Official Next Smash - Speculation & Discussion Thread

[fogbadge]

No one game, the last GBA F-Zero wasn't released outside of Japan because it was based on the anime that they never brought to the west. Also I'm having second thought in regards to GX's sales because from what I've been able to gather is a Nintendo "Player's Choice" game equates to 1 million sales and that'd line up with what the GX producer from SEGA was saying. I don't think we can solidly say one way or another about GX's sales.

I don't like you asserting I've said things that I didn't say based on nothing but your baseless extrapolation of the sentiments of my various thoughts on separate matters. I tend to kind of rant but I now wish this conversation had remained about F-Zero specifically because I feel like it's gone off-rails. I've never said success was an assured thing and I've mentioned plenty of times that it'd be a risk but that risks are worth taking and can lead to great success. I basically think it's been long enough to give the series another try and that there are enough new ideas that you could add to it to make it stand out from the rest of the franchise.

The first-party lineup is just your standard stuff. Smash, Mario Kart, Party, 3D, 2D, some sports, Zelda, Animal Crossing Pokemon and now Splatoon. Sprinkle some Kirby here and there and a once a generation Yoshi oh and the new Warioware was actually kind of nice. Remember a lot of these ports, outsourced and over the span of 5 freaking years well past half the console's lifecycle. I do think in general the output is lagging. There should be more Nintendo first-party titles every year than what they've been capable of producing but my main argument was that it isn't a diverse portfolio and it isn't a substantially new experience offered to their audience. You can praise them for the Pokemon games all you want and even if you like them you have to admit there's nothing new about them. I guess you'd point to Arceus but considered me unimpressed. Same low-effort graphics, no voice acting, bland one-dimensional characters, lifeless animations, segmented empty worlds and just our overall typical Pokemon game that could have probably run on the GameCube a game released at the beginning of 2022. Well beneath the potential of the franchise which is its own crying shame.

Why would you count the ports though in regards to all the Mario games your referring to? That's not new work. That's just repackaging old work. To count that as proper first-party output in the Switch's lifecycle seems wrong. Sometimes it's new work like with the case of the Mario Party all-stars game being completely redone old work and the new DLC for Mario Kart being repackaged from a phone game they made during the Switch's lifecycle. Would you honestly count Super Mario Bros U Deluxe or 3D worlds thought minus Bowser's Fury? Or Hyrule Warriors definitive edition or Mario Kart 8 DX or Skyward Sword HD or any of the 3D Mario ports? That just seems illogical to me in regards to defining Nintendo's actual first-party output during the Switch's lifecycle.

No I don't really want to play a lot of them honestly but that's not the problem. You're trying to count ports to puff the numbers and failing to recognize that we're halfway into the lifecycle of this system. This first-party catalog for Switch took half a decade to produce and it's littered with ports and outsourced work. I think counting annual Pokemon releases too is borderline puffing up the numbers too since they are such insubstantial, mediocre releases but if people want to go as far as to count those then so be it. Again I was mainly talking about Nintendo's release output outside of their standard Mario, Zelda Pokemon, Splatoon a couple of Kirby games and 1 mandatory Yoshi game. I think it's basically what they're capable of producing with the resources they're willing to allocate as things currently stand with them which is why I think some expansion and acquisitions (in conjunction with outsourcing work to reliable third-party studios) could really help address this piling of inactive IPs.

I forget that Camelot isn't first-party but they're second-party for sure so close enough. It's just a thought about what they could potentially do with more studios/staff under their belt. Hell if Camelot was first-party they could probably hire more staff and actually work on Golden Sun games again sometimes.

I do notice Nintendo bringing back some old franchises. That's what I want more of and I hope they keep doing it! So why not F-Zero? I showed you the example of an outside team pitching it to Nintendo. There was just a story about a studio with a proven track record offering to enhance-remaster Eternal Darkness and Nintendo just won't agree to it. Why not? Nintendo doesn't have a serious horror game. Luigi's Mansion in no way whatsoever could ever cut into Eternal Darkness' audience and vice versa. Here they have this IP with soooooooooooooooooooo much potential for expanded lore and worldbuilding that also has its own identity relative to its peers (Silent Hill, Resident Evil) offers a unique gameplay experience to Nintendo's audience and even has a proven studio willing to enhance-remaster the first game for Nintendo, a perfect opportunity to test the franchise, and still Nintendo refuses to cooperate. So even Nintendo's tried and true outsourcing method is unattainable for certain franchises. If Advance Wars and Famicon Detective Club can the greenlight then I think there is definitely a case to be made for various of Nintendo's long-neglected first-party IP.

Let's remember that this discussion started from my expressing my hopes that fans of Dragalia Lost wouldn't have to lose their game forever. I glanced at the lore and gameplay and it all seems very solid. As far as I'm aware Nintendo doesn't offer a dungeon-crawler. Why not build this franchise into that? They can literally start by enhance-porting what they have with the phone game to Switch to get things started. I think over time this IP could be built into a great success utilizing the more traditional video game packaging model versus chasing the gacha model. What's stopping Nintendo is their inability to see past a slump in sales as indicative of anything else other than the IP's overall quality. Maybe they should consider that they're doing something wrong? Like maybe the phone game market was holding this IP back from its potential actually and could do better on console? Dungeon-Crawlers are an established genre so why not bring that unique gameplay experience to their audience with a Nintendo spin on it? An enhanced-port would be borderline effortless so they really have no excuse to not at least try that and that's especially true if we consider the game such a failure that Nintendo would need to salvage some of their losses. There's basically no excuse other than Nintendo's trademark brand of stubborn risk-intolerance.

