Official Next Smash - Speculation & Discussion Thread

[Quillion]

No I think DLC is still affected by AT selection. Freeing up those resources away from those characters is just as applicable to DLC as it is to base game. Nintendo doesn't care to discourage anybody from continuing to support a character that got AT treatment but they even more so don't care to spend resources reverting their previous decision on the matter.

Again they could reverse course on this but I highly doubt they would because it'd be counterproductive to the overall goal of AT inclusion. Yeah we'd be surprised at an AT being upgraded but we'd be even more surprised and I think overall satisfied with a character that's not in the game whatsoever and especially from a franchise that's not represented whatsoever. I don't think the surprise factor neutralizes the counterproductive factor I elaborated on earlier.

But again, the overall goal of AT inclusion would still be maintained by a same-game DLC promotion. Just over a shorter timeframe.

 

[SPEN18]

No but I didn't say it was a blanket disconfirmation from future games. I specifically stated it likely a blanket disconfirmation of the game they're an AT in. I even laid out the nebulous caveat of Nintendo ultimately getting to do whatever they truly want. It's not impossible but I'd say it's borderline impossible because I think Nintendo views AT as a disconfirmation and thus freeing up resources for other characters they'd rather pursue/prioritize.

No I think DLC is still affected by AT selection. Freeing up those resources away from those characters is just as applicable to DLC as it is to base game. Nintendo doesn't care to discourage anybody from continuing to support a character that got AT treatment but they even more so don't care to spend resources reverting their previous decision on the matter.

It doesn't free up resources for DLC, though. The amount of resources it takes to make a character just depends on their vision for implementing the source material into Smash, and is irrespective of whether the character is already an AT.

It wouldn't be reversing any previous decisions or wasting any already spent resources, either. The old AT can still easily appear in the battles where that character is not being played, which statistically will be a vast majority of them. The PC is also functionally completely distinct from the AT; they both add to the game in their own ways despite representing the same character. Plus, the resources spent on the AT are a sunk cost once it comes time to decide the DLC, and making future decisions based on those misses you out on the potentially massive gains from making a character fully playable.

Why would Nintendo view an AT as a disconfirmation for later DLC? Circumstances for characters can change dramatically within the timeframe between the base roster and DLC roster decisions. They might not even decide the first party ATs for the most part.

Again they could reverse course on this but I highly doubt they would because it'd be counterproductive to the overall goal of AT inclusion. Yeah we'd be surprised at an AT being upgraded but we'd be even more surprised and I think overall satisfied with a character that's not in the game whatsoever and especially from a franchise that's not represented whatsoever. I don't think the surprise factor neutralizes the counterproductive factor I elaborated on earlier.

I'm not saying that an AT promo would necessarily be more or less surprising than another character; it would depend on the specific characters involved. It's that Nintendo, in their effort to surprise us with the roster, is not making the ATs with the purpose of tipping us off that they don't plan to later make those characters playable. The ATs are likely decided before they even fully know or have thought through if the respective characters would be strongly considered for DLC. In most cases, the ATs have not been the types of characters that are likely in DLC, but that's not because they're ATs and knowing a character is an AT does not a priori tell you that they would be in the highly unlikely crowd for DLC.

As for bringing in new characters and franchises not in the game at all vs. further representing series with at least auxiliary representation already, it would again depend heavily on the specific characters involved. People generally like bringing in new franchises, yeah, but that is far from the only thing to consider in determining how well a newcomer is likely to be received. A character is not automatically a better addition just because they're from a new franchise or don't already have auxiliary forms of representation that are, if we're being honest, dwarfed by the status of being a PC.

I think he was if we're just laying it out straight. I didn't think it'd happen during Ultimate but the idea of Waluigi "cheating" his way into the game does make sense for the character. Then on top of that he has a very vocal demand that is still there. I stand by my statement. If Waluigi couldn't do it I don't think any of them could. Springman had the red carpet all laid out before him to waltz his way into the game and it still didn't pan out like that.

From my perspective, that is (1) ignoring all the factors besides popularity that go into choosing characters, (2) ignoring the factors going against Waluigi specifically that probably led to him not being chosen, and (3) ignoring the possible merits of other ATs that could have made or could make them even stronger candidates than Waluigi.

Yeah, Spring Man is a mysterious case and I would have preferred that he be the ARMS rep, personally. But despite him not actually making it, basically all of the concrete indicators and evidences surrounding the ARMS choice point to Spring Man's AT not being the reason he didn't make it.

The teaser announcement to me was just a generic ballot of illustrating the idea that it could supposedly be anyone from the franchise.

