab at Byleth, but I suppose that happened anyway.

Besides, I'm pretty sure you've heard me say at least once that I don't dislike all third-parties. It's true that I'm indifferent to most of them, but Steve, Rayman, Sora, and a second Sonic rep are all characters I'd be fine with.

 

[Shroob]

Sometimes wonder if we all take this **** too seriously. Why does it matter if a character isn't iconic or 3rd party? They're a character in a video game and if they have a unique moveset, that's enough for me. I haven't picked up any of the DLC characters as a main, but I'm just glad to have 'more' options available at my disposal, to hell with these imaginary borders.

 

[Cutie Gwen]

If what you're implying is that there is such a thing as being objectively iconic that really doesn't help your point.

So Smash has never actually been able to fulfill its vision? That contradicts your previous statement that it has a clear one.

My point wasn't to discuss what icons are, it's explaining that just telling people to Google a character isn't enough, that it stems from deeper issues, and that we as a community need to take a different approach than just shunning or ignoring people's complaints when they don't know a character.

My point was that if a google search to get background means you're 'unworthy', it applies to literally anything we ever had or want.


Except it doesn't? You're saying Smash CURRENTLY lacks vision, there's a large difference between that and "The game that had to be made in free time and the total rushjob game didn't quite know what it wanted to do yet". Third party content was planned since Melee, who knows how different things would have been now if Kojima asked to add Snake 5 months earlier? Smash's vision is a crossover of gaming, not strictly Nintendo, and it has slowly but surely climbed upwards to make that vision a reality for the past 15 years. Going into a different direction that some people don't like isn't having an identity crisis, an identity crisis is a game not knowing what it wants to be, Fire Emblem Fates lacked vision as it wanted to try and be morally grey where your choices were difficult but then it completely ignored that beyond the conceptual phase

 

[SMAASH! Puppy]

Hitagi said KataLINA

League has KataRINA



Oh yeah, it's all coming together.

"Katalena joins the Katarena!"

 

[Schnee117]

If what you're implying is that there is such a thing as being objectively iconic that really doesn't help your point.

So Smash has never actually been able to fulfill its vision? That contradicts your previous statement that it has a clear one.

This just reads as being wilfully obtuse

 

[Cosmic77]

Sometimes wonder if we all take this **** too seriously. Why does it matter if a character isn't iconic or 3rd party? They're a character in a video game and if they have a unique moveset, that's enough for me. I haven't picked up any of the DLC characters as a main, but I'm just glad to have 'more' options available at my disposal, to hell with these imaginary borders.

Well, you might be downplaying the situation just a bit.

I'm sure Sakurai could've made Katalina a really unique character, but I'm extremely grateful that she wasn't one of the five characters I had prepurchased in the pass. If Sakurai can make any character unique and fun to play as, might as well shoot for something I like or something really big.

 

[Opossum]

All I'm going to say is, this community would have a literal meltdown were it to get a PC/Mobile 'rep'.

Fear the days where a character from League of Legends or a character from something like Dragalia Lost/Fate Grand Order are potentially rumored to be coming.

Which is silly when you think about it considering Fire Emblem Heroes not only got name dropped in the Byleth presentation, but got two entire remixes in Ultimate.

 

[Al-kīmiyā']

Big jump from:


Haha Joker Personaman in Smash


To

Barney the Dinosaur wearing a g-string coming out and stabbing Mario in the face

If the argument applies to one, why doesn't it apply to another? What's the relevant difference? Why is complaining about some changes bad, but not others?

Imagine being so scared of a letter rating getting in a game with a different letter rating.

I don't understand.

 

[Shroob]

Well, you might be downplaying the situation just a bit.

I'm sure Sakurai could've made Katalina a really unique character, but I'm extremely grateful that she wasn't one of the five characters I had prepurchased in the pass. If Sakurai can make any character unique and fun to play as, might as well shoot for something I like or something really big.

But that's also your own personal opinion and bias.


I have 0 interest in ARMs as a franchise, nor will their inclusion in Smash make me want to pick their game but, but I enjoy the fact they're going to be a new character in an already great game.

 

[Cosmic77]

But that's also your own personal opinion and bias.


I have 0 interest in ARMs as a franchise, nor will their inclusion in Smash make me want to pick their game but, but I enjoy the fact they're going to be a new character in an already great game.

I know. That's kind of why I said "shoot for something I like."

Point I was trying to make is that I would never be so dismissive to the point where I absolutely don't care who gets added. If people were that lax, we'd never have Ridley or Banjo.

 

[Schnee117]

I had prepurchased in the pass..

And there's the actual issue.
You already gave them your money for every character before knowing the entire pass, they never needed to win you over in the first place because they already had you on board even though you personally felt otherwise.

