Official Next Smash - Speculation & Discussion Thread

[Opossum]

Lara is an interesting one: back in the days of DLC spec, I remember her being one of the quintessential "sleeper picks" thrown around - everytime she was brought up, it was with this air of how the hell aren't more people bringing her up, she's so iconic, etc etc. The problem, I feel, is that.....how do I explain this? I feel like, in spite of her icon status, the combination of space, time and audience in which she was most relevant feels so far removed from anything we've seen from Smash's third-party characters thus far, in such a way that it's hard for me to imagine her being on the team's radar with how things have gone so far. I also can't shake the feeling that, while she's obv. still very recognizable, Tomb Raider games are still being made and she still gets plenty of collabs; a lot of the push for her feels to me like it's just on the laurels of how big the series was in the 90s, and sometimes feels like it fails to recognize that it isn't the 90s anymore, and that the days in which she was one of the totemic figures of the industry are behind us. I also sense this detachment coming from a lot of her support - plenty of ppl vouching for how iconic she is, but how many of these people are actually into Tomb Raider? I guess my central thesis here is that I think there's ultimately just not a lot of audience overlap - for how iconic she is, I don't think the vast majority of the fandom would particularly care to see her compared to other Western third-parties that might resonate more, and I think a lot of the push for her is predicated entirely on her icon status and not so much on people actually caring about the series. A lot of this is just gut feelings, mind

Honestly I think a really big reason why she never gets brought up much anymore is the fact that a lot of the old discussions were predicated on the fact that she was owned by Square Enix, which isn't the case anymore. So it went from a case of "why doesn't she get brought up more" due to her having that connection, to nobody having a reason to bring her up much because the goal has shifted much further away.

 

[LiveStudioAudience]

Lara might be the most prototypical example of "Jack (Jill?) of All Trades, Master of None" with Smash speculation. She's very well known, but not the same kind of iconic to the audience in the same way a Sonic, Pac-Man, or Mega Man is. She has a Nintendo history technically yet not one that seems particularly strong association wise. She does have decent potential with her moveset, however it really doesn't get imaginations going in the same way a Monster Hunter does. There's a hypothetical representation with notable third parties, though none that really feel like she would outwardly embody.

That does feel like it explains why the push for her doesn't seem to go that much beyond "Hey she's 90s gaming celebrity Lara Croft, why shouldn't she be in Smash" because unless you're a mega fan of Tomb Raider, there's not one particular thing about her that really drives passionate discourse about her hypothetical inclusion.

 

[TheFirstPoppyBro]

Honestly I think a really big reason why she never gets brought up much anymore is the fact that a lot of the old discussions were predicated on the fact that she was owned by Square Enix, which isn't the case anymore. So it went from a case of "why doesn't she get brought up more" due to her having that connection, to nobody having a reason to bring her up much because the goal has shifted much further away.

me, reading this
"Huh, Square doesn't own Tomb Raider anymore?"
starts looking it up
"I wonder who do--"
Embracer Group

 

[SMAASH! Puppy]

If I think about it, I guess the reality is that I like the idea of Lara Croft being in Super Smash Bros. more than I like the character itself. Like, I want to be introduced to her and her series, but I've also yet to actually look it up on Steam. Part of this is because I rarely buy anything, but still.

Embracer Group

...

What's the Embracer Group?

 

[LiveStudioAudience]

If I think about it, I guess the reality is that I like the idea of Lara Croft being in Super Smash Bros. more than I like the character itself. Like, I want to be introduced to her and her series, but I've also yet to actually look it up on Steam. Part of this is because I rarely buy anything, but still.


...

What's the Embracer Group?

It's a media holding company that made a lot of major acquisitions of various video game properties (a few of them inactive) a few years ago with the idea of making new games/remakes from the IP's. Unfortunately, when a major bit of investment money (said to be in the neighborhood of 2 billion) didn't come through they then had to sell off a bunch of those same franchises because they could no longer afford to actually do anything with them. They've basically gained a shady reputation for not being wholly trustworthy with their properties, a symbol of the investment/acquisition excesses of the modern gaming market.

