No one (at least in this thread) is claiming "Nintendo = iconic, non-Nintendo = obscure". If someone started saying that Ayumi Tachibana was a gaming icon and whenever someone asked who that was and what credentials Ayumi has to be in Smash, they responded "Go Google her and it'll become evident. Quit living under a rock", most people would think they're being abrasive at best.
A lot of Smash speculation is selling your case to other people. That often can mean dealing with people who have no idea of who your character is. Gaming is still largely blocked off in its own little bubble of the culture, with many game characters who are popular within the community failing to really crossover and have a mainstream presence. There's also the factor of gaming being an international hobby with global markets that have specific trends to them. Therefore, it's entirely possible that characters can be simultaneously be iconic and important to their genre while also being unknown to a large chunk of the population. For example, Terry and SNK are recognized by millions and have an incredibly demonstrable influence on their genre. However, if you didn't grow up in a region of the world where they were popular and you don't dabble in fighting games, its understandable why you might not know who he or his company really are. This also applies to Nintendo characters as well, not everyone is going to know who Bandana Waddle Dee is in depth and his relevance to the Kirby series.
So, the question then comes up, what's the best way to inform people that they don't know? Telling someone do their own research and come back when they know who they are definitely saves time and energy, but I really don't think it's the best way to get people up to speed. Google isn't always a great way demonstrate why a character is iconic or works well in Smash. For example, Googling Shiori Fujisaki will tell you that she's the main heroine of Tokimeki Memorial, but it won't tell you how her game was an unprecedented success, birthed a genre, and how it basically bankrolled Konami to expand and develop titles like Metal Gear Solid, Silent Hill, and Castlevania: Symphony of the Night. It also tells you nothing really of what her Smash moveset might look like and how she would be unique from other characters on the roster.
Instead, the way to go is to personally guide people who are unfamiliar with your character through who they are, why they're important, and why they'd be good in Smash. It doesn't have to be long, it can literally be "Dante is the main character of Devil May Cry. His game is important because A, B, and C. He'd be fun in Smash because X, Y, and Z. Here's his support thread if you want more information". Even Sakurai does this with his little crash course on gaming history at the start of his "Sakurai presents" presentations. The Ridley and K. Rool support threads were extremely effective at this, actually. The main post on each thread was an overview of who the characters were, their relevance to their series, and what they bring into Smash. They were also written in such a way that even people who had never touched a Metroid or Donkey Kong game. Did this make those write-ups a pain in the ass to do? Oh yeah, probably. But those write-ups also helped attracted and convince people to put their support behind Ridley and K. Rool when they otherwise wouldn't have. If Ridley and K. Rool weren't able to grow their fanbase outside of a small group of vocal supporters, they may not be in the game today.
"Literal Who"ism does suck, but that behaviour is meant to be intentionally degrading to get a rise out of people. Most people who come into the thread wanting to learn more likely aren't here for that sort of mean-spirited mocking, but instead a genuine interest in speculation. As such, while it's appropriate to tell people who want to troll to **** off, it's really not fair to the majority that just wants to sincerely doesn't know the character in question.
[Applause gif]
I know my big support in Sm4sh was because of the threads and the community. I was still in the "only rare third parties" at the time, so my big support back then was K.Rool and Ridley, despite never having played more than 1 level of DK64 and having Metroid II in my game boy for a total of 10 minutes. I learned about who the characters were and why they were important all because of the support threads and the community around them.
Not to mention that there were characters that I wanted for myself, but Midna got the assist trophy treatment...
And that's also why Sm4sh burned me so bad. That was the first time I got involved in speculation, and none of my most wanted got in. But we did get loads of characters who I had to google to know. I wouldn't even have been all that interested if they hadn't given us Mewtwo as DLC, considering how I felt they left out my big name wants and then seemingly ignored my favorite series content-wise.
And yeah, there's a lot of undeserving hate that characters get also because of their fanbases. Sometimes people inflate their favorites' importance of that was helped by people who were claiming that Shulk (or another more obscure character) was more important to gaming than Ridley or that Dark Pit deserved a unique victory theme but Ganondorf didn't. I know there were two characters who I got completely turned off from since the biggest detractors of my most wanted inevitably had one of them in their avatar/sig.