Now though I've definitely said my peace because I've largely just been reiterating my previous sentiments. We clearly disagree but there is absolutely no way I could make myself any clearer than I already have.

well first of all the dubbed the first 7 episodes of the f-zero anime so thats not true.

the thing about the ports is that a number of them are from the wii u's life cycle, which was a commercial failure so this is them given them a second chance. a number of ports had new things added in to them like bowsers fury. captain toad had number of new levels and then dlc, mario kart 8 had new characters ad battle mode maps, skyward sword had the updated graphic and they qol improvements, tropical freeze had funky kong added all their ports which are still out numbered by the new games all had additions.

see your argument that theyre not living up to the promise is muddied by the fact that what they said was "bring you new gameplay experiences" and a number of those games wouldnt have existed. they made arms, they made 1 2 switch, they published astral chain, the stretchers, good job many of these game wouldnt exist wihtout them so how does that not count? particularly the out sourced games that use their licences they couldnt exsist without them so why doesnt that count? and pretty much all the new entries in the ongoing series have had new things added, odyessy mario could control enemies, botw was very different from your average zelda, kirby's gone 3d for the first time, pokemons going open world (although im not sure how open to nw things so of the pokemon fans are) animal crossing had you build your town from the ground up, paper mario had a new battle system, ring fit adventure played very differently from wii fit, get it together has you complete micro games in a different way from usual. why doesnt any of that count?

eternal darkness isnt a nintendo IP it was made by sillicon knights, which would have counted as out sourcing, who went bankrupt in 2014 after a failed attempt to revive eternal darkness as it happens. so that wouldnt have counted even if it did work

calling out nintendo for being risk adverse is all very well and good but they did just go through a tricky period when the wii u failed and their attempt to revive star fox back fired so you can kinda see why

also as for nintendo not having any dungeon crawlers i think the mystery dungeon crowd would have something to say about that. as for why they might not want to do things with certain series well remember they co own a lot of them so they cant do anything about dragalia lost without cygames, golden sun with out camelot eic

Because they're still not alike situations. It's a stretch to justify it. If Zelda never transformed into Sheik in the first place and she was an all new character made for Smash, you'd have a much better point. But right now, we see that Zelda was meant to have Shiek in TP anyway, and it just happened to not make it into the game. It never got as far as the concept, but they still wanted to keep it. Brawl just happened to do what TP intended. That's not a case remotely similar to Ganondorf's situation.

Ganondorf didn't actually fight at any point with the Trident in FSA. More accurately, he went after it. He never used the weapon. He transformed into Ganon to use it. ...So it's not really the same thing.

I can think of some way better analogies that fit what you're saying, but it's just your particular points don't really hold in the end. I get what you mean, but just don't see any good reason to add it when it doesn't improve his current moveset in any way. He needs buffs, not a new weapon(that isn't really plausible for his particular playstyle).

but ganondorf and ganon are the same character as much as zelda and shiek are. its not about improving his moveset its about this rule that it needs to be something hes done in his own canon feels arbiter when we have so many characters who dont do so.

 

[Perkilator]

To change subjects a bit; I was always bummed Eggman never joined in after Sephiroth did. The former seems to me like the ideal 3rd part villain for Smash. I would’ve personally taken him over Steve but that’s besides the point

 

[Dinoman96]

eternal darkness isnt a nintendo IP it was made by sillicon knights, which would have counted as out sourcing, who went bankrupt in 2014 after a failed attempt to revive eternal darkness as it happens. so that wouldnt have counted even if it did work

I mean, Eternal Darkness is a Nintendo IP in that Nintendo owns it despite being made by Silicon Knights, Alex Rovias appears as a spirit in Smash Ultimate after all. Like how DKC/L 1-3 and DK64 + Star Fox Adventures are all owned by Nintendo despite Rare making them.

 

[Gengar84]

To change subjects a bit; I was always bummed Eggman never joined in after Sephiroth did. The former seems to me like the ideal 3rd part villain for Smash. I would’ve personally taken him over Steve but that’s besides the point

I think Eggman has a pretty good chance to make it in Smash at some point. Now that we have two Sonic movies and at least the first was a relative success, I could see him or Knuckles joining the next game.

 

[fogbadge]

I mean, Eternal Darkness is a Nintendo IP in that Nintendo owns it despite being made by Silicon Knights, Alex Rovias appears as a spirit in Smash Ultimate after all. Like how DKC/L 1-3 and DK64 + Star Fox Adventures are all owned by Nintendo despite Rare making them.

they why, when they tried to revive it were they bringing it to PC?

 

[Megadoomer]

they why, when they tried to revive it were they bringing it to PC?

To my knowledge, that was a spiritual successor like Yooka-Laylee, Bloodstained: Ritual of the Night, or Mighty No. 9. (since it was called Shadow Of The Eternals rather than Eternal Darkness 2)

 

[fogbadge]

To my knowledge, that was a spiritual successor like Yooka-Laylee, Bloodstained: Ritual of the Night, or Mighty No. 9. (since it was called Shadow Of The Eternals rather than Eternal Darkness 2)

hmm must have miss read the Wikipedia article

point still stands though: calling for Nintendo to revive something that was made in house while saying everything they didn’t make in house doesn’t count comes as a little off

 

[osby]

I would’ve personally taken him over Steve but that’s besides the point

I would've personally taken them both together:

 

[CapitaineCrash]

Nintendo made a post that showcase every trailer from Smash wii u with some comments from Sakurai on the process of making the trailers and the inspiration. The comments are pretty short but it's intersting and worth a read Take a look back at Super Smash Bros. fighter reveals with Masahiro Sakurai! – Part 1 | News | Nintendo

 

[Gengar84]

Now that we’re finally starting to get more villains in Smash and it was revealed that Sora won the ballot, I think it would be cool if we could get some form of Xehanort in the next game. If we did, does anyone have a preference which version of the character we got? My personal favorite form is Xemnas but I also love Ansem, Seeker of Darkness. I know it isn’t really canon to Kingdom Hearts but I’d love if we could somehow get Ansem, Xemnas, and Master Xehanort as a single character that could change between forms like Pokémon Trainer. Master Xehanort is probably the most likely if we were to only get one but he’s my least favorite of his three main forms.

 

[Diddy Kong]

There's a pretty decent chance that's going to change in BotW 2, though, if the cave drawings in the trailer are any indication. No guarantee, but it would be a little strange to set him up that way and just ditch it once we actually see him.

It's going to be interesting to see how that game changes our perception of what Ganondorf has to offer. Especially considering it's the first canon Zelda game to feature him since 2006 and is the most likely source for inspiration if he does manage to get a rework in the next Smash.

Honestly in case of a reboot and a total different yet humanoid looking version of a Calamity Ganon, like for example we had in Age of Calamity, I could see and maybe even want that sort of Ganon to be a replacement of our current Ganondorf.

Despite the complaints of the Zelda fanbase surrounding Ganondorf, I feel the character is quite underutilized in Zelda. And the current Zelda roster isn't reflective of what the series is like anymore.