The only reason it's not quite as seen as insidious as a Tencent is because the latter is generally smarter in the industry and their strategic investment in major video game/technology companies makes more people nervous.

 

[TheFirstPoppyBro]

It's a media holding company that made a lot of major acquisitions of various video game properties (a few of them inactive) a few years ago with the idea of making new games/remakes from the IP's. Unfortunately, when a major bit of investment money (said to be in the neighborhood of 2 billion) didn't come through they then had to sell off a bunch of those same franchises because they could no longer afford to actually do anything with them. They've basically gained a shady reputation for not being wholly trustworthy with their properties, a symbol of the investment/acquisition excesses of the modern gaming market.

Not to mention recent restructuring that saw 1387 employees laid off, 29 projects cancelled, and saw them split into three separate groups (Asmodee, Coffee Stain, and Middle-earth Enterprises) seemingly just to confuse people while the CEO said he was "taking hits and criticism" and could "take a lot of the blame" while those 1300 employees suffer the consequences.

Ironically, Tomb Raider being connected to Embracer sorta gives it a connection to go off of since Nintendo bought Shiver Entertainment--that recent porting studio acquisition they did--directly from Embracer. Though I don't know that you'd want a company like Embracer on your copyright info anyway.

 

[SMAASH! Puppy]

It's a media holding company that made a lot of major acquisitions of various video game properties (a few of them inactive) a few years ago with the idea of making new games/remakes from the IP's. Unfortunately, when a major bit of investment money (said to be in the neighborhood of 2 billion) didn't come through they then had to sell off a bunch of those same franchises because they could no longer afford to actually do anything with them. They've basically gained a shady reputation for not being wholly trustworthy with their properties, a symbol of the investment/acquisition excesses of the modern gaming market.

The only reason it's not quite as seen as insidious as a Tencent is because the latter is generally smarter in the industry and their strategic investment in major video game/technology companies makes more people nervous.

Wait, wasn't Tencent seen as bad because they basically control the entire Chinese video game market? Like, if you want to localize your game in China you need approval from Tencent?

Anyway, yeah that sounds like a whole big "I don't care about the product, or know anything about how it's made, I just want to make money" kind of deal, which just means you've got a lot of workers hating everything while pumping out products that aren't very good.

 

[chocolatejr9]

Not to mention recent restructuring that saw 1387 employees laid off, 29 projects cancelled, and saw them split into three separate groups (Asmodee, Coffee Stain, and Middle-earth Enterprises) seemingly just to confuse people while the CEO said he was "taking hits and criticism" and could "take a lot of the blame" while those 1300 employees suffer the consequences.

We lost TimeSplitters because of them... again...

The Cult of Cortez will not forgive. TIME TO SPLIT!!!

(Man, remember when the Sergeant Cortez memes were a thing? I kinda miss it...)

 

[Sucumbio]

Time To Split!

 

[fogbadge]

Cortez is a strange case of a character who I have nostalgia for but have never actually played his games. But I watched my brother play a lot of future perfect

 

[Borskaboska]

Lara is an interesting one: back in the days of DLC spec, I remember her being one of the quintessential "sleeper picks" thrown around - everytime she was brought up, it was with this air of how the hell aren't more people bringing her up, she's so iconic, etc etc. The problem, I feel, is that.....how do I explain this? I feel like, in spite of her icon status, the combination of space, time and audience in which she was most relevant feels so far removed from anything we've seen from Smash's third-party characters thus far, in such a way that it's hard for me to imagine her being on the team's radar with how things have gone so far. I also can't shake the feeling that, while she's obv. still very recognizable, Tomb Raider games are still being made and she still gets plenty of collabs; a lot of the push for her feels to me like it's just on the laurels of how big the series was in the 90s, and sometimes feels like it fails to recognize that it isn't the 90s anymore, and that the days in which she was one of the totemic figures of the industry are behind us. I also sense this detachment coming from a lot of her support - plenty of ppl vouching for how iconic she is, but how many of these people are actually into Tomb Raider? I guess my central thesis here is that I think there's ultimately just not a lot of audience overlap - for how iconic she is, I don't think the vast majority of the fandom would particularly care to see her compared to other Western third-parties that might resonate more, and I think a lot of the push for her is predicated entirely on her icon status and not so much on people actually caring about the series. A lot of this is just gut feelings, mind