Exactly, illustrating the idea that it could be anyone from the franchise. Obviously they knew when the tease was made that only one of them was actually chosen, but they chose to purport the idea that anyone was fair game up until the reveal.

If we're getting into the realm of Nintendo/Sakurai didn't say this or that then borderline anything with this franchise becomes possible

It's not just them not saying anything about the AT. It's them not saying anything about it when addressing directly a directly related topic, that being the choice of Min Min over a presumed mascot type like Spring Man. And not only that but also them offering an alternative reason for the choice that has nothing to do with the AT.

I don't believe they're just gonna announce these kinds of behind-the-scenes considerations to all of us

No, I don't think they are motivated to disclose much about their process. If anything, it's to their advantage not to do so. However, if the AT really was the reason for not going with Spring Man, then I really don't see why Sakurai would actively avoid revealing that when talking directly about it, especially while also presenting an alternative account that would apparently contradict that being the case.

The reason they gave is kind of weaksauce if you're willing to be critical about it. It's a clear deflection away from the issue. Didn't he even bring up players wondering about Springman not being chosen as the preface to that statement about everybody being the main character? I don't remember exactly but yeah why not choose the clear mascot of the franchise? Oh it's because he's already an AT that's why.

How is it evasion? Yes, Sakurai directly addressed the expectation that it would be Spring Man in the Presents video, and didn't mention the AT as a factor.

I also disagree with the reasoning they gave, but I'm not ready to accuse them of lying or hiding the truth about it (although the joke about search results for "Spring Man" may have rubbed some people the wrong way). They gave a plausible answer to why they didn't choose the mascot; even though I disagree with it I acknowledge that, from their perspective, the ARMS director's personal opinion on the matter would have been an influencing and possibly decisive factor.

Basically Min-Min is just more popular than Springman and they had a convenient excuse to skip over him entirely; that being he was an AT already.

Here I think you're just acknowledging another factor that could have led to Min Min over Spring Man other than the AT. "Convenient excuse," if that was a thing at all (which I don't think it was), would be far from a decisive factor anyway and would say nothing about what they would do for an AT with no clear alternative from the same franchise.

 

[Chuderz]

I only intended to offer my thoughts on the current discussion. Most discussions here lately I haven't found super necessary to get involved in but I guess when it came to this I thought my opinion was warranted. I think I'm done after this.

It doesn't free up resources for DLC, though. The amount of resources it takes to make a character just depends on their vision for implementing the source material into Smash, and is irrespective of whether the character is already an AT.

It wouldn't be reversing any previous decisions or wasting any already spent resources, either. The old AT can still easily appear in the battles where that character is not being played, which statistically will be a vast majority of them. The PC is also functionally completely distinct from the AT; they both add to the game in their own ways despite representing the same character. Plus, the resources spent on the AT are a sunk cost once it comes time to decide the DLC, and making future decisions based on those misses you out on the potentially massive gains from making a character fully playable.

Why would Nintendo view an AT as a disconfirmation for later DLC? Circumstances for characters can change dramatically within the timeframe between the base roster and DLC roster decisions. They might not even decide the first party ATs for the most part.



I'm not saying that an AT promo would necessarily be more or less surprising than another character; it would depend on the specific characters involved. It's that Nintendo, in their effort to surprise us with the roster, is not making the ATs with the purpose of tipping us off that they don't plan to later make those characters playable. The ATs are likely decided before they even fully know or have thought through if the respective characters would be strongly considered for DLC. In most cases, the ATs have not been the types of characters that are likely in DLC, but that's not because they're ATs and knowing a character is an AT does not a priori tell you that they would be in the highly unlikely crowd for DLC.

As for bringing in new characters and franchises not in the game at all vs. further representing series with at least auxiliary representation already, it would again depend heavily on the specific characters involved. People generally like bringing in new franchises, yeah, but that is far from the only thing to consider in determining how well a newcomer is likely to be received. A character is not automatically a better addition just because they're from a new franchise or don't already have auxiliary forms of representation that are, if we're being honest, dwarfed by the status of being a PC.

I think fundamentally we disagree on AT settling the matter of the representation of the relevant characters in the game. Duh I know but whereas I see a matter on the character as ceremoniously resolved when they're made into an AT you see a potential for future revision. You're not wrong but just because it's technically a possibility doesn't mean it's likely or equally not Nintendo's final call on the matter of said characters.

I just don't see Nintendo carving out this really weird lane for AT characters getting potentially promoted where their AT is effectively turned off when they're being controlled by a player. Sure they could but will they really consider doing that? Nintendo is a bunch of suits, I can barely flatter the idea of them having this level of imagination, especially for a game they seemingly begrudgingly do somewhat or at least have a very complicated relationship with.