A reboot Zelda roster I could see is:

Link (BotW style)
Zelda (BotW style, using Sheikah Slate attacks)
Impa (Age of Calamity style, spiritual successor to Sheik with a kodachi)
Calamity Ganon in humanoid form (this is a total what-if)
One of the Champions, with a slight bias towards Urbosa

 

[Gengar84]

Honestly in case of a reboot and a total different yet humanoid looking version of a Calamity Ganon, like for example we had in Age of Calamity, I could see and maybe even want that sort of Ganon to be a replacement of our current Ganondorf.

Despite the complaints of the Zelda fanbase surrounding Ganondorf, I feel the character is quite underutilized in Zelda. And the current Zelda roster isn't reflective of what the series is like anymore.

A reboot Zelda roster I could see is:

Link (BotW style)
Zelda (BotW style, using Sheikah Slate attacks)
Impa (Age of Calamity style, spiritual successor to Sheik with a kodachi)
Calamity Ganon in humanoid form (this is a total what-if)
One of the Champions, with a slight bias towards Urbosa

I would be really bummed to lose Ganondorf in his human form since he and Sephiroth are my two favorite characters in Smash, particularly Ganondorf’s OoT design, but I’d be interested to see what a humanoid Calamity Ganon could look like.

 

[osby]

Despite the complaints of the Zelda fanbase surrounding Ganondorf, I feel the character is quite underutilized in Zelda. And the current Zelda roster isn't reflective of what the series is like anymore.

Doesn't being reflective of what the series is like has its own problems?

Like, the Zelda cast in Brawl was a pretty good showcase of the franchise during GameCube/Wii era but that design and cast almost immediately became dated when Smash 4 came.

In contrast, Ultimate pulls from all kinds of Zelda games so it will be a good representation of the Triforce trinity over the years even if they all receive new looks later.

 

[Gengar84]

Doesn't being reflective of what the series is like has its own problems?

Like, the Zelda cast in Brawl was a pretty good showcase of the franchise during GameCube/Wii era but that design and cast almost immediately became dated when Smash 4 came.

In contrast, Ultimate pulls from all kinds of Zelda games so it will be a good representation of the Triforce trinity over the years even if they all receive new looks later.

Yeah, I like the approach Ultimate took in taking inspiration from across the whole series rather than just the newest games personally. Personally, I feel that way about the whole roster as well. I like when there is a good balance of old and new content, even though I do admittedly have a bias towards old.

 

[ZeldaFan01]

Omg, I've missed so much since my last post about Sonic & Tails in SSB6 hahaa. Enlighten me

... 2010s VAs lol

 

[CapitaineCrash]

I'm curious about why you think a normal Waddle Dee would be better than Bandana Dee beyond just having more things to pull from. Mostly because Bandana Dee's one thing is very robust in comparison to any of the individual things a normal Waddle Dee would do, and would fill a Smash moveset with ease. Is there a problem with originality, series representation, something else?

Personally, if it comes down to a character who can use 100 tools 1 way or a similar one who can use 1 tool 100 ways (hyperbole, I know), I'd pick the guy who has the better mastery of the single tool. They are far more likely to get past the surface level and do unique things with it, while also being more likely to feel cohesive. That's my take, though.

I see your point, and I can understand the appeal of Bandana dee, but personally I like the more generic character when it's possible. It's kind of remind me of people who wanted Edelgard over Byleth and while I do agree that Edelgard is a way better character, I personally like having Byleth who can use every weapons of the lords + his own weapon instead of having Edelgard that would have focus one one. It's just personnal perference when I see a moveset.

 

[osby]

I see your point, and I can understand the appeal of Bandana dee, but personally I like the more generic character when it's possible. It's kind of remind me of people who wanted Edelgard over Byleth and while I do agree that Edelgard is a way better character, I personally like having Byleth who can use every weapons of the lords + his own weapon instead of having Edelgard that would have focus one one. It's just personnal perference when I see a moveset.

To be fair, Kirby's hardly as restrictive when it comes to which characters can use which abilities. I don't think giving Bandana Dee the moves other Waddles Dees use would be out of character considering how Smash designs movesets.

Like how Rosalina and Peach use generic characters in their skillsets on top of their own abilities.

 

[Perkilator]

To be fair, Kirby's hardly as restrictive when it comes to which characters can use which abilities. I don't think giving Bandana Dee the moves other Waddles Dees use would be out of character considering how Smash designs movesets.

Like how Rosalina and Peach use generic characters in their skillsets on top of their own abilities.

THIS. It’s the reason why I see BWD bringing both a spear and a parasol if he ever got in (here’s my attempt, anyways).

 

[Guynamednelson]

Byleth who can use every weapons of the lords + his own weapon instead of having Edelgard that would have focus one one.

At the same time, by having to cram Byleth's own sword plus the house leaders' weapons into one kit, you have less room to show things Byleth's own whipsword can do.

 

[Diddy Kong]

I would be really bummed to lose Ganondorf in his human form since he and Sephiroth are my two favorite characters in Smash, particularly Ganondorf’s OoT design, but I’d be interested to see what a humanoid Calamity Ganon could look like.

I get you, but it's not like Nintendo is really doing much with Ganondorf these days. Sure he's a legacy character, but count the mainline appearances without remakes, and he doesn't appear all too much in Zelda. Given Calamity Ganon does return in BotW2, Calamity Ganon has just one less role than Ganondorf.

I read the discussion about the trident last page, and I could easily get behind that. But I pose a different look at the situation right now. And let's be honest, Ganondorf in Smash isn't a unique character at all, and there have been loads of complaints about his moveset, and it's broken for like, 3 games in a row. I do think with all this combined, Ganondorf might just be one of the characters leaving if we speak of a total reboot.

Not to speak of Sheik. The smaller Links are also not safe of course.

 

[Gengar84]

I get you, but it's not like Nintendo is really doing much with Ganondorf these days. Sure he's a legacy character, but count the mainline appearances without remakes, and he doesn't appear all too much in Zelda. Given Calamity Ganon does return in BotW2, Calamity Ganon has just one less role than Ganondorf.