I don't think Lara's support mostly coming from her 90's appearances is that big of a problem. Smash soesnt shy away from retro characters a la K Rool, and they will use a character's most 'iconic' appearance even if it's old (Like ryu using sf3 hit sfx, Mario using his 64 attacks, all of Megaman). If Lara were to get in i'm pretty sure shed be based on her ps1 look no matter how popular her modern games are. At most they might pull a move or two from the modern games while still keeping the majority of the design rooted in the 90's.

(And imagine, a final smash where she traps the opponent in the freezer)

 

[Speed Weed]

I don't think Lara's support mostly coming from her 90's appearances is that big of a problem. Smash soesnt shy away from retro characters a la K Rool, and they will use a character's most 'iconic' appearance even if it's old (Like ryu using sf3 hit sfx, Mario using his 64 attacks, all of Megaman). If Lara were to get in i'm pretty sure shed be based on her ps1 look no matter how popular her modern games are. At most they might pull a move or two from the modern games while still keeping the majority of the design rooted in the 90's.

(And imagine, a final smash where she traps the opponent in the freezer)

Sure. The difference in this specific scenario is that people weren't asking for her so much as they were pushing for her as a slept-on candidate - that's what sets her apart from K. Rool, who was a genuine huge fan request. I think that's the thing I'm getting at here, in that on paper she seems obvious but I don't think she's really in the wheelhouse of stuff Smash tends to go for. I know I'm kind of dealing in the abstract here, but does this makes sense?

 

[LiveStudioAudience]

There are some characters where the passion feels driven by a desire to fight as them or against them in Smash and there's characters where the enthusiasm comes from just having them in Smash; like the contrast between someone buying a game to play it vs getting it as part of a collection. Sometimes Lara (and certain other characters at times) feels like she falls into the latter category, at least in terms of discussion.

 

[Borskaboska]

Sure. The difference in this specific scenario is that people weren't asking for her so much as they were pushing for her as a slept-on candidate - that's what sets her apart from K. Rool, who was a genuine huge fan request. I think that's the thing I'm getting at here, in that on paper she seems obvious but I don't think she's really in the wheelhouse of stuff Smash tends to go for. I know I'm kind of dealing in the abstract here, but does this makes sense?

yeah that makes sense. Tbh thats how i feel about bandana waddle dee.

 

[Kirbeh]

Re: Lara

I like Lara, played a lot of Anniversary as a kid. I'd be ecstatic to see her get into Smash but the prerequisite there is that it'd have to classic Lara. I know the reboot series got pretty big but I never really got into it (the first remains in my backlog of games to complete.)

As for actual chances, pretty low I'd say. She gets brought up a lot for being so well known but I don't think there's much of an actual support base there. Even when TR was owned by Square Enix, it was always "Oh, she's owned by a JP company now, that'll help her chances! Buuut, she's still got to wait in line behind Tifa, 2B, Chrono, etc."

She's was a big deal in the west but even then, as far as Smash goes she's a pretty niche pick overall. There's not a lot of people rallying behind Lara as far as I can tell and I think it's safe to say Eastern support is even less than that (if it's even there.)

If Nintendo were to go to Embracer group specifically to get a character from them then maybe she'd have a better shot compared to whatever other stuff they own. Assuming Nintendo goes to a few more western devs next time round I still don't think the Tomb Raider IP is really on their radar tbh. And as before, I don't think she's really on the radar of Smash's audience either outside of a very small niche.

Even here, I think you'll find maybe a dozen people who'd show genuine support. Even if a lot users agree that she's pretty iconic, I don't think there are many who actively want her as a most wanted or top five (or even 10) newcomer pick. The overlap just isn't there.