Ultimately it seems like we interpret Nintendo as an organization very differently. I think they view AT as disconfirmation as sort of just a matter of doing business. I don't think they have strong feelings on whether it tips off the speculators or if it will be well received at all with the inclusion being anew franchise or not. They had to have known Byleth wasn't going to go well hence they dumped them at the end of a widely celebrated Fighters' Pass composed of otherwise completely new third-party franchises. Nonetheless I personally think they view an AT as just as good as disconfirmation in the sense they're effectively passing on this specific character for this current entry into the Smash franchise.

I was also speaking as just a rule of thumb when talking about metrics of how well-received a newcomer will be in Smash. Of course there's a load of nuance that goes into that. My favorite FP2 character was Sephiroth from a series and game that was already represented in Smash and I think it suffices to say that his reception was very well received outside of some minor grumblings from FF fans.

From my perspective, that is (1) ignoring all the factors besides popularity that go into choosing characters, (2) ignoring the factors going against Waluigi specifically that probably led to him not being chosen, and (3) ignoring the possible merits of other ATs that could have made or could make them even stronger candidates than Waluigi.

I'm sorry but what aspect of Waluigi's potential in Smash is missing from basically leading the entire pack of the ATs? He has a humanoid figure, has a well-established expressive personality, is owned by Nintendo and has a strong demand that is already preconditioned toward heavily promoting whatever future Smash game he appears in. What is actually going against him? Moveset potential? No way that's just absurd. That he wasn't specifically made by Nintendo? Oh well, they sure still like to use him if that was seriously a problem.

Also saying Waluigi is the top AT to consider and the one that'd likely have been chosen to be promoted if it was to happen doesn't ignore the merits of the other ATs but yeah saying he leads the pack does separate him from the rest and it's true. I know it's kind of cool in a way to drag on Waluigi because he's popular and his fans are annoying I guess (I have no idea really) but I really can't take any argument denying his status among the ATs very seriously.

Yeah, Spring Man is a mysterious case and I would have preferred that he be the ARMS rep, personally. But despite him not actually making it, basically all of the concrete indicators and evidences surrounding the ARMS choice point to Spring Man's AT not being the reason he didn't make it.



Exactly, illustrating the idea that it could be anyone from the franchise. Obviously they knew when the tease was made that only one of them was actually chosen, but they chose to purport the idea that anyone was fair game up until the reveal.



It's not just them not saying anything about the AT. It's them not saying anything about it when addressing directly a directly related topic, that being the choice of Min Min over a presumed mascot type like Spring Man. And not only that but also them offering an alternative reason for the choice that has nothing to do with the AT.



No, I don't think they are motivated to disclose much about their process. If anything, it's to their advantage not to do so. However, if the AT really was the reason for not going with Spring Man, then I really don't see why Sakurai would actively avoid revealing that when talking directly about it, especially while also presenting an alternative account that would apparently contradict that being the case.



How is it evasion? Yes, Sakurai directly addressed the expectation that it would be Spring Man in the Presents video, and didn't mention the AT as a factor.

I also disagree with the reasoning they gave, but I'm not ready to accuse them of lying or hiding the truth about it (although the joke about search results for "Spring Man" may have rubbed some people the wrong way). They gave a plausible answer to why they didn't choose the mascot; even though I disagree with it I acknowledge that, from their perspective, the ARMS director's personal opinion on the matter would have been an influencing and possibly decisive factor.



Here I think you're just acknowledging another factor that could have led to Min Min over Spring Man other than the AT. "Convenient excuse," if that was a thing at all (which I don't think it was), would be far from a decisive factor anyway and would say nothing about what they would do for an AT with no clear alternative from the same franchise.

Sure they did because they'd just narrowed down the field of potential CP6 characters exclusively to ARMS characters. Should they have actually said "Oh except Springman because he's an AT" in the actual direct or a Sakurai column? They're a business and Sakurai represents that business whenever he's doing anything Smash related. They're never gonna take time to speak directly to the concerns of Smash speculators or highlight their criteria for Smash inclusion like that. Them saying nothing of the sort has no material impact on the fact that Springman was still skipped over and it was very likely because he was an AT already.

I just see the "everyone is the main character" bit to be an obvious deflection away from the issue. The reason for this deflection is to keep their cards closer to their chest and in doing so remain in the more advantageous position when doing anything from negotiating the characters all the way to the eventual reveal/release of said characters.