I read the discussion about the trident last page, and I could easily get behind that. But I pose a different look at the situation right now. And let's be honest, Ganondorf in Smash isn't a unique character at all, and there have been loads of complaints about his moveset, and it's broken for like, 3 games in a row. I do think with all this combined, Ganondorf might just be one of the characters leaving if we speak of a total reboot.

Not to speak of Sheik. The smaller Links are also not safe of course.

The first BotW2 trailer does show an undead humanoid figure that is likely Ganondorf so there is still hope he will show up in that game. Potentially losing Ganondorf is just one more reason to hope for a deluxe version of Ultimate rather than a complete reboot. Although we did just get K. Rool despite his absence in his own series for the last 20 years.

 

[ZeldaFan01]

I get you, but it's not like Nintendo is really doing much with Ganondorf these days. Sure he's a legacy character, but count the mainline appearances without remakes, and he doesn't appear all too much in Zelda. Given Calamity Ganon does return in BotW2, Calamity Ganon has just one less role than Ganondorf.

I read the discussion about the trident last page, and I could easily get behind that. But I pose a different look at the situation right now. And let's be honest, Ganondorf in Smash isn't a unique character at all, and there have been loads of complaints about his moveset, and it's broken for like, 3 games in a row. I do think with all this combined, Ganondorf might just be one of the characters leaving if we speak of a total reboot.

Not to speak of Sheik. The smaller Links are also not safe of course.

I liked him better when he was just an Evil Blob...
-He/she just has better hair.
The Goddesses of Calamity has some choice words for , lol.
But as much as I would like to have the Return of Paultena's Bow (Trophy Gallery)(Palutena & .! from SSBB) Or Ocarina Link, Twilight Link.... Mmm, I guess if I had to pick one Character, it would have to be The Hero Of Time Himself.

 

[SPEN18]

A reboot Zelda roster I could see is:

Link (BotW style)
Zelda (BotW style, using Sheikah Slate attacks)
Impa (Age of Calamity style, spiritual successor to Sheik with a kodachi)
Calamity Ganon in humanoid form (this is a total what-if)
One of the Champions, with a slight bias towards Urbosa

I agree that the Zelda roster could use some reorganization and diversification, but the problem I have with this lineup is that it is hyperfocused on BotW and not on the series' history as a whole. Not that BotW shouldn't get dedicated representation, but I personally would rather have classic Link, Zelda much like we have now, Impa with OoT or hybrid design, etc. When I think of "Zelda" as a character, for example, I like to think of her as one character, one likeness if you will that represents how she's generally looked throughout the decades; even though there are multiple Links, they still all represent the same "character," just different incarnations of him. I agree that Link, Zelda, Ganondorf/Ganon, and Impa are the core four. However, I think they should also be less averse to including one-off types like Skull Kid, Midna, Champions (I don't see any issue with just picking one like they do with PKMN starters), or even Ghirahim, who people forget was a fairly popular request for 4. There's a total double-standard when it comes to one-offs if you look at series like FE, Xenoblade, and even PKMN, whose starters are rarely relevant outside of their generation of origin (with some notable exceptions like Charizard).

--

As for F-Zero, well, at least we can still play the SNES game. It's genuinely still super fun and can be picked up and played whenever. I would love for Nintendo to keep F-Zero as a more "hardcore" racer to pair with Mario Kart, but unfortunately it seems unlikely to come back. There are plenty of third party racers around, and maybe Nintendo just doesn't see it as an area where they can offer a true standout experience. The older F-Zero games were novel for pushing their hardware, and maybe that just wouldn't be the case so much for a new F-Zero game in a market littered with higher-res options on other platforms.

--

As for Golden Sun, it would still fill a niche; the other Nintendo RPGs of Zelda, FE, and Xenoblade, and PKMN are all moving farther away from the type of game that traditional GS is like. From what they've said publicly, it sounds like Camelot likes making RPGs, and the RPG-type elements that sneak their way into Camelot's sports games are further evidence. However, it's just difficult to pitch and justify a game with less of a casual-friendly market, no Mario branding, and on top of that a probably larger budget required. I don't think the issue is as simple as throwing more money and staff at it; GS has to be worth it relative to whatever else they could do with those resources, and Camelot is still pretty small anyway compared to other Nintendo-associated developers like Intelligent Systems. Outsourcing RPGs is not so easy either since, well, people typically like to work on their own story rather than someone else's. GS happening would probably be the result of Camelot really wanting to make a passion project and Nintendo, having already gotten their fill of Switch sports games, being okay with it. I thought Isaac's ballot performance might cause some reinvigoration, but I've gotten a little less optimistic on this front recently as nothing has seemed to result beyond some expanded auxiliary Smash representation.

 

[Yamat08]

...I mean, Ganondorf is still using Swords regardless of whether it's one or not. That's not inconsistent in itself. It took HW for him to use a Trident.

It took until Hyrule Warriors Legends, actually.

Also, I never found any merit in shoving his old moveset onto Black Shadow just for the sake of adding him. This doesn't really actually treat Black Shadow as worthwhile to begin with. He'd make a nice callback to the previous Ganondorf moveset, due to actually working well as a heavyweight magic user, but that's kind of it. The moveset works quite well for Ganondorf, representing his personality extremely well. Just have two Ganondorfs at this point and it'd work better without alienating other people. Worth noting that the change that Ganondorf got already made him feel awkward and I've seen some find him too different just due to how the sword was implemented. And he's not even that changed. Could be some found his slow self more pleasing to win with or something. Either way, removing his moveset doesn't actually do him justice, nor does adding Black Shadow just for the sake of giving Ganondorf another moveset. You can have all three and call it a day. It's a lot better to have more characters at that point than what becomes more of a moveset function.

I can agree with having all three. Ganondorf can exist as he does now, not making any drastic changes to his established playstyle than what was already made. Black Shadow could be a throwback to Ganondorf's pre-sword moveset (with several assets being re-used from Smash4 Ganondorf, and incidentally, come full circle in being a Captain Falcon Echo). Ganon could be a brand new moveset. Seems like a win-win overall.