Now obviously Smashboards isn't reflective of the wider audience but given the number of characters that get thrown around on this site, I think it says something when her most frequent mention is a reminder that she exists.

Hopefully that didn't come off as too harsh or trying to downplay her. I do want to make it clear that I'm part of that niche that does want her, but I just don't think she has much of a chance given the current circumstances.

 

[Laniv]

Not sure if it's been brought up yet, but hey, Delzethin came up with a new video, this one about Takamaru:

 

[Perkilator]

Not sure if it's been brought up yet, but hey, Delzethin came up with a new video, this one about Takamaru:

I’m actually working on an article for that one.

 

[Louie G.]

I also sense this detachment coming from a lot of her support - plenty of ppl vouching for how iconic she is, but how many of these people are actually into Tomb Raider? I guess my central thesis here is that I think there's ultimately just not a lot of audience overlap - for how iconic she is, I don't think the vast majority of the fandom would particularly care to see her compared to other Western third-parties that might resonate more, and I think a lot of the push for her is predicated entirely on her icon status and not so much on people actually caring about the series. A lot of this is just gut feelings, mind

Thank you for putting this so wonderfully. There’s always been something about Lara in Smash that just doesn’t click with me, and it’s always been a difficult point to make because it’s wholly off of vibes. During Ultimate DLC we were riding high on our “anything goes” wave after all. But it did frustrate me how often the conversation seemed to begin and end with how iconic she is and not much else. I’m certain she has true, earnest supporters but most of the push here felt hollow.

I think Lara “deserves” a spot on the roster - given her legacy and icon status especially as one of gaming’s most prestigious female characters - on paper. The credentials are irrefutably there. But in execution does not excite me at all. Smash isn’t a checklist.

 

[ninjahmos]

Not sure if it's been brought up yet, but hey, Delzethin came up with a new video, this one about Takamaru:

Sweet! I'll have to watch this one later.

 

[Scrimblo Bimblo]

Yeah Lara would feel like a somewhat random choice. That's never stopped anyone, and she wouldn't be the first, but I dunno...
As far as Western characters go, the fandom's interest clearly lies somewhere else, and Nintendo and Tomb Raider don't really have much association. Plus she's a little too grounded as a character for Smash's standards.
None of these circumstances is a deal breaker on its own, but taken all together... I feel like they'd have to have very specific reasons to choose Lara over, say, Crash or Doom guy or even one of the Assassin's Creed protagonists.

 

[Louie G.]

I feel like they'd have to have very specific reasons to choose Lara over, say, Crash or Doom guy or even one of the Assassin's Creed protagonists.

I nearly compared Tomb Raider’s situation to Assassin’s Creed, but I recognized I’d actually like to see someone like Ezio quite a bit more. Even though both series feel a bit out of place, I think I can just envision a flashier and more intriguing playstyle out of an Assassin’s Creed character. Part of the disconnect with me and Lara is that what she actually does is not all that interesting, and I can’t really cook up a unique spin on it that wouldn’t just feel like forced complexity.

 

[NintenRob]

Lara might be the most prototypical example of "Jack (Jill?) of All Trades, Master of None" with Smash speculation. She's very well known, but not the same kind of iconic to the audience in the same way a Sonic, Pac-Man, or Mega Man is. She has a Nintendo history technically yet not one that seems particularly strong association wise. She does have decent potential with her moveset, however it really doesn't get imaginations going in the same way a Monster Hunter does. There's a hypothetical representation with notable third parties, though none that really feel like she would outwardly embody.

That does feel like it explains why the push for her doesn't seem to go that much beyond "Hey she's 90s gaming celebrity Lara Croft, why shouldn't she be in Smash" because unless you're a mega fan of Tomb Raider, there's not one particular thing about her that really drives passionate discourse about her hypothetical inclusion.