And like I said I think it's double-pronged. First and foremost Min-Min is more popular than the rest of the ARMS cast. Then when you factor in Nintendo's likely feelings on ATs being effective disconfirmations for playable status and you get this ideal set of conditions to skip over the mascot/protag of your new franchise that needs promotion. I think Nintendo just feels like they lucked out and I don't think they give a damn about the feelings of the director. Again they're a bunch of fossils in suits that can't even wrap their collective minds around the value of having good online infrastructure in what it would bring to their systems.

Oh well that's all of what I had to say. I respectfully disagree with you on this topic and I've elaborated on my reasoning in sufficient enough detail as well as I've also tried to be fair about it.

 

[DarthEnderX]

I'm pretty sure you'd make an exception to any rule with a Scrooge McDuck Mii Costume that comes with the Moon theme.

Nah. I can't even make an exception for that. It's too much of a floodgate opener.

With Captain N there's still, like, this sliver of deniability.

 

[HyperSomari64]

Nah. I can't even make an exception for that. It's too much of a floodgate opener.

Spoiler: The Ugly Truth

The TRUE floodgate opener will be an original character made for the Universal's Mario movie.

 

[Dinoman96]

Spoiler: The Ugly Truth

The TRUE floodgate opener will be an original character made for the Universal's Mario movie.

Well in that sense, you could say that Lucario's a floodgate opener considering he technically debuted in a movie beforehand. Likewise Cloud's Advent Children outfit first came from...Advent Children before it started appearing in games. At the very least, these non-video game things are still part of a greater IP owned by gaming companies.

I just think there's kind of a big difference between that and going up to Time Warner asking to include Bugs Bunny or Batman or something.

 

[fogbadge]

Well, you could say that Lucario's a floodgate opener considering he technically debuted in a movie beforehand. Likewise Cloud's Advent Children outfit first came from...Advent Children before it started appearing in games. At the very least, these non-video game things are still part of a greater IP owned by gaming companies.

I just think there's kind of a big difference between that and going up to Disney asking to include Iron Man or Darth Vader or something.

do remember though that lucario was made for a video game and that advent children was a follow up to a game.

 

[chocolatejr9]

Spoiler: The Ugly Truth

The TRUE floodgate opener will be an original character made for the Universal's Mario movie.

I mean, for a lot of people, Foreman Spike may as well be an original character for the movie...

 

[Geno Boost]

I saw pretty well made smash crusade mod for E.M.M.I. it has a fun moveset and unique gimmick

 

[Perkilator]

My stance on AT's: my problem with them getting promoted in the same game as DLC is that it would (IMO) waste dev time going back and accomodating for them, in which case they might as well have been playable in the base game if Sakurai was able to do so.

 

[Gengar84]

My stance on AT's: my problem with them getting promoted in the same game as DLC is that it would (IMO) waste dev time going back and accomodating for them, in which case they might as well have been playable in the base game if Sakurai was able to do so.

You could always just leave the character as an Assist Trophy and make them playable at the same time. They didn’t take Chrom out of Robin’s Final Smash when they made him playable so he already fills two roles (sorry if that’s already been brought up, I haven’t really been keeping up with the thread lately).

 

[ceterisparibus]

I think it's pretty telling when the point of dlc is to push pass sales as well as to promote the idea of a evergreen title. In which there's little to no point to include ATs in which almost none of that is likely to achieve that result within the same game.

Also pretty telling when in the 20 year history of smash we only got 3 promotes between entries, none of whom were dlc. Yea yea, patterns and all, but is there even any first party ATs which would pull in new audiences or other 3rd parties which would be much more lucrative but made 0 sense as a one-off cameo, like the whole host of 3rd party dlc in ultimate?

 

[SPEN18]

Chuderz I recognize these AT arguments can be tiring and tend to go in circles a bit, so if you don't feel compelled to respond then that is alright.
I am going to respond here, however, since it is a topic I am particularly invested in.

I just don't see Nintendo carving out this really weird lane for AT characters getting potentially promoted where their AT is effectively turned off when they're being controlled by a player. Sure they could but will they really consider doing that? Nintendo is a bunch of suits, I can barely flatter the idea of them having this level of imagination, especially for a game they seemingly begrudgingly do somewhat or at least have a very complicated relationship with.

Now, see, from my perspective it is equally weird for them to quit on making a character they really want playable just because of the minor, auxiliary representation that already exists. If it is weird for you to think of turning off the AT for certain battles, then note that there are other possible solutions, including just straight-up allowing the AT and PC to appear on the battlefield simultaneously.