That's a fault on both parties though.
You made an uninformed purchase but also Nintendo shouldn't have been selling unknown content in the first place.

 

[Shroob]

I know. That's kind of why I said "shoot for something I like."

Point I was trying to make is that I would never be so dismissive to the point where I absolutely don't care who gets added. If people were that lax, we'd never have Ridley or Banjo.

On the flipside, not investing in who gets added allows you to get excited for pretty much anyone.


Maybe it's because I'm already content with Ultimate, but they could add a warp-pipe with googly eyes and I'd be excited. Ultimate already laid out an excellent foundation to the point I'd consider the base game was already good enough, to me, anyone who's added afterwards is 100% bonus.


I didn't play 3 Houses, I have no intention to play 3 Houses, but I still enjoy Byleth.

I have no PS5, and I don't intend to get one, but I'm happy with Joker.



I don't 'want' anything, so anything added is good for me.

 

[GoodGrief741]

My point was that if a google search to get background means you're 'unworthy', it applies to literally anything we ever had or want.

You're very right. But try to put yourself in the place of the other person. Of course you and I know that Zelda is an incredibly iconic franchise, but if someone came and told you there's this huge franchise, or character, or company, that everyone knows and you just never heard of it, you'd think it's kind of weird, wouldn't you? At the very least, you'd suspect the other person might be exaggerating.

You're saying Smash CURRENTLY lacks vision

I'm not saying that, what I am saying is that if there is one, it's either not properly realized or vague enough that there is confusion as to what it is. After all, our latest characters have differed wildly in origins, relevance, fame, popularity, and ownership, so it's not easy to come up with a grand vision that unifies everything. If you say the vision is "the greatest gaming crossover", then why not some bigger characters?

This just reads as being wilfully obtuse

If you want to do more than just insult me, please explain why.

 

[SMAASH! Puppy]

If the argument applies to one, why doesn't it apply to another? What's the relevant difference? Why is complaining about some changes bad, but not others?

I'm not sure it's bad to complain so long as you're not just whining. Though a change that feels more like a natural extension of what the series already does (such as widening the scope of the crossover in Super Smash Bros.) is way different from a change that is actively bad for it/drop kicks its appeal into space (Sonic Unleashed).

 

[Scoliosis Jones]

If what you're implying is that there is such a thing as being objectively iconic that really doesn't help your point.

So Smash has never actually been able to fulfill its vision? That contradicts your previous statement that it has a clear one.

My point wasn't to discuss what icons are, it's explaining that just telling people to Google a character isn't enough, that it stems from deeper issues, and that we as a community need to take a different approach than just shunning or ignoring people's complaints when they don't know a character.

See, I agree with you there. I think a better approach is to find an avenue to introduce that information to folks that don't have that knowledge.

Alas, I still think the solution has two sides to it. I, for example, can bring forth cool ideas or introductory stuff to Smash fans, but the fans themselves can only appreciate it if they want to. At the end of the day, is there a reason for them to? No, because they have particular wants for Smash. However, my concern is that that mentality in itself isn't good for discussion, as it makes things stale. It also creates reactionary moments of, "WHAT" when they add a character that somebody doesn't know.

I do think the Sakurai videos are a good way to mitigate it though. I believe there are also folks on the Writing Staff here that write about underrated series that aren't in Smash yet, though I could be wrong.

 

[Shroob]

If the argument applies to one, why doesn't it apply to another? What's the relevant difference? Why is complaining about some changes bad, but not others?

I don't understand.

There's a difference between:

Smash adding 3rd party characters

and

Smash adding a great white shark with laser cannons for eyes and spider legs it uses to walk around on.



In a sense, this is jumping the shark, by a lot. Smash is in no way on the verge of cranking up the sex appeal or going the Mortal Kombat route. In fact, they did everything against said ideas this game specifically by toning down both the violence and LOOD.

 

[Cosmic77]

And there's the actual issue.
You already gave them your money for every character before knowing the entire pass, they never needed to win you over in the first place because they already had you on board even though you personally felt otherwise.

That's a fault on both parties though.
You made an uninformed purchase but also Nintendo shouldn't have been selling unknown content in the first place.

No, I understand that it would've been my fault if I ended up with Katalina due to me putting my faith in Nintendo enough for a pre-purchase. I'm sure I probably would've bought her anyway just to complete my roster. Still, that doesn't make her any less disappointing. We have a limited number of slots, and we'd end up with someone who I think many would agree to be one of the most underwhelming additions in Smash to date.

Has less to do with the money and more to do with thinking of what could have been.

 

[Shroob]

No, I understand that it would've been my fault if I ended up with Katalina due to me putting my faith in Nintendo enough for a pre-purchase. I'm sure I probably would've bought her anyway just to complete my roster. Still, that doesn't make her any less disappointing. We have a limited number of slots, and we'd end up with someone who I think many would agree to be one of the most underwhelming additions in Smash to date.