Also, I gotta ask, what's actually being accomplished if you get rid of Ganondorf's Space World demo sword, something he FINALLY got incorporated into his moveset after high demand (and which was teased in his taunts throughout the years), to replace it with the trident? I think we've established earlier in this thread that Smash is pretty averse to making overly drastic changes to characters' movesets in general. Or are people advocating that Ganondorf has stance changes where he equips a different weapon? I guess that could work, though he'd still have to sacrifice a Down-B or something in the process. Though really, I think they should just establish a new character at that point, and I think Ganon would work since he is sorta the OG main villain of the Zelda series (keep in mind that Ganondorf is technically newer, a human avatar for Ganon that debuted in OOT), and this would also bring him more in line with Link and Zelda (who also sport multiple variants of themselves on the roster).

Honestly in case of a reboot and a total different yet humanoid looking version of a Calamity Ganon, like for example we had in Age of Calamity, I could see and maybe even want that sort of Ganon to be a replacement of our current Ganondorf.

Despite the complaints of the Zelda fanbase surrounding Ganondorf, I feel the character is quite underutilized in Zelda. And the current Zelda roster isn't reflective of what the series is like anymore.

A reboot Zelda roster I could see is:

Link (BotW style)
Zelda (BotW style, using Sheikah Slate attacks)
Impa (Age of Calamity style, spiritual successor to Sheik with a kodachi)
Calamity Ganon in humanoid form (this is a total what-if)
One of the Champions, with a slight bias towards Urbosa

Doesn't being reflective of what the series is like has its own problems?

Like, the Zelda cast in Brawl was a pretty good showcase of the franchise during GameCube/Wii era but that design and cast almost immediately became dated when Smash 4 came.

In contrast, Ultimate pulls from all kinds of Zelda games so it will be a good representation of the Triforce trinity over the years even if they all receive new looks later.

Agreed with this. Of course, I'm part of the anti-reboot crowd, but even if Smash did go for a full-on roster revamp, I'd prefer them not to pull what Melee and Brawl did by focusing almost exclusively on the latest entry in the Zelda series (and even in those cases, it could be somewhat excused with the reusable assets that just happened to be available). Smash is mostly about celebrating Nintendo history, after all. NOT expending the efforts to make half the N64 game roster's worth of playable fighters exist to blatantly advertise ONE recent game.

 

[Gengar84]

It took until Hyrule Warriors Legends, actually.


I can agree with having all three. Ganondorf can exist as he does now, not making any drastic changes to his established playstyle than what was already made. Black Shadow could be a throwback to Ganondorf's pre-sword moveset (with several assets being re-used from Smash4 Ganondorf, and incidentally, come full circle in being a Captain Falcon Echo). Ganon could be a brand new moveset. Seems like a win-win overall.

Also, I gotta ask, what's actually being accomplished if you get rid of Ganondorf's Space World demo sword, something he FINALLY got incorporated into his moveset after high demand (and which was teased in his taunts throughout the years), to replace it with the trident? I think we've established earlier in this thread that Smash is pretty averse to making overly drastic changes to characters' movesets in general. Or are people advocating that Ganondorf has stance changes where he equips a different weapon? I guess that could work, though he'd still have to sacrifice a Down-B or something in the process. Though really, I think they should just establish a new character at that point, and I think Ganon would work since he is sorta the OG main villain of the Zelda series (keep in mind that Ganondorf is technically newer, a human avatar for Ganon that debuted in OOT), and this would also bring him more in line with Link and Zelda (who also sport multiple variants of themselves on the roster).



Agreed with this. Of course, I'm part of the anti-reboot crowd, but even if Smash did go for a full-on roster revamp, I'd prefer them not to pull what Melee and Brawl did by focusing almost exclusively on the latest entry in the Zelda series (and even in those cases, it could be somewhat excused with the reusable assets that just happened to be available). Smash is mostly about celebrating Nintendo history, after all. NOT expending the efforts to make half the N64 game roster's worth of playable fighters exist to blatantly advertise ONE recent game.

I’ve already said about as much as I can in defense of Ganondorf having a trident but I’ll try to clarify my stance one last time. It’s not that I’m really against the idea of him having a sword, it’s just that when they finally give him one, they just copied moves from Ike and Cloud rather than give him anything original. Smash also has a ton of sword users already and Ganon has an iconic weapon he is known for that no one else in Smash has anything like. The closest thing we have is Byleth and that’s just part of a multi-weapon kit. The trident would make the character stand out from everyone else in Smash while remaining faithful to his home series. Whether or not you feel that Ganondorf and Ganon should be sharing moves is a matter of personal opinion and I can respect that if you disagree. I’m also not a huge fan of having so many versions of the same character. I don’t think we need more than one Link or Mario and I personally preferred ZSS and Sheik as transformations. Ganon is different enough from Ganondorf that he’d be fine as a separate character but I’d much prefer him as a transformation. The trident for Ganondorf was assuming we only got one version of the character.

 

[DarthEnderX]

" Ganondorf has never actually wielded the Trident itself in a single canon game. " covered that beforehand. So doesn't remotely count. Non-canon makes the point moot.

No it doesn't. "canon" is a limitation you are imposing yourself. Smash is full of non-canon movesets. And Smash itself isn't canon with any of it's source series.

HW may not be canon to the central Zelda timeline, but it is a Nintendo published and approved product. There's nothing preventing them from using HW Ganondorf in Smash, and they in fact very much should, because it's easily one of his best, and most fighting game compatible incarnations.

Now that we’re finally starting to get more villains in Smash and it was revealed that Sora won the ballot, I think it would be cool if we could get some form of Xehanort in the next game.

I don't. All the KH villains are just cheap Sephiroth knockoffs, and we already have him.

 

[fogbadge]

I don't. All the KH villains are just cheap Sephiroth knockoffs, and we already have him.

how? theyre not infused with alien DNA nor do they try a drop a meteor on the planet nor carry an absurdly long sword nor have a deep connection with the series hero. i dont think they have any of the traits that make sephiroth, sephiroth

 

[chocolatejr9]

I don't. All the KH villains are just cheap Sephiroth knockoffs, and we already have him.

Tell me you've never played Kingdom Hearts without telling me you've never played Kingdom Hearts.

 

[ALongWistfulSquiggle]

how? theyre not infused with alien DNA nor do they try a drop a meteor on the planet nor carry an absurdly long sword nor have a deep connection with the series hero. i dont think they have any of the traits that make sephiroth, sephiroth

I mean, there's the whole plotline of hanging out with scientists, finding out a bunch of forbidden knowledge, and deciding to trash the world because of what they found.

