Official Next Smash - Speculation & Discussion Thread

[Quillion]

is this the same logic as your greninja/shiek thing?

It is.

It's also the same reason we can't have Lyn from Fire Emblem be promoted from AT, since she would step on Mythra's toes.

 

[SPEN18]

...and then there's the clone apologists saying they actively want more variations of the same essential moveset.
Idk, almost all characters have the potential to bring something new to the table, as a natural consequence of fictional game universes and characters being extremely diverse. Besides, while I don't want characters added just for the sake of being cheaper resource-wise, I also don't think similarity to characters already in Smash is a barrier to entry if the character has the merits to be in without taking things like cloneability into account.

 

[Quillion]

...and then there's the clone apologists saying they actively want more variations of the same essential moveset.
Idk, almost all characters have the potential to bring something new to the table, as a natural consequence of fictional game universes being extremely diverse. Besides, while I don't want characters added just for the sake of being cheaper resource-wise, I also don't think similarity to characters already in Smash is a barrier to entry if the character has the merits to be in without taking things like cloneability into account.

Thing is, clones are fine since they're upfront about characters being similar to one another for less development time.

Having two characters that are built from the ground up just to be similar to one another is a waste no matter how you slice it.

 

[SPEN18]

Having two characters that are built from the ground up just to be similar to one another is a waste no matter how you slice it.

Realistically, I think it's highly unlikely that two characters built from the ground up would end up similar anyway. If you take two teams and have each develop one character, even with the explicit direction of "make this a sword-using air juggler who also has projectiles," then the two teams will probably come up with two completely different takes on that theme simply due to the vast number of possible variations. We can have multiple zoners, bruisers, jugglers, etc. that all express manifold diversities and personalities while still fitting the same archetypes. I think the Smash team is generally smart enough to know when two characters can borrow from each other and still achieve the vision for their respective movesets; because of natural diversities, most of the time they require ground-up work even if characters overlap in archetype.

 

[dream1ng]

It is.

It's also the same reason we can't have Lyn from Fire Emblem be promoted from AT, since she would step on Mythra's toes.

They don't make characters in a vacuum, original characters are deliberately crafted to not replicate an existing character, unless that's the point. Thematic overlap has existed since the beginning of the roster and doesn't impede being unique. Only you think Sheik makes Greninja unoriginal.

 

[fogbadge]

It is.

It's also the same reason we can't have Lyn from Fire Emblem be promoted from AT, since she would step on Mythra's toes.

well swap mythra out for Rex and there’s no problem

 

[Quillion]

Realistically, I think it's highly unlikely that two characters built from the ground up would end up similar anyway. If you take two teams and have each develop one character, even with the explicit direction of "make this a sword-using air juggler who also has projectiles," then the two teams will probably come up with two completely different takes on that theme simply due to the vast number of possible variations. We can have multiple zoners, bruisers, jugglers, etc. that all express manifold diversities and personalities while still fitting the same archetypes. I think the Smash team is generally smart enough to know when two characters can borrow from each other and still achieve the vision for their respective movesets; because of natural diversities, most of the time they require ground-up work even if characters overlap in archetype.

Well, Bowser's Smash 4 revamp wasn't a ground-up job. They revamped a lot of his animations, but kept a lot of the function.

And then he ended up intruding on Donkey Kong. There's a real danger from doing less than a ground-up job.

They don't make characters in a vacuum, original characters are deliberately crafted to not replicate an existing character, unless that's the point. Thematic overlap has existed since the beginning of the roster and doesn't impede being unique. Only you think Sheik makes Greninja unoriginal.

Then name two non-clone pairs in 64 and Melee that intrude on each other's niche.

Also, you know I don't see argumentum ad populum as a valid argument.

 

[SPEN18]

They don't make characters in a vacuum, original characters are deliberately crafted to not replicate an existing character, unless that's the point.

Yeah, take the observation that two characters built from the ground up are very likely to end up unique without them even trying, and conjoin it with them actively trying to make them distinct...

 

[Opossum]

Then name two non-clone pairs in 64 and Melee that intrude on each other's niche.

Also, you know I don't see argumentum ad populum as a valid argument.

I mean, Fox and Captain Falcon.

Both are super fast combo-centric close combat specialists with burst options. Hell, on an aesthetic level, they're also both sci-fi pilots with fire moves. And yet nobody in their right mind would say Fox and Captain Falcon make one another redundant.

 

[dream1ng]

Then name two non-clone pairs in 64 and Melee that intrude on each other's niche.