Has less to do with the money and more to do with thinking of what could have been.

Let's no kid ourselves, this is going to be an emotion we all are going to have to deal with sooner or later.


Be it 6 more characters, or 10 to fit with the World of Light leak, when this is all said and done, even if someone's 99.9% happy with the final roster, we're going to look at it and say "....but what if..."

 

[Schnee117]

specifically by toning down both the violence .

*Ridley killing Mario and Mega Man noises*
*Luigi Death noises*

 

[SMAASH! Puppy]

...toning down both the violence...

Skewer.

Not exactly gory, but there's some pretty powerful implied violence there.

 

[Cutie Gwen]

You're very right. But try to put yourself in the place of the other person. Of course you and I know that Zelda is an incredibly iconic franchise, but if someone came and told you there's this huge franchise, or character, or company, that everyone knows and you just never heard of it, you'd think it's kind of weird, wouldn't you? At the very least, you'd suspect the other person might be exaggerating.

I'm not saying that, what I am saying is that if there is one, it's either not properly realized or vague enough that there is confusion as to what it is. After all, our latest characters have differed wildly in origins, relevance, fame, popularity, and ownership, so it's not easy to come up with a grand vision that unifies everything. If you say the vision is "the greatest gaming crossover", then why not some bigger characters?

If you want to do more than just insult me, please explain why.

My issue is about attitude around it, I'd be confused yes, but I'll judge if they claim to be a hardcore gamer who certainly knows all about gaming acting like a big name is Mr. Doodle tier.

Wrong again, Sakurai himself has stated multiple times that Smash is a gaming crossover, be it in a Direct or by saying "**** all you dumbasses trying to criticize this for not being Nintendo enough in this house we respect vidya regardless of console" multiple times. This is like saying Metal Gear doesn't have a vision because some people played it and thought the military was cool, or a Fallout fan going "Nukes are so cool! Love the Enclave!". The issue is people refusing to see what's actually happening

 

[Scoliosis Jones]

I do just kinda have to wonder what this place is going to be like if we’re down to one remaining pick and Geno, Waluigi, Bandanna Waddle Dee, Dante, Steve Minecraft, and Green Mario aren’t among the picks we got at that point.

Just. IMAGINE. THE CHAOS OF IT ALL.

Sorry, may have gotten carried away there.

 

[Will]

Sometimes wonder if we all take this **** too seriously.

You don't even gotta answer the question, we know that we do.

Spoiler: I went ahead and wasted my time making it

it's bad and sloppy and idek if i got the right gacha pages but i tried

 

[Shroob]

*Ridley killing Mario and Mega Man noises*
*Luigi Death noises*

Skewer.

Not exactly gory, but there's some pretty powerful implied violence there.

Fair enough.


Snake still wants his ass back though. How can he alert the guards if he's not dummy thicc?

 

[GoodGrief741]

See, I agree with you there. I think a better approach is to find an avenue to introduce that information to folks that don't have that knowledge.

Alas, I still think the solution has two sides to it. I, for example, can bring forth cool ideas or introductory stuff to Smash fans, but the fans themselves can only appreciate it if they want to. At the end of the day, is there a reason for them to? No, because they have particular wants for Smash. However, my concern is that that mentality in itself isn't good for discussion, as it makes things stale. It also creates reactionary moments of, "WHAT" when they add a character that somebody doesn't know.

I do think the Sakurai videos are a good way to mitigate it though. I believe there are also folks on the Writing Staff here that write about underrated series that aren't in Smash yet, though I could be wrong.

I don't agree that there's something inherently wrong with having specific wants, there's nothing wrong with having expectations. Without having any expectations, you'll always be satisfied with whatever you get, and while that certainly makes for a happy life, that also means there isn't constructive criticism, which is crucial to improving on an iterative product such as a videogame.

But aside from that, yeah, I agree. I don't have any expectations, and I don't make lists of my wants, and I like to think that I have an extremely broad taste in videogames. So far, I have liked every one of the Fighter Pass characters, which is something I'm grateful for as I know that's not the case for most people. And I think Sakurai's introductions are a very good idea, as the man clearly knows his stuff and is very happy to share as well (the one time I think it went wrong is when he explained what Fire Emblem is, that just came across as tone-deaf to an audience that already thinks they're more than familiar enough with it). As for us? Well, we're only human, so while bringing up new ideas for discussion is great, I think a crucial change would be to tone down the abrasiveness when the reveals actually come and people find issue with them. Obviously people will be emotional and reactive because that's just what a Smash reveal does to us, but still, there's room for improvement.