It's not that only Nintendo is iconic, but that I've noticed that the people who refuse to google names when a character out of there comfort zone is considered tend to be Nintendo purists who can tell you the name of any Pokemon you show them and can tell you what games the Assists all come from off the top of their head and claim the name they didn't recognize must be super obscure and a bad addition if they could not recognize them and if people provide info of the characters, they refuse to listen as seen with when 2B became the big topic here, people who've been vocal about disliking third parties dismissed her and when others tried provided info, they were met with "Hmph! I never heard of this!" and then refuse to learn why people cared about the idea of 2B in Smash
I don't consider myself a Nintendo purist anymore. Heck, I used to be able to name all the Pokémon on sight, but that stopped in Gen II (the first time they cut the roster down, and then they dropped my favorite). Really, I just want some names I recognize outside of this site.
I've never been really adventurous with gaming. I'm one of those people who plays to get lost in the world, so a game that I can complete in less than 100 hours isn't worth it. And if I'm gonna devote that much time to learning the entire history and lore, it had better be something I like. And yes, I completely believe you can know you'll like something or not. I remember when Game of Thrones first came out, I immediately tried to stay away from it since I didn't want to get hooked until the series ended. Medieval, fantasy, dragons, etc? Right up my alley. I knew I would get so deep into that as soon as I started watching. And I was right. On the other hand, when Joker got announced for Smash, I knew just from his look and the synopses here that I'd be completely indifferent to the character. And then I went and looked him up, looked at his parent game, looked into his gameplay and stage, listened to the music... and I found that yes, there is nothing I like about this character. At all. Someone could gift him to me and I'd never look at him.
It's also a personal thing to how well you think the character fits. Do you know them? Do you think they fit in the setting? The more positive those are, the more likely you'll enjoy them.
I've never been big on guest characters in the first place. If I know the character, I think it's fantastic. If not, I'm just annoyed at the extra character (who's probably got a lot more developmental love in relationship to the rest of the cast). Best example here is probably Soul Calibur - I got into the series with SCII for one reason only: Link as a gues fighter. And I loved it. Even got a cheap PSIII on ebay just to be able to play the heck out of SCIII (best entry in the series, imho). But then SCIV brought Star Wars guests... Yeah, I knew them (who doesn't), but I've never been big on Star Wars and they honestly didn't fit with the whole setting in the 16th century. It was blatant advertisement for The Force Unleashed (and it worked too; sad that that series ended). SCV brought Ezio, which was phenomenal beyond reason (unfortunately the rest of the game was trash). And now with SCVI, it's again guests I have only heard of and not played - one that I knew from the beginning I'd love, and one I wouldn't, all because of the bio I'd read on them. And yes, one fits beautifully and is loads of fun, and the other feels shoehorned into the setting and I really don't care about.
I mean, when I was the local Resident Evil stan, it seemed to really drum up interest in the series. There were some folks who even tried the series out from this very site because of the stuff I posted.
Despite the fact that it isn’t playable, it was kinda cool to see how folks were legitimately shocked it wasn’t playable.
Though, I also got responses that were kinda sorta rude. Like, “STOP TRYING TO EDUCATE US, YOU’RE NOT MY TEACHER” which, to me, seems to embody the overall dilemma of the situation. Folks can talk up their stuff and really make them seem legit to folks who haven’t played the games, but there has to be an audience that is reachable. Some folks don’t even want to hear it, even when the person sharing their ideas tries to make it accessible as possible.
At the end of the day, it seems to me that each Challenger Pack, 1-6, has been consistent in the context of, “bringing new things” to Smash. Obviously new characters, but each pack has brought a new game or series into Smash entwined with the new gameplay ideas. I, for one, think it will continue, and if it does it will not work out for folks with very strict interests.
I was pretty indifferent to RE for a while because, again, not really up my alley. Then I watched someone play it and tried the RE2make when I got it on sale, and I did enjoy it, despite sucking miserably at it. I would really have liked to see Leon/Chris/Jill share a moveset, especially after seeing them in the remakes.
I'll completely agree that opening your mind to other series is a good thing and may introduce you to new stuff. I know I got into most of my favorite series - Soul Calibur, Assassin's Creed, Dragon Age - from recommendations from friends. Also related series with similar themes or gameplay: I know I got into Fallout since it was post-apocalyptic Elder Scrolls.
But forcing people to enjoy something more often backfires than not if it's something that the person may not have liked in the first place. It's a balance and "Just google it" isn't gonna inspire someone who doesn't like JRPGs or modern games to play Persona. But if someone likes something like Fire Emblem, they may be more open to something like Golden Sun.