Other than that and visual similarities, not really.

 

[fogbadge]

I mean, there's the whole plotline of hanging out with scientists, finding out a bunch of forbidden knowledge, and deciding to trash the world because of what they found.

Other than that and visual similarities, not really.

actually xehanorts desire to remake the world came from what hed seen in the worlds in his youth not from forbidden knowledge

well yeah a lot of normuas characters look similar

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

No it doesn't. "canon" is a limitation you are imposing yourself. Smash is full of non-canon movesets. And Smash itself isn't canon with any of it's source series.

HW may not be canon to the central Zelda timeline, but it is a Nintendo published and approved product. There's nothing preventing them from using HW Ganondorf in Smash, and they in fact very much should, because it's easily one of his best, and most fighting game compatible incarnations.

...So again, it's not a canon Zelda game. https://www.gameinformer.com/b/news...ule-warriors-place-in-the-zelda-timeline.aspx As confirmed by Aonuma. It's a fun celebrational spin-off.

Doesn't delude your point about the non-canon movesets, though. Which is a fair point. But no, it's not a "limitation". I don't believe there's a good reason for Ganondorf to use the Trident as he doesn't do so in a canon game. That's how I feel about it. I'm not limiting myself by doing that. I'm giving it to the proper character who uses it, Ganon. The other character who is the original villain of the series and rather badly represented with barely one boss fight that doesn't even use his original weapon to begin with. The one he's most famous for. Ganondorf does use swords in canon, even if he uses a more odd one. And sometimes in non-canon like Hyrule Warriors.

Agree to disagree, though. That said, there's no real reason to use his HW incarnation at this point. It doesn't mesh with his moveset and we know Sakurai won't give him an all new moveset either way(a new character with one, sure. But the current one is going to only get updates while remaining the same core character overall).

I’ve already said about as much as I can in defense of Ganondorf having a trident but I’ll try to clarify my stance one last time. It’s not that I’m really against the idea of him having a sword, it’s just that when they finally give him one, they just copied moves from Ike and Cloud rather than give him anything original. Smash also has a ton of sword users already and Ganon has an iconic weapon he is known for that no one else in Smash has anything like. The closest thing we have is Byleth and that’s just part of a multi-weapon kit. The trident would make the character stand out from everyone else in Smash while remaining faithful to his home series. Whether or not you feel that Ganondorf and Ganon should be sharing moves is a matter of personal opinion and I can respect that if you disagree. I’m also not a huge fan of having so many versions of the same character. I don’t think we need more than one Link or Mario and I personally preferred ZSS and Sheik as transformations. Ganon is different enough from Ganondorf that he’d be fine as a separate character but I’d much prefer him as a transformation. The trident for Ganondorf was assuming we only got one version of the character.

Actually, Ganondorf's Down Smash is rather unique to begin with. It doesn't get copied from anyone, and only is basically similar to his old Down Smash. So while there is copying, two of them function pretty similar to his original moves. I agree the sword should be used more(like it'd make an excellent Up Air without changing the function of the overall move).

Anyway, I feel Ganondorf is represented best with his core weapon, the Sword, regardless if we have regular Ganon or not. However, I also want to note that the Transformation into Ganon isn't really noteworthy in Smash gameplay itself. You can't control Ganon himself, making it more like a Summon Mechanic in practice(akin to End of Day, if you will). As a Boss Battle, yes, his Transformation is important. But as for you playing as the duo, you only get to actually play as a single character. Or if you want another example, the Gun Men from Duck Hunt is pretty much what Ganon is to Ganondorf on the playable front. ...Besides that, I can't remember if you ever fight Ganondorf and then Ganon in any Classic Mode. I think you do? I know that Adventure Mode treats them as entirely different characters due to the Spirits and all(which makes it weirder with Giga Bowser, but he's a Smash OC anyway). I would like to play as Ganon even as a Final Smash if he isn't going to be playable. Hell, that'd be a good way to use his Trident. That or a proper Transformation character(that you can select who you use too at first). Not as a Final Smash, but the hard part is how the Transform command would work. Only his Up B is entirely unfaithful(as he does no animations similar to Dark Dive, with the others being based upon his animations or some similar part of his ability).

but ganondorf and ganon are the same character as much as zelda and shiek are. its not about improving his moveset its about this rule that it needs to be something hes done in his own canon feels arbiter when we have so many characters who dont do so.

I'll repeat what I said earlier; same person, different character. They function differently as overall characters and abilities. That's why they should be separate, just like Zelda and Sheik are.

Anyway, agree to disagree is still a good idea in this case.

(Also, not to you, but I want to point out that Grandfather Clause isn't what saved Sheik. It was that in TP, she actually was meant to be in it, but they scrapped the concept before making artwork. Sakurai would have to entirely refigure out how Zelda should fight at that point, so there's no reason to try and change it. That, and considering he planned a Toon Zelda/Toon Sheik combo as shown by the files(and no, that is not Tetra. He would've used that file name if so. They're just Toon clones like Toon Link), it's pretty clear he found Sheik an important aspect of the game and of Zelda's capabilities overall as two characters. Obviously it was not implemented well and they'd have been better off split apart. Grandfather Clause may have played a role, but it's clear it wasn't enough on its own to get it done).

 

[fogbadge]

...So again, it's not a canon Zelda game. https://www.gameinformer.com/b/news...ule-warriors-place-in-the-zelda-timeline.aspx As confirmed by Aonuma. It's a fun celebrational spin-off.

Doesn't delude your point about the non-canon movesets, though. Which is a fair point. But no, it's not a "limitation". I don't believe there's a good reason for Ganondorf to use the Trident as he doesn't do so in a canon game. That's how I feel about it. I'm not limiting myself by doing that. I'm giving it to the proper character who uses it, Ganon. The other character who is the original villain of the series and rather badly represented with barely one boss fight that doesn't even use his original weapon to begin with. The one he's most famous for. Ganondorf does use swords in canon, even if he uses a more odd one. And sometimes in non-canon like Hyrule Warriors.

Agree to disagree, though. That said, there's no real reason to use his HW incarnation at this point. It doesn't mesh with his moveset and we know Sakurai won't give him an all new moveset either way(a new character with one, sure. But the current one is going to only get updates while remaining the same core character overall).


