Now, I’m not going to say anybody should just “be fine with what they have”. That’s just rude. For context, however, we’ve got folks who are eatin good...dozens of quality Nintendo characters to choose from, stages, and music. Now, the highest requested Nintendo characters are lower in importance either as individuals or within the series they are in. While they are great characters, we’re down to picks like Dixie Kong, Waluigi, or Bandanna Waddle Dee. Dixie has been a protagonist in 2 games, one several years older than the other, while the other two are consistently supporting characters in series that have plenty of content in Smash already. You have characters such as these lines up with characters outside of Nintendo who are the lead of their respective games or series.
I completely agree.
To me, those characters feel more like base roster additions rather than DLC fighters. Not trying to say they're not valuable enough to be sold separately, just in case.
And to some extent I'd love to be proven wrong, to clarify. For example, Dixie Kong is probably my fave DK character and DKC2 and Tropical Freeze being my fave DK games is in part to her being playable in both games. I always liked her as a playable character more than DK or Diddy.
Those aren't left-field at all.
I don't know, I'd argue that some of those names are indeed left-field characters. Names such as Sol Badguy or even Layton are mostly discussed in hardcore Smash communities. You're not gonna see those names popping out frequently in casual Smash circles.
Those characters might not surprise us enough to consider them left field picks, but they would be incredibly surprising for a lot people. Hell, I'd argue they would still be very left-field choices to us. It's just that now we're more aware of the fact that Nintendo could go with ""low"" profile franchises when it comes to third parties, after what happened with the first Fighter Pass.
That doesn't mean names like Sol, Layton and company are suddenly more likely. They're not. If they get in we would still be quite surprised.
Does Phoenix really constitutes as an "honorary Nintendo character"?
Both Banjo and Bayo have games that were published by Nintendo worldwide, that's kinda what makes them such. Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think Nintendo has ever had any stake in any Ace Attorney game.
I don't know if this is the case for the other languages the original AA trilogy had, but the spanish localization of the first three games was made by Nintendo IIRC.
That's why the HD re-release doesn't have spanish localization. Capcom added multiple languages as free updates after the release of the HD trilogy, but the game is still not available in spanish, which is strange because the original games had spanish subs on the DS. Keep in mind that the HD trilogy is not only on 3DS/Switch but also Steam or PS4 so if some of the translations were paid/made by Nintendo Capcom wouldn't be able to use them. At that point I guess Capcom didn't wanted to make a new spanish localization, probably because they consider the series isn't popular enough in spanish speaking regions (the franchise stopped getting spanish translations after Apollo Justice).
Still feel Dante's looked at due to Bayonetta being in the game, not to mention those tweets a few years back which was likely a coincidence.
Also just because a game gets ported to Switch doesn't automatically means they're instantly in.
By no means I'm not saying he's won't get in because he could still get in, but he's not as likely as people makes it out to be.
I mean I can understand your point about the tweets and the DMC ports. But I literally haven't saw anyone saying Dante is likely because Bayonetta is in the game. That's plain nonsense and doesn't make sense as an argument for Dante in Smash.
A completely different thing is saying "having Dante vs Bayonetta would be a dream match up!" or something like that, which is something people does say.
From what I can gather, the relationship between the two is somewhat similar to Fatal Fury and King of Fighters, except the KoF equivalent is finished and Fatal Fury is back in action. Don't think I know enough to have any authority in the matter, though.
Personally I don't see the similarities. I'm not into Blazblue so I might be wrong but Blazblue and Guilty Gear aren't connected in any way beyond being owned and made by the same developer. That, and being fighting games, I guess.
In fact some people have asked Arc Sys for years for a crossover between the two series, and IIRC they said that won't happen after the stories of both franchises are finished.
I think it might be a regional thing. Guilty Gear is popular in the West, Blazblue is popular in Japan. Though I don't have a source on that, so don't quote me.
It's hard to prove it without numbers and all, but as far as I saw, I'd say this is pretty accurate. Guilty Gear seems to have more appeal among the Western audience, and I kinda agree with
ALongWistfulSquiggle
example. GG feels like it is able to reach better to people who isn't really into anime. I guess it's because of the series aesthetic/music?
In the other hand I'm pretty much convinced Blazblue is more popular in Japan. Guilty Gear has still a sizable following and popularity over there, tho.
Bias aside, I think that if we get an ArcSys rep Sakurai would go for Guilty Gear and Sol. It has more history and seems to be the closest thing they have as a mascot or flagship series. Also I feel it is slightly more recognizable for people who isn't into fighting games, but maybe it's just me. Anyway I don't think Ragna should be discarded that easily. I mean the arguments I just mentioned sound very strong, but you could have said something similar for Shin Megami Tensei and Persona and well, we know how that ended.