By the logic of thematic overlap equaling redundancy? Kirby and Jigglypuff, and Ness and Mewtwo.

You can bridge together a lot of characters with this weirdness. Ike and Cloud, the four characters who use input commands, Bowser and K. Rool, Bowser and Charizard, Link and Hero, Robin and Hero, Charizard and Ridley, Duck Hunt and Banjo, Simon and Min Min, Game & Watch and Villager, Dark Pit and Sephiroth, it goes on and on.

If you draw parallels between Palutena/Zelda, and Sheik/Greninja, you can form connections on the basis of sharing some sort of theme whether in the background of the character or in overview of their functionality between a ton of characters.

By this logic, we wouldn't get Crash because we have Sonic.

You can discredit the examples I've listed. And I wouldn't argue with you, because they obviously are different characters. My point is, that cuts both ways, into your examples as well. Being tied together in one or even a few qualities doesn't make characters inherently derivative.

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

I play the game mainly for the characters. Functions aren't really important to me. At most it means that the character I want to get good with doesn't always work out, since they don't mesh well with me.

The game sells on character names more than functions too. Also, this isn't like Dragon Ball Z or Naruto which can have many redundant characters. This is a game where no two playable characters are 100% the same(99% at most, which is pretty much just Daisy. Richter is barely better with a projectile's element being changed, and Dark Samus sticking out more with only electric abilities).

That said, I did prefer Bowser's older style, but even then, I found him much better to actually use in 4. He's the first one I easily took out the 100 Man Challenge with, due to the changes. Much like Ganondorf in Ultimate, he's outright improved. Even despite having changes that won't work with all previous players.

 

[SPEN18]

Well, Bowser's Smash 4 revamp wasn't a ground-up job. They revamped a lot of his animations, but kept a lot of the function.

And then he ended up intruding on Donkey Kong. There's a real danger from doing less than a ground-up job.

Now see, while I don't think Bowser and DK are all that similar to begin with, if I can't even convince you of that then I'll say that Bowser and DK are both worth having in the game even if you have to expend a lot of resources only to have them end up similar. No matter how similar you think they may be, it wouldn't feel right to exclude one of them; there is more to rostering than just some nebulously defined thematic uniqueness since we're dealing with real bonafide icons here, and sometimes even the legacies of entire franchises to a certain extent.

 

[Quillion]

I mean, Fox and Captain Falcon.

Both are super fast combo-centric close combat specialists with burst options. Hell, on an aesthetic level, they're also both sci-fi pilots with fire moves. And yet nobody in their right mind would say Fox and Captain Falcon make one another redundant.

But Fox is a lightweight while Falcon is heavy. Fox has a gun while Falcon is all brawling. Fox has moves that are all quick to come out while Falcon has to rely on mixing up quick weak moves and slow strong moves.

By the logic of thematic overlap equaling redundancy? Kirby and Jigglypuff, and Ness and Mewtwo.

You can bridge together a lot of characters with this weirdness. Ike and Cloud, the four characters who use input commands, Bowser and K. Rool, Bowser and Charizard, Link and Hero, Robin and Hero, Charizard and Ridley, Duck Hunt and Banjo, Simon and Min Min, Game & Watch and Villager, Dark Pit and Sephiroth, it goes on and on.

If you draw parallels between Palutena/Zelda, and Sheik/Greninja, you can form connections on the basis of sharing some sort of theme whether in the background of the character or in overview of their functionality between a ton of characters.

By this logic, we wouldn't get Crash because we have Sonic.

You can discredit the examples I've listed. And I wouldn't argue with you, because they obviously are different characters. My point is, that cuts both ways, into your examples as well. Being tied together in one or even a few qualities doesn't make characters inherently derivative.

So what's stopping me from saying you're casting a net too wide to make your argument?

I play the game mainly for the characters. Functions aren't really important to me. At most it means that the character I want to get good with doesn't always work out, since they don't mesh well with me.

The game sells on character names more than functions too. Also, this isn't like Dragon Ball Z or Naruto which can have many redundant characters. This is a game where no two playable characters are 100% the same(99% at most, which is pretty much just Daisy. Richter is barely better with a projectile's element being changed, and Dark Samus sticking out more with only electric abilities).

That said, I did prefer Bowser's older style, but even then, I found him much better to actually use in 4. He's the first one I easily took out the 100 Man Challenge with, due to the changes. Much like Ganondorf in Ultimate, he's outright improved. Even despite having changes that won't work with all previous players.