Actually, Ganondorf's Down Smash is rather unique to begin with. It doesn't get copied from anyone, and only is basically similar to his old Down Smash. So while there is copying, two of them function pretty similar to his original moves. I agree the sword should be used more(like it'd make an excellent Up Air without changing the function of the overall move).

Anyway, I feel Ganondorf is represented best with his core weapon, the Sword, regardless if we have regular Ganon or not. However, I also want to note that the Transformation into Ganon isn't really noteworthy in Smash gameplay itself. You can't control Ganon himself, making it more like a Summon Mechanic in practice(akin to End of Day, if you will). As a Boss Battle, yes, his Transformation is important. But as for you playing as the duo, you only get to actually play as a single character. Or if you want another example, the Gun Men from Duck Hunt is pretty much what Ganon is to Ganondorf on the playable front. ...Besides that, I can't remember if you ever fight Ganondorf and then Ganon in any Classic Mode. I think you do? I know that Adventure Mode treats them as entirely different characters due to the Spirits and all(which makes it weirder with Giga Bowser, but he's a Smash OC anyway). I would like to play as Ganon even as a Final Smash if he isn't going to be playable. Hell, that'd be a good way to use his Trident. That or a proper Transformation character(that you can select who you use too at first). Not as a Final Smash, but the hard part is how the Transform command would work. Only his Up B is entirely unfaithful(as he does no animations similar to Dark Dive, with the others being based upon his animations or some similar part of his ability).


I'll repeat what I said earlier; same person, different character. They function differently as overall characters and abilities. That's why they should be separate, just like Zelda and Sheik are.

Anyway, agree to disagree is still a good idea in this case.

(Also, not to you, but I want to point out that Grandfather Clause isn't what saved Sheik. It was that in TP, she actually was meant to be in it, but they scrapped the concept before making artwork. Sakurai would have to entirely refigure out how Zelda should fight at that point, so there's no reason to try and change it. That, and considering he planned a Toon Zelda/Toon Sheik combo as shown by the files(and no, that is not Tetra. He would've used that file name if so. They're just Toon clones like Toon Link), it's pretty clear he found Sheik an important aspect of the game and of Zelda's capabilities overall as two characters. Obviously it was not implemented well and they'd have been better off split apart. Grandfather Clause may have played a role, but it's clear it wasn't enough on its own to get it done).

no they didn’t there’s no proof that they wanted to put her in TP and the ability to summon phantoms is a non canon move of Zeldas as well sure she could take control of them but the ability to summon them was only shown by bellum, the spirits of good and anjean

 

[MasterCheef]

Anyone else getting the impression Microsoft is trying to destroy __ Halo ?

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

no they didn’t there’s no proof that they wanted to put her in TP and the ability to summon phantoms is a non canon move of Zeldas as well sure she could take control of them but the ability to summon them was only shown by bellum, the spirits of good and anjean

I wasn't going to actually say the Phantom thing, since I was hoping you'd bring up a good analogy. But yes, there's definitely a good case of it being awkward. Incidentally, the Phantom is a move that should be removed and they should add something that isn't from a different Toon character to begin with. It doesn't really bolster her game, and there's a ton more magical options throughout the series anyway that would make sense for Zelda to use besides the Goddess Spells(which retroactively she happens to be responsible for, heh). The Medallions probably won't work, though, seeing as they require a sword to begin with, but also don't really have easy ways to interpret them. Ether freezes things, which may be doable at least. Bombos explodes everything in the air, and that's already what Din's Fire is. Quake doesn't... really fit anything, but it could be plausible to implement as something similar to DK's Side B in terms of what it does(embed people into the ground). On the other hand, it'd be a different element from her 3 current specials and would stand out more(as they're Fire, Wind, and Water respectively). But I'm not sure it would actually fit her playstyle that well.

Incidentally the Phantom also doesn't do anything bad other than being an awkward move to add at most. However, I do like the idea of Toon Zelda anyway, and it's her move to begin with, so giving her uses of that while giving Zelda a new Down B also would do some good for her. Just figuring out a good one beyond her past two is the harder part.

FYI, Hyrule Historia confirmed Twilight Princess Concept Art of Sheik. So yes, she was meant to be in TP. The way the writing is, it's pretty unclear if she had the concept art before Brawl's development or before TP's development. Either way, they still wanted her in TP, which is what led to the drawings. However, we have more interviews too. It looks like the final word is "Sheik has concept art during the development of TP". ...You can't really get more than "meant to be in" than straight-out concept art of the character. Unless you're interpreting it more as "was considered" instead, which is a fair way to look at it. Either way, yeah, the concept art existed during the development of TP for Sheik. Which means there was already a TP Sheik to begin with. Just unused. That's the overall point I was making.

 

[chocolatejr9]

Anyone else getting the impression Microsoft is trying to destroy __ Halo ?

No, but they're trying to destroy Perfect Dark, given the reports about The Initiative...

 

[Gengar84]

...So again, it's not a canon Zelda game. https://www.gameinformer.com/b/news...ule-warriors-place-in-the-zelda-timeline.aspx As confirmed by Aonuma. It's a fun celebrational spin-off.

Doesn't delude your point about the non-canon movesets, though. Which is a fair point. But no, it's not a "limitation". I don't believe there's a good reason for Ganondorf to use the Trident as he doesn't do so in a canon game. That's how I feel about it. I'm not limiting myself by doing that. I'm giving it to the proper character who uses it, Ganon. The other character who is the original villain of the series and rather badly represented with barely one boss fight that doesn't even use his original weapon to begin with. The one he's most famous for. Ganondorf does use swords in canon, even if he uses a more odd one. And sometimes in non-canon like Hyrule Warriors.

Agree to disagree, though. That said, there's no real reason to use his HW incarnation at this point. It doesn't mesh with his moveset and we know Sakurai won't give him an all new moveset either way(a new character with one, sure. But the current one is going to only get updates while remaining the same core character overall).


Actually, Ganondorf's Down Smash is rather unique to begin with. It doesn't get copied from anyone, and only is basically similar to his old Down Smash. So while there is copying, two of them function pretty similar to his original moves. I agree the sword should be used more(like it'd make an excellent Up Air without changing the function of the overall move).