Lara Croft feels like a different kind of iconic. A lot of non gamers know who she is, but what many of them probably don't realize is that she is in fact a video game character. She was played by Angelina Jolie in two movies and had another more recent movie. A lot of people will know her from those actions flicks

Plus she's a little too grounded as a character for Smash's standards.

Now this is an interesting topic to me. Is "being too grounded for Smash" something that should be considered? Are there any characters in Smash we can consider "too grounded." Off the top of my head, Snake is probably the closest, but I know Metal Gear can get pretty wild. Making an interesting and engaging move set for "normal human" would be a challenge.

 

[SMAASH! Puppy]

But it did frustrate me how often the conversation seemed to begin and end with how iconic she is and not much else.

Now that you mention it, one of the most prevalent arguments against her was that she wasn't interesting. Even now she's being said to be a bit too grounded to mesh with Super Smash Bros. even though one of the most notable moments in the series was fighting a T-Rex. I also remember my mom telling me about how she got stranded in the middle of the ocean, and her response was to cut herself to attract a shark, punch it in the face when it tried to eat her, and ride it all the way to shore. That's...not very grounded.

It doesn't help that her reference material is split between two very different styles of game mechanics (and probably also tone), and none of us actually know how either of them work. At least not fully. lol

 

[Scrimblo Bimblo]

I nearly compared Tomb Raider’s situation to Assassin’s Creed, but I recognized I’d actually like to see someone like Ezio quite a bit more. Even though both series feel a bit out of place, I think I can just envision a flashier and more intriguing playstyle out of an Assassin’s Creed character. Part of the disconnect with me and Lara is that what she actually does is not all that interesting, and I can’t really cook up a unique spin on it that wouldn’t just feel like forced complexity.

Yeah Ezio or Altair would fit pretty well in my opinion, in the vein of someone like Snake. It's easier to envision them as Smash fighters since they're basically ninjas.

I'd say that an Assassin's Creed character is actually slept on. The series is uber iconic, is actually on Nintendo's radar (heck it even has content in Smash already) and belongs to a company that's fairly close to Nintendo.
I wouldn't be surprised if it was to get in.

 

[Louie G.]

Now this is an interesting topic to me. Is "being too grounded for Smash" something that should be considered? Are there any characters in Smash we can consider "too grounded."

So I think what elevates Snake, or say a Resident Evil character, is that their gameplay style will inform their kit in a distinct way. How do we represent stealth tactics in Smash? Or if we got a Resident Evil character, how do we accomplish the feeling of a horror game? New mechanics and gameplay angles can be brought out through this distinction. Not to mention the impact of a character like Snake at that point in Smash’s history, we’d never seen anything like it.

Lara Croft is an adventure game protagonist, of which we already have a few. Mind you, I’m not arguing that Lara CAN’T be unique - I think her flavor of weaponry would stand out among what we have in Smash right now. There’s something to be said about that kind of grounded more Indiana Jones style adventurer. But I feel her gameplay would be on the somewhat basic end.

Even if she fights dinosaurs and rides sharks… I feel like that doesn’t exactly inform her moveset. The events of the game are not especially grounded but Lara is a simple character, I feel like that’s the distinction people are making here.

 

[Scrimblo Bimblo]

Now this is an interesting topic to me. Is "being too grounded for Smash" something that should be considered? Are there any characters in Smash we can consider "too grounded." Off the top of my head, Snake is probably the closest, but I know Metal Gear can get pretty wild. Making an interesting and engaging move set for "normal human" would be a challenge.

It's one of many factors, but I feel like it's what has prevented stuff like Resident Evil from getting a character.
I know the series isn't actually grounded at all, but take Leon or Jill and they're pretty much just standard humans. At least in the context of videogames.

 

[Perkilator]

This discussion about Lara Croft actually kind of ties back to my beliefs that Smash fans either overestimate or underestimate a character’s chances depending on their mood each day.

 

[Louie G.]

This discussion about Lara Croft actually kind of ties back to my beliefs that Smash fans either overestimate or underestimate a character’s chances depending on their mood each day.