While I would prefer to have Bowser return to his Melee tank self (with buffs), I'm willing to compromise by keeping his Smash 4 functions and reverting to his Melee animations. Let's be real, people only like Bowser's Smash 4-on animations by association with his functional improvements, not on the animations' own merits.

Now see, while I don't think Bowser and DK are all that similar to begin with, if I can't even convince you of that then I'll say that Bowser and DK are both worth having in the game even if you have to expend a lot of resources only to have them end up similar. No matter how similar you think they may be, it wouldn't feel right to exclude one of them; there is more to rostering than just some nebulously defined thematic uniqueness since we're dealing with real bonafide icons here, and sometimes even the legacies of entire franchises to a certain extent.

And likewise, there's more to making a Smash character than just lifting their moves and personalities straight from their home games. Reposting one of my earlier posts:

You know something? I'm starting to miss when Smash altered the characters' personalities/portrayals in the transition from the source to Smash.

In 64, Melee, and Brawl, we got to see different sides to established characters while still making sense with canon. We got Mario keeping it together as the more-or-less Ryu of the game, Peach being sassy and flirty rather than a naive optimist, Pit becoming a skilled, loyal warrior, Bowser unleashing his primal fury, Ganondorf holding back his magic power and melee weapons as a power move, and Wario relying on his gross side, just to name a few.

Now with Smash 4 and on, they're just straight up bringing in the characters as they are normally. Villager and WFT feel like they don't give a crap like Smash!Mario and are doing their usual explore-and-make-friends or be a yoga instructor. TBF, the "different sides of a character" approach doesn't work all that well for characters like Shulk, Robin, or Incineroar who were recent at the time of their inclusions, but it still gets me wondering. It especially hurts when they change characters established in Smash to "better represent their canon selves" like Bowser and Ganondorf in a misguided attempt to appease the demand for "faithful portrayals".

Smash making changes to the characters' portrayals helped give the series a life of its own separate from its various sources. Now neglecting this aspect is making Smash feel too subservient to its sources. I know this is just another of my 64-Brawl boomerisms, but whatever; I just have to get this off my chest.

(I can at least concede that DK and Bowser's voices need to be changed on account of them not working with the lighter art style, but they should stop there.)

 

[Opossum]

But Fox is a lightweight while Falcon is heavy. Fox has a gun while Falcon is all brawling. Fox has moves that are all quick to come out while Falcon has to rely on mixing up quick weak moves and slow strong moves.

So weight differences matter. In that case, do you really think Dante would be as light as Sora? There's no way he would be.

And Fox uses his blaster for, functionally, one attack, whereas Captain Falcon's ONLY slow attack is the Falcon Punch. Everything else comes out quickly, making it an obvious outlier. If those differences are enough to separate Fox and Captain Falcon, then Sora and Dante being too similar shouldn't even be a topic of discussion.

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

While I would prefer to have Bowser return to his Melee tank self (with buffs), I'm willing to compromise by keeping his Smash 4 functions and reverting to his Melee animations. Let's be real, people only like Bowser's Smash 4-on animations by association with his functional improvements, not on the animations' own merits.

Except Bowser has evolved in the other Mario games to be much more like this. So he's only more accurate while functionally better. Really, my only issue at this point is Giga Bowser no longer playing similar to his Melee self to have both movesets properly like in 4(which gave the best of both worlds to a degree).

I wouldn't mind Giga Bowser as a proper playable semi-clone, though. But it'd be awkward due to being huge, regardless of removing immunity to throw moves or not. Cause making him much smaller also wouldn't do him service. Unlike Ridley, Giga Bowser was created for Smash being loosely based upon the Giant Bowser concept in various Super Mario and Yoshi games. Whereas Ridley isn't huge in every single media piece either, as well as his size being only a smaller part of his characterization, as his brutality is very much there in Smash. And even then, Giga Bowser actually debuted as a very particular boss in Smash, and was actually playable somewhat as a Final Smash, meaning the size is a bit more important than it is to Ridley in terms of being playable.

But you get the point. I mean, wouldn't matter in the end. Maybe as a unique playable character like Master Hand is(so specific modes only) or whatnot, but eh.

 

[dream1ng]

So what's stopping me from saying you're casting a net too wide to make your argument?

Well then I would say that you aren't actually the arbiter, and were this were a legitimate barrier for Smash, it wouldn't have permitted the examples you yourself have broached. So clearly your standards aren't the same as Smash's, thus your opinion over the parameters here would have no practical bearing.