Anyway, I feel Ganondorf is represented best with his core weapon, the Sword, regardless if we have regular Ganon or not. However, I also want to note that the Transformation into Ganon isn't really noteworthy in Smash gameplay itself. You can't control Ganon himself, making it more like a Summon Mechanic in practice(akin to End of Day, if you will). As a Boss Battle, yes, his Transformation is important. But as for you playing as the duo, you only get to actually play as a single character. Or if you want another example, the Gun Men from Duck Hunt is pretty much what Ganon is to Ganondorf on the playable front. ...Besides that, I can't remember if you ever fight Ganondorf and then Ganon in any Classic Mode. I think you do? I know that Adventure Mode treats them as entirely different characters due to the Spirits and all(which makes it weirder with Giga Bowser, but he's a Smash OC anyway). I would like to play as Ganon even as a Final Smash if he isn't going to be playable. Hell, that'd be a good way to use his Trident. That or a proper Transformation character(that you can select who you use too at first). Not as a Final Smash, but the hard part is how the Transform command would work. Only his Up B is entirely unfaithful(as he does no animations similar to Dark Dive, with the others being based upon his animations or some similar part of his ability).


I'll repeat what I said earlier; same person, different character. They function differently as overall characters and abilities. That's why they should be separate, just like Zelda and Sheik are.

Anyway, agree to disagree is still a good idea in this case.

(Also, not to you, but I want to point out that Grandfather Clause isn't what saved Sheik. It was that in TP, she actually was meant to be in it, but they scrapped the concept before making artwork. Sakurai would have to entirely refigure out how Zelda should fight at that point, so there's no reason to try and change it. That, and considering he planned a Toon Zelda/Toon Sheik combo as shown by the files(and no, that is not Tetra. He would've used that file name if so. They're just Toon clones like Toon Link), it's pretty clear he found Sheik an important aspect of the game and of Zelda's capabilities overall as two characters. Obviously it was not implemented well and they'd have been better off split apart. Grandfather Clause may have played a role, but it's clear it wasn't enough on its own to get it done).

So much for moving on lol. I think they took the animation for Ganondorf’s down smash from Cloud. It likely has very different properties due to their different attributes though.

As for the similarities between Sephiroth and Xehanort, I think they are mostly visual, and even then it’s just the long coat and silver hair. It makes sense that I’d love the designs of Ansem and Xemnas so much since Sephiroth is one of my favorite characters ever. Character-wise, Xehanort always reminded me a lot more of Emperor Palpatine from Star Wars than Sephiroth.

 

[Sid-cada]

FYI, Hyrule Historia confirmed Twilight Princess Concept Art of Sheik. So yes, she was meant to be in TP.

There's a quote right on the page that I think points to the opposite, actually.

"The pictures at the bottom right represent what Zelda from Twilight Princess would look like if she transformed into Sheik. They were drawn for Super Smash Bros. Brawl."

So, yes, the Sheik in Brawl was a hypothetical design made by the character artists for the sake of Brawl.

 

[Yamat08]

Agree to disagree, though. That said, there's no real reason to use his HW incarnation at this point. It doesn't mesh with his moveset and we know Sakurai won't give him an all new moveset either way(a new character with one, sure. But the current one is going to only get updates while remaining the same core character overall).

Speaking of which, though, does anyone think we'll ever see a new Fighter that's another incarnation of an existing Fighter again, like Dr. Mario or the multiple Links (and I guess transformations being their own thing, though unless we downgrade to a 3DS again, I see no reason to split Pyra and Mythra)? The Legend of Zelda series certainly has several incarnations of the same characters, though aside from maybe Ganon, I can't see yet another one of them going down too well (in fact, Toon Link initially seemed to act as a replacement for Young Link). Also, what would you even call these new incarnations? Dr. Mario may've already been from an established title, but Smash specifically had to come up with the descriptors of "Young" and "Toon" to differentiate Link. For that matter, could anyone see them ever making the same character, with the same appearance, but using an alternate moveset?

Not as a Final Smash, but the hard part is how the Transform command would work. Only his Up B is entirely unfaithful(as he does no animations similar to Dark Dive, with the others being based upon his animations or some similar part of his ability).

It may not be faithful, but it is a standard recovery move commonplace among almost the entire Smash roster. If anyone move was to be replaced with a transformation command, that wouldn't be it (and god knows Ganondorf's recovery is already bad enough with it).

FYI, Hyrule Historia confirmed Twilight Princess Concept Art of Sheik. So yes, she was meant to be in TP. The way the writing is, it's pretty unclear if she had the concept art before Brawl's development or before TP's development. Either way, they still wanted her in TP, which is what led to the drawings. However, we have more interviews too. It looks like the final word is "Sheik has concept art during the development of TP". ...You can't really get more than "meant to be in" than straight-out concept art of the character. Unless you're interpreting it more as "was considered" instead, which is a fair way to look at it. Either way, yeah, the concept art existed during the development of TP for Sheik. Which means there was already a TP Sheik to begin with. Just unused. That's the overall point I was making.

Earlier, it was mentioned that Hyrule Historia was vague about this even in the Japanese version. Would you happen to have a scan of the Japanese page? I might be able to interpret it and see if that's actually the case.

 

[NonSpecificGuy]

I wouldn’t necessarily say that’s Microsoft’s fault. Some studios just have issues. Not everyone gets along and sometimes people who are hard to get along with end up in higher up positions. It’s like that everywhere. Yeah it’s a shame that 343 and The Initiative aren’t the best they could be but like I said, it’s not uncommon in ANY industry for this to happen.

Studios like the Coalition, Playground games, Turn 10, Rare, and more are thriving under Microsoft right now and eventually I imagine the Initiative will to. It’s not uncommon for games to have a “redemption arc” if you will that ends up supporting the game for years and years and Halo Infinite is only in its first year. Whether it survives is up to the players.

I mean hell, Nintendo’s best bet for Retro was to ditch them and let the studio burn itself to the ground with scandal after scandal and 5 different cancelled projects within its first couple years. Instead they bought them and now Retro is Nintendo’s premier USA developer. One known for its prestige. Just give it some time. I’m sure things will work out fine.

 

[Megadoomer]

Since some Youtube channels are still making Smash movesets, this was just posted. (also, I like the channel and figure that the movesets made here are pretty thorough)

I'd love to see Dante (and Vergil, if we could get both at once) added into a future Smash game.