I’ve been pretty consistent in Lara’s (IMO) low chances, personally. Everyone just has different views that will direct the conversation positively or negatively depending on who is talking. I don’t think you can really umbrella “smash fans” like that, since this frames it as if everyone inherently believes the same thing and just chooses on a whim how to feel about it each day.

It’s hard to underestimate a character like this anyway, a western third party whose parent company has no presence in the game. By default this isn’t a good position to be in. At best this is a DLC character and frankly after Square Enix left it at the doorstep I think her chances are even lower than before. Tomb Raider as a series is not in a healthy place.

 

[Guynamednelson]

It's one of many factors, but I feel like it's what has prevented stuff like Resident Evil from getting a character.
I know the series isn't actually grounded at all, but take Leon or Jill and they're pretty much just standard humans. At least in the context of videogames.

Doesn't stop Marvel vs. Capcom from having multiple RE reps. I mean sure it makes more sense there since it's Vs. CAPCOM and RE is a major Capcom franchise, but they still make Chris and Jill feel at home in a fast-paced fighting game.

 

[SMAASH! Puppy]

Doesn't stop Marvel vs. Capcom from having multiple RE reps. I mean sure it makes more sense there since it's Vs. CAPCOM and RE is a major Capcom franchise, but they still make Chris and Jill feel at home in a fast-paced fighting game.

They're also very different from each other. Heck, they're both extremely different in both their own appearances.

EDIT: MvCI Chris is built on MvC3 Chris's skeleton, but they added a new mechanic that entirely changed how he was played. IIRC it mostly made him bad, but it is still different.



EDIT EDIT: I think an apt comparison for Lara Croft in Super Smash Bros. would be Nathan Drake in PlayStation All Stars: Battle Roayale. Compared to the rest of the roster, he's "just a guy", but they gave him moves that summon environmental objects that he can use to his advantage, such as exploding barrels, and he has cover shooter mechanics that look really funny. They also seem like the type of guy who would put themself in a situation where they have to fight a cartoon skeleton knight, a greek god of war, and whatever the heck the Big Daddies are supposed to be, all the while wondering how they got there.

I know less about Uncharted than I do Tomb Raider, but from what I've seen, I think the series's are similar enough to show that there is definitely something that you can do to make characters like them stand out. I mean, both series are at least pretending to adhere to reality when it comes to physics, but at the end of the day, they're still action heroes. I don't think they'll be that out of place in an action game, even if it's got giant purple space dragons.

 

[DarthEnderX]

Yeah Ezio or Altair would fit pretty well in my opinion, in the vein of someone like Snake. It's easier to envision them as Smash fighters since they're basically ninjas.

Thanks to Lost Crown, the Prince of Persia basically has a built-in Smash moveset now.

 

[Diddy Kong]

This discussion about Lara Croft actually kind of ties back to my beliefs that Smash fans either overestimate or underestimate a character’s chances depending on their mood each day.

Not only with her, Doom Guy and Master Cheif as well.

I don't think either one of them will make it in. Not unless Smash specifically starts to prefer third party newcomers. And it never did. And if so, priority will probably be the ones we had in Ultimate. Cause we're gonna lose a bunch of them.

Controversial take but I don't think outside of the "safe bunch" Sega, Namco, Capcom and maybe Square we can expect all that much from other third party companies. Not if the next Smash is gonna be that much different from Ultimate in approach and budget.

Unless we talking DLC of course. I can picture that happening much easier. Then again, just my vision as of this morning.

I do think with Sakurai closing his YouTube channel and all he's probably already laying the groundwork for the next Smash anyway. Including drafting new characters.

 

[Louie G.]

Unless we talking DLC of course. I can picture that happening much easier. Then again, just my vision as of this morning.

I figure most people are just vaguely accounting for DLC when discussing third parties in general. I agree with you on the front that someone like Doom Guy or Master Chief is pretty damn unlikely to appear in the base game but I wouldn't be surprised to see them pop up if DLC keeps a similar format to Ultimate. Assuming that Microsoft returns to play ball which I'm under the impression that they will. The promise of a big character as DLC later would probably make it easier to secure the return of veterans like Banjo and Steve in base game if that's what they choose to do.