And I would also be suspicious that if you're dismissing every single counterexample, even after asking for them, it's owing to staying entrenched over actually entertaining any rebuttal. I mean some of these characters were literally lampooned for sharing similarities, like Duck Hunt in Banjo's trailer.

 

[SPEN18]

And likewise, there's more to making a Smash character than just lifting their moves and personalities straight from their home games. Reposting one of my earlier posts:

Some creative liberty is fine, even sometimes required, and not every move has to be an explicit reference, nor do we have to attempt to transplant all the mechanics of particular games/genres into Smash, especially when it leads to overreliance on gimmicks. That's all fine and dandy.

I'll also acknowledge that there is a more and more apparent disunity between the older moveset styles and the newer ones, which incites a lot of this kind of debate and leads to people taking sides between 64-/Melee-/Brawl-type movesets and 4-/Ult-type movesets. If they had been more amenable to gradually updating the older characters in more significant ways than they did each time around, or if they had stuck to the older moveset styles rather than increasingly implementing the 4-style gimmicks, then my sense is that there would be a lot less of this type of argument no matter which of the two was chosen. But whether or not they should have actually done either of those things depends on a number of factors like how many more/less resources it would take to do so or what you would gain/lose by filling newcomer movesets with more "generic" moves that aren't explicit references to canon.

Regardless, what I can say with more certainty is that faithfully representing characters does indeed matter a great deal no matter your preference in style, for otherwise you're defeating the purpose of characters, well, being those characters. In the extreme alternative, you would lose the whole point of the crossover aspect. I don't see how it's better in any sense for Peach, for example, to show a different personality in Smash than she does in canon, or for Ganondorf to explicitly omit canon abilities other than, highly debatably, for the purposes of saving resources. Omitting canon traits in favor of made-up ones just misses you out on, well, the equally unique attributes you just omitted, and further than that it dampens the crossover aspect as I already mentioned. I feel like it's much safer to just let Peach feel like Peach and let Ganon feel like Ganon. In Ganondorf's case, they did what they could to make him feel like himself given the resources they had, and whether or not that succeeded, whether or not he should have been changed going forward, and whether or not they should have just skipped him in Melee in order to do him right in the next game are open debates. But whatever your opinion might be on old vs. new moveset styles, moveset updates for vets, etc., you can't just throw canonicity to the wind and I don't even see what you gain by doing so, given how naturally unique all these characters are when they are just themselves. Whether the move is a reference or made up, it still has to make the player feel like they are controlling the character they're controlling; both explicit references and made up moves are ways of achieving this effect, and while which is better at achieving it is debatable, they both have the common goal of doing the best they can to bring a character, as they are, to life in the world of Smash.

 

[Geno Boost]

how do you guys feel about EA, Sony, Tencent representation in smash? they are big gaming companies that still has no content in smash yet

 

[dream1ng]

Honestly I only understand wanting a character to be less faithful when that faithfulness is going to result in them becoming less fun or more obtuse in the game. For example, I appreciate Sakurai's efforts to be faithful to Kazuya and Min Min, but I don't find either particularly fun to play. When faithfulness becomes so dominant that Smash's own control scheme sort of takes a backseat, that's a little much for me.

But simply being less faithful for the sake of being less faithful... why? One thing most people appreciate is that character bringing with them a familiar and sometimes beloved arsenal, as well as just... remaining true to their source material. You can take liberties, sure, but why fix what isn't broken?

There's a reason people get grumbly when you suggest a character like Dixie or Shadow could wind up being a clone/semi-clone.

 

[Idon]

The funniest thing about Dante being invalidated by Sora is that I had already heard arguments for Sora being invalidated by Bayonetta.

We really don't learn do we?

 

[Swamp Sensei]

My face when I realize I have to cut either Captain Falcon or Samus because they both are heavy sci-fi bounty hunters that have the same up tilt and fire moves.

 

[JOJONumber691]

how do you guys feel about EA, Sony, Tencent representation in smash? they are big gaming companies that still has no content in smash yet

These three should never get in. Not only are they kinda garbage, or hard to work with, or both in the case of Sony, but you’re also letting in the Chinese Government with Tencent. And even though EA is tame in comparison to Sony and T E N C E N T , I feel like they would still be so hard to work with to the point where I Don’t see the point of adding a single character of theirs into the game, and this is coming from a Wattson Simp who would love to see her in Smash. So yeah, I hope none of them, or at least Sony and TENCENT, and especially Tencent, should never get into Smash. End of Story.

 

[Perkilator]

In other news, apparently a Smash fan game with one hell of a roster was cancelled.