---
For me, at the end of the day, I'd just like a character I recognize. It's nerve-wracking enough that there are such limited spaces, and that Smash has evolved into what looks almost like a hall of fame among gaming, so it's natural we want our favorites to get one of the limited remaining slots. I know that if they give me my most wanted and nobody else I've even heard of, I wouldn't care. I just want one of the slots to acknowledge a character I want.
I came to this site to discuss and hope, but the character speculation boards are pretty well dead unless you're supporting one of the favorites (or whichever character gets named in a plausible leak). There's something that's also disheartening about that as well. Sure, we can all make the case that our favorites deserve to be in - I've got a whole litany of reasons for my top three - but that doesn't make them any more talked about since my top three all have a 'fan favorite' from the same company who's talked about more.
I mean look at Dovahkiin: I've heard people complain about him because i) he's an avatar, ii) he's got a sword, iii) Todd Howard, iv) Skyrim is overrated, v) one-off, vi) older game, vii) Bethesda games are buggy, viii) little Nintendo history, ix) open world RPG isn't unique. Never mind a lot of those arguments are pithy. But that doesn't change the fact that every open-world game since 2012 is like that
because of influence from Skyrim, including a little game called Zelda: Breath of the Wild. BotW really did feel like Skyrim in a lot of ways, and the Skyrim Switch port even gave BotW gear as a crossover. Heck even about that port - remember the Switch announcement trailer? They showed a guy playing BotW, and then the next scene was someone playing Skyrim. Skyrim was the second game shown off for the Switch - before Mario - and served to show that Nintendo could 'play with the big boys.' And I'll argue that the genre is kinda unique - yeah we've got loads of
JRPG characters, but nobody from any other RPG genre...unless you want to count BotW Link. Not to even mention that it would seemingly fit perfectly in Smash: one of the bosses in Smash is a literal dragon, while the theme of Skyrim is being a dragon hunter. All of the marketing for Skyrim has shown off that helmet, and there's a character in Smash who's schtick is wearing the hats of other characters to copy their abilities. And what's the memetic move from Skyrim? Using your voice to fling enemies off of cliffs. How do you get KOs in Smash? There is a lot that Skyrim has going for it...
But nobody will talk about that because of Doomguy. Even that article we got a while ago suggesting that Bethesda talked to Nintendo about Smash put Doomguy all over the pictures, as if it was inconceivable that Bethesda owns properties other than Doom. Yes, Doom has good reasons as well: grandfather of a genre, loads of ports, the latest game is very recent, and massive fanbase. It's just hard to get excited when people don't want to even consider your favorite or their merits since there's another character from the same company that also has merits, but a larger fanbase.
Look also at Tails. Tails is well known as Sonic's sidekick, and was even the basis of an April Fool's hoax back in 2002. Sonic's the only third party who's been in continually since Brawl, and yet still has so little content compared to the rest. But Tails, who's honestly on the level of Luigi in terms of the player-2-who-developed-his-ofn-personality, is still stuck in the background. Really, with Luigi, Diddy, Ken...why not get Sonic's iconic 90's player 2?
But again, there's a fan-favorite who stifles discussion of any Sonic character outside of Shadow. I find it interesting that most of the discussion is "Tails can't be an echo since he flies and can't do Sonic's up throw!" when Tails' first game was Sonic 2, where he was a literal pallette swap of Sonic and only flew when he was an NPC. Meanwhile these same people say "Shadow is a perfect echo, but he could get a different up special and a different this and a different that..." I get it: Shadow's popular. But just because "Tails is a coward!" that doesn't mean that Tails is a worthless character.
And of course, I'd like a new Zelda character, but they all got shoved in the assist trophy box. At least there people are open to more than one possibility.
I could even say that my fourth most wanted is also affected by all of this. I'd like to see Nightmare from Soul Calibur as well, but most of the SC discussion centers around it not being Tekken. I'll admit, though, SC was dead for a while and only recently came back (and they're certainly taking their time with DLC characters) while Tekken is the main franchise, so that I feel is more understandable. Still while Tekken only got Nintendo costumes, it was SC that got a crossover character.
Ah well... Not really sure where I was going with this, but it turned into a giant wall of text. I guess it's just railing against our habits of stifling discussions, either from blindly saying "literally who is this" or from saying "your fave is unimpressive go away." Not everyone is gonna like everything - not everyone has to, and it's okay to choose not to buy a character. It's just not okay to be a **** if someone is calmly choosing not to buy the character who you like. And it's okay to say "I wish they had picked X," but not "Y is the worst character ever and only weebs like them, they should have gone with X since he's so much cooler!"