I'm not sure what to make of the prospect of new companies coming on board for base game. For DLC it's a no brainer, since that was largely the intention with Ultimate's DLC anyway (to improve relations with external partners). Perhaps someone closely associated like Koei Tecmo is a safe bet, or maybe something a little less AAA like a number of indie characters, but something like a new western third party partner is gonna have to wait til at least DLC.

 

[Undella2]

Not sure if it's been brought up yet, but hey, Delzethin came up with a new video, this one about Takamaru:

Watched it, was pretty interesting to think about. Though he's not exactly one of my top most-wanted characters, I definitely wouldn't mind seeing him join... I think he's one of the better possible new "super-retro"/NES reps still left around.

 

[Kirbeh]

I nearly compared Tomb Raider’s situation to Assassin’s Creed, but I recognized I’d actually like to see someone like Ezio quite a bit more. Even though both series feel a bit out of place, I think I can just envision a flashier and more intriguing playstyle out of an Assassin’s Creed character. Part of the disconnect with me and Lara is that what she actually does is not all that interesting, and I can’t really cook up a unique spin on it that wouldn’t just feel like forced complexity.

I can agree that Lara's chances are incredibly low but if we're talking move set potential, I personally don't see any difference between her, an RE protag, an Assassin's Creed protag or who's already in Smash. Ezio would definitely play quite differently (being focused on his blades and whatnot), but I mean more of the whole "regular human" aspect.

Like Snake, you can expect Lara or Jill or whoever to have some punches and kicks. Lara and the RE characters also have access to a lot of the same weapons: handguns, shotguns, grenade launchers, etc.

For Lara specifically she also has access to other gear like her grappling hook or grapple gun and a crowbar. If you extend things to the 2016 reboot series, she's got a climbing axe for melee attacks and a bow (easy neutral special). And if you really want to, you can even reach into the mobile game that gives her access to chakrams and a magic staff. (The irony here, being that the mobile game makes more sense to blend into a classic Lara move set given that it's based on the original TR.)

Lara's biggest issue (one that I think most "grounded" human characters share) is what to do about an Up Special, but there's precedent for that too. She's got a grappling hook that can basically function like Plasma Wire or Pikmin Chain. Or you use the grapple gun and make it work like the recoveries of .

Another thing to note is that Lara is a pretty acrobatic character, which by default I think gives her some animations they could more easily pull from for jumping around platforms (being from a platformer and all) compared to her survival horror or more standard action game counterparts. This of course is a great benefit for a character like Ezio too, who I'd also like to see.

Not to say you can't translate the tanky RE characters either mind you, I've argued for their inclusion plenty (and still want them more than Lara or Ezio for that matter.)

 

[Swamp Sensei]

I'll never understand why people think Lara doesn't quite fit when Snake can.

Both franchises are pretty darn goofy while being grounded.

That's not to say I think Lara is likely, but I think the idea that Lara is too grounded for Smash is silly. People said the same for Snake way back after Brawl.

 

[Louie G.]

I guess I should just put it bluntly then to avoid the miscommunication, I just think Lara is boring LOL.

My explanation regarding Snake or Resident Evil is why they work for me. I like the extra layer of exploring those unique gameplay styles in Smash, essentially boiling down an unconventional genre "essence" into a fighting game, and find that more exciting than interpreting a more standard action hero. She's got a gun, a grappling hook, she's acrobatic, so you could easily make a unique moveset but I just struggle to think of one that would be striking or compelling for me. Not out of a lack of imagination, just a general disinterest in what's being presented to me and IMO she doesn't add much dynamically to the game. I think it also helps that Metal Gear and Resident Evil have more interesting setpieces, designs, characters and worlds to explore. Again, for me.

I still feel there's a fundamental disconnect between Lara Croft and Smash itself, which I guess I've failed again to justify but Speed Weed already did a nice job with earlier. I guess it kind of does just come down to the apparent lack of audience overlap and the odd, ever fluctuating status of the series itself.