There was a problem fetching the tweet

 

[dream1ng]

In other news, apparently a Smash fan game with one hell of a roster was cancelled.

There was a problem fetching the tweet

That's a good roster, but did this ever get off the ground at all? I've never heard of this game.

 

[Quillion]

Some creative liberty is fine, even sometimes required, and not every move has to be an explicit reference, nor do we have to attempt to transplant all the mechanics of particular games/genres into Smash, especially when it leads to overreliance on gimmicks. That's all fine and dandy.

I'll also acknowledge that there is a more and more apparent disunity between the older moveset styles and the newer ones, which incites a lot of this kind of debate and leads to people taking sides between 64-/Melee-/Brawl-type movesets and 4-/Ult-type movesets. If they had been more amenable to gradually updating the older characters in more significant ways than they did each time around, or if they had stuck to the older moveset styles rather than increasingly implementing the 4-style gimmicks, then my sense is that there would be a lot less of this type of argument no matter which of the two was chosen. But whether or not they should have actually done either of those things depends on a number of factors like how many more/less resources it would take to do so or what you would gain/lose by filling newcomer movesets with more "generic" moves that aren't explicit references to canon.

Regardless, what I can say with more certainty is that faithfully representing characters does indeed matter a great deal no matter your preference in style, for otherwise you're defeating the purpose of characters, well, being those characters. In the extreme alternative, you would lose the whole point of the crossover aspect. I don't see how it's better in any sense for Peach, for example, to show a different personality in Smash than she does in canon, or for Ganondorf to explicitly omit canon abilities other than, highly debatably, for the purposes of saving resources. Omitting canon traits in favor of made-up ones just misses you out on, well, the equally unique attributes you just omitted, and further than that it dampens the crossover aspect as I already mentioned. I feel like it's much safer to just let Peach feel like Peach and let Ganon feel like Ganon. In Ganondorf's case, they did what they could to make him feel like himself given the resources they had, and whether or not that succeeded, whether or not he should have been changed going forward, and whether or not they should have just skipped him in Melee in order to do him right in the next game are open debates. But whatever your opinion might be on old vs. new moveset styles, moveset updates for vets, etc., you can't just throw canonicity to the wind and I don't even see what you gain by doing so, given how naturally unique all these characters are when they are just themselves. Whether the move is a reference or made up, it still has to make the player feel like they are controlling the character they're controlling; both explicit references and made up moves are ways of achieving this effect, and while which is better at achieving it is debatable, they both have the common goal of doing the best they can to bring a character, as they are, to life in the world of Smash.

Honestly I only understand wanting a character to be less faithful when that faithfulness is going to result in them becoming less fun or more obtuse in the game. For example, I appreciate Sakurai's efforts to be faithful to Kazuya and Min Min, but I don't find either particularly fun to play. When faithfulness becomes so dominant that Smash's own control scheme sort of takes a backseat, that's a little much for me.

But simply being less faithful for the sake of being less faithful... why? One thing most people appreciate is that character bringing with them a familiar and sometimes beloved arsenal, as well as just... remaining true to their source material. You can take liberties, sure, but why fix what isn't broken?

There's a reason people get grumbly when you suggest a character like Dixie or Shadow could wind up being a clone/semi-clone.

I'm not saying that I prefer when Smash throws canon in the trash; I'm saying I prefer when Smash shows different sides to established characters.

In 64, Melee, and Brawl, we got to see different sides to established characters while still making sense with canon.

TBF, the "different sides of a character" approach doesn't work all that well for characters like Shulk, Robin, or Incineroar who were recent at the time of their inclusions, but it still gets me wondering.

It's the same reason why the Mario Strikers series has the cult following it does. Even when Battle League tones it down a little bit, that spin-off series loves showing how serious and competitive the Mario cast can get. Even still, Strikers doesn't use that as an excuse to throw the characters' established personalities out the window.

Again, 64-Brawl favoring the "different sides of character" approach gave the Smash series a life of its own that coincided with its crossover nature instead of overriding it. With Smash 4-on, it feels like the newer characters overemphasize the crossover aspect rather than balance that with giving their Smash incarnations their own identity.

In other news, apparently a Smash fan game with one hell of a roster was cancelled.

There was a problem fetching the tweet

Those are some nice sprites fr. Maybe if they have some incomplete sheets they can be donated to the Smash Crusade dev team or McLeodGaming.

That's a good roster, but did this ever get off the ground at all? I've never heard of this game.