 

[Kirbeh]

I guess I should just put it bluntly then to avoid the miscommunication, I just think Lara is boring LOL.

My explanation regarding Snake or Resident Evil is why they work for me. I like the extra layer of exploring those unique gameplay styles in Smash, essentially boiling down an unconventional genre "essence" into a fighting game, and find that more exciting than interpreting a more standard action hero. She's got a gun, a grappling hook, she's acrobatic, so you could easily make a unique moveset but I just struggle to think of one that would be striking or compelling for me. Not out of a lack of imagination, just a general disinterest in what's being presented to me and IMO she doesn't add much dynamically to the game. I think it also helps that Metal Gear and Resident Evil have more interesting setpieces, designs, characters and worlds to explore. Again, for me.

I still feel there's a fundamental disconnect between Lara Croft and Smash itself, which I guess I've failed again to justify but Speed Weed already did a nice job with earlier. I guess it kind of does just come down to the apparent lack of audience overlap and the odd, ever fluctuating status of the series itself.

Once again, I agree completely on the lack of audience overlap and overall chances.

Out of curiosity though, have you actually played any of the classic or legend era TR games? They have some great settings/locations to explore, set pieces and some cool/crazy monster designs once you move into the more supernatural themed levels. It does all come down to opinion and I can understand if TR just isn't your cup of tea, but I still feel like it's not getting proper credit here.

MG and RE definitely take it a step further, but I think TR stands pretty toe to toe with stuff like AC or PoP if you want to compare it to other western titles.

As far as how crazy they can get with the move set, the simplicity is actually one of the things that makes it more appealing to me personally. I feel like if you dropped Lara in 64, Melee, or Brawl no one would bat an eye in terms of move set complexity. Compared to how crazy and flashy a lot of the newer characters are though I suppose I can understand why some might find her less interesting.

I do like unique and flashy. but at the same time, I would prefer more universal mechanics over more character specific gimmicks.

 

[Borskaboska]

As far as how crazy they can get with the move set, the simplicity is actually one of the things that makes it more appealing to me personally. I feel like if you dropped Lara in 64, Melee, or Brawl no one would bat an eye in terms of move set complexity. Compared to how crazy and flashy a lot of the newer characters are though I suppose I can understand why some might find her less interesting.

I saw a post on Gamefaqs that suggested her neutral special would be her twin pistols that act like a mix between Banjo's Breagle Blaster and Joker's Gun, where if the initial hit lands it 'locks on' and then she can walk around while constantly firing at the opponent.

Bit of a digression, but the Lara discussion is making me think about what if smash characters weren't added in based on fan demand or even moveset potential, but solely off of historical importance. You'd probably have someone from Wizardry, Frogger, the coaster from roller coaster tycoon.... a tetris block?

 

[Wonder Smash]

I guess I should just put it bluntly then to avoid the miscommunication, I just think Lara is boring LOL.

My explanation regarding Snake or Resident Evil is why they work for me. I like the extra layer of exploring those unique gameplay styles in Smash, essentially boiling down an unconventional genre "essence" into a fighting game, and find that more exciting than interpreting a more standard action hero. She's got a gun, a grappling hook, she's acrobatic, so you could easily make a unique moveset but I just struggle to think of one that would be striking or compelling for me. Not out of a lack of imagination, just a general disinterest in what's being presented to me and IMO she doesn't add much dynamically to the game. I think it also helps that Metal Gear and Resident Evil have more interesting setpieces, designs, characters and worlds to explore. Again, for me.

I still feel there's a fundamental disconnect between Lara Croft and Smash itself, which I guess I've failed again to justify but Speed Weed already did a nice job with earlier. I guess it kind of does just come down to the apparent lack of audience overlap and the odd, ever fluctuating status of the series itself.

I wouldn't say you should listen to him on that particular subject. It almost sounds like he's saying people who want Lara Croft in Smash must don't actually play her games or something and that she was only popular in the 90s, despite the fact that she has three hit games in recent years.