TBH, the fact that Smash Flash 2 and Crusade utterly dominate the Smash fangame community makes any other project hard to get off the ground. Both McLeod and the Crusade team are also open to bringing in all the help they can get, which makes fostering potential rivals difficult.

 

[osby]

These three should never get in. Not only are they kinda garbage, or hard to work with, or both in the case of Sony, but you’re also letting in the Chinese Government with Tencent. And even though EA is tame in comparison to Sony and T E N C E N T , I feel like they would still be so hard to work with to the point where I Don’t see the point of adding a single character of theirs into the game, and this is coming from a Wattson Simp who would love to see her in Smash. So yeah, I hope none of them, or at least Sony and TENCENT, and especially Tencent, should never get into Smash. End of Story.

I mean, Nintendo already collaborates with Tencent to officially bring Switch to China and promote their games, including SSSBU.

It's not like a character owned by them getting into Smash is a big step-up from this relationship.

 

[JOJONumber691]

I mean, Nintendo already collaborates with Tencent to officially bring Switch to China and promote their games, including SSSBU.

It's not like a character owned by them getting into Smash is a big step-up from this relationship.

Yeah, but just because it’s likely doesn’t mean I don’t want it to happen personally, thus the use of Should.

 

[osby]

Yeah, but just because it’s likely doesn’t mean I don’t want it to happen personally, thus the use of Should.

I didn't say that it's likely, I just don't think the event of it happening is anything more than business.

Like, I don't enjoy the idea of making Activision Blizzard money if they get involved in Smash in the future but I also don't claim that it's something worse than Nintendo actively promoting their Switch releases.

 

[Lionfranky]

In other news, apparently a Smash fan game with one hell of a roster was cancelled.

There was a problem fetching the tweet

It's cancelled because they didn't add Master Chief.
2A from Nier is there, so Nintendo fanrule don't apply.

 

[Geno Boost]

In other news, apparently a Smash fan game with one hell of a roster was cancelled.

There was a problem fetching the tweet

The roster does need newcomers villains but I think it’s interesting they thought of Marina Lightyear
Also I do hope the resources they have done for that game so far can go to SSF2 or Smash Crusade at some point so these contents don’t just die forever

 

[fogbadge]

how do you guys feel about EA, Sony, Tencent representation in smash?

i think it's great as it is

 

[Geno Boost]

i think it would be funny if we get FIFA stage no one will ever expect that
and no footballer on the stage just like how no donald and goofy on hollow bastion stage
i could picture FIFA stage as a large football stadium stage from the 1st goal to the 2nd goal

 

[fogbadge]

i think it would be funny if we get FIFA stage no one will ever expect that
and no footballer on the stage just like how no donald and goofy on hollow bastion stage
i could picture FIFA stage as a large football stadium stage from the 1st goal to the 2nd goal

So what you’re suggesting is Nintendo pay an awful lot of money just to use a name? You’re right no one would expect that

 

[Wonder Smash]

I don't know why I could never get excited for Smash fangames for some reason.

 

[LiveStudioAudience]

If there's EA content to get in at all, it should be something from Sim City. A wacky stage with cities popping up, trains running around, and the occasional natural disaster would be pretty fun.

 

[chocolatejr9]

I don't know why I could never get excited for Smash fangames for some reason.

Maybe because they're FANgames? As in, none of it is official?

 

[SPEN18]

I don't know why I could never get excited for Smash fangames for some reason.

Maybe because they're FANgames? As in, none of it is official?

Also, while they usually include at least 1-2 of your personal picks, the overall rosters look too obviously like, well, fan rosters, with strange omissions and a few too many third party additions that have lots of fans in general but at best only fleeting Smash demand in particular. Having a "realistic" roster is probably not a big concern for these fan games, and maybe sometimes that can subconsciously throw you off from taking their game too seriously.

That and, well, the core gameplay probably isn't going to approach the quality of the real Smash; without immersive gameplay the crossover aspect just feels empty.

 

[Wonder Smash]

Maybe because they're FANgames? As in, none of it is official?

Actually, I can get excited for fangames but not Smash fangames for some reason.

I'd be down for a well-made PlayStation All-Stars fangame.

 

[dream1ng]

I'd be bigger on Smash Flash if they didn't have anime characters on the roster.

 

[ceterisparibus]

if genshin actually sustains its momentum for the next 5 years i want to see how many of you end up finding excuses like no nintendo connection/its tencent/its gacha. Cause that game might even up becoming another potential headliner while people pretend its not enough like minecraft/pre smash4 FF etc