Even if your view of Nintendo is so negative, one would think that corporate moneymaking urges would override the presence of an AT if the AT character was the one they really think would make money as DLC. Even if you don't think the current ATs are DLC moneymakers, that doesn't mean that in principle an AT'd character in the future couldn't be that or couldn't become that sometime after being AT'd.

Ultimately it seems like we interpret Nintendo as an organization very differently.

Probably, yeah. I mean, I definitely don't agree with everything they do and at times have been dismayed by certain "business realities." I also write a lot on here pushing back against promotional characters and such, so it's not all sunshine and roses. But they're human beings liable to both praise and criticism like everyone else.

They had to have known Byleth wasn't going to go well hence they dumped them at the end of a widely celebrated Fighters' Pass composed of otherwise completely new third-party franchises.

In their eyes, any character they add is a good addition to the game that they want people to be excited about. The fact that the people clamoring for a continuation of the third party flooding with every single pick set their expectations the way they did was not Nintendo's fault, nor was it likely Nintendo's anticipation. From Nintendo's perspective, FE:TH was still a "new world" added to Smash with a lot of fans, especially among the general Nintendo audience who bought copies of TH like hot cakes. As much as I criticize Nintendo's handling of third parties in Ultimate's DLC, I wouldn't go so far as to say Nintendo simply stopped thinking that some of their own IPs couldn't make profitable and exciting additions as well.

I'm sorry but what aspect of Waluigi's potential in Smash is missing from basically leading the entire pack of the ATs?

Among the things that could possibly have been factors against Waluigi:
side-character syndrome;
lack of mainline appearances;
lack of obvious auxiliary content to comprise a full fighter pack;
only allotting so many slots to 1P chars and deciding to use those on characters more directly promoting a specific Switch game;
and, yes, moveset potentially since most of the DLC characters had more complex and/or gimmicky movesets, which I don't necessarily imagine for Waluigi.

Note that I actually like Waluigi and don't necessarily agree with all of those as reasons to exclude him, but from their perspective any or all could have been issues.

Also saying Waluigi is the top AT to consider and the one that'd likely have been chosen to be promoted if it was to happen doesn't ignore the merits of the other ATs but yeah saying he leads the pack does separate him from the rest and it's true.

It's not just that you're claiming Waluigi would have been their top AT choice. Even if he was, I don't think the gap was so large as you claim, and not so large that him not getting in allows us to make a blanket statement about the chances of all other ATs going forward.

Should they have actually said "Oh except Springman because he's an AT" in the actual direct or a Sakurai column? They're a business and Sakurai represents that business whenever he's doing anything Smash related. They're never gonna take time to speak directly to the concerns of Smash speculators or highlight their criteria for Smash inclusion like that. Them saying nothing of the sort has no material impact on the fact that Springman was still skipped over and it was very likely because he was an AT already.

No, I don't think they would have gone out of their way to say Spring Man was ineligible during the tease, if that was the case. That I can concede. They didn't just quietly exclude him from the tease while saying nothing, though, which they could have done also. Maybe his inclusion in the tease is only a minor point in his favor, but it still represents one of many potential opportunities for them to mention the AT as an issue where they did not do so.

I just see the "everyone is the main character" bit to be an obvious deflection away from the issue. The reason for this deflection is to keep their cards closer to their chest and in doing so remain in the more advantageous position when doing anything from negotiating the characters all the way to the eventual reveal/release of said characters.

Obvious? No, definitely not obvious. Maybe you are more cynical about Nintendo as a company than I am, but here I am saying their claim is a plausible thing that could have happened even if I disagree with it. Remember that it's not just the "everyone is a main character" bit, which could, yes, in theory just be them further buttering up the real reasoning. It's IMO more importantly that the ARMS director wanted Min Min to be the rep. The "everyone is a main character" bit might not have even been a necessary factor given the other one.

First and foremost Min-Min is more popular than the rest of the ARMS cast.

Again, I think this is just a further illustration of how characters' circumstances can change during the time from the ATs being chosen to the time of the DLC roster being chosen. Min Min's popularity might not have been as emergent or noticeable to them at the time of the ATs being chosen; her status within the ARMS fandom has only been heightened by recent years and so it's possible she simply surpassed SM in the time since SM was chosen as the AT to represent ARMS. So, again, Min Min being popular just presents a further possible scenario other than the AT being an issue. And that goes back to my point that there's so many good explanations for Min Min being chosen that the AT being an issue seems more and more wildly speculative to me.

--

my problem with them getting promoted in the same game as DLC is that it would (IMO) waste dev time going back and accomodating for them, in which case they might as well have been playable in the base game if Sakurai was able to do so.

But again, the resources spent on the ATs in base represent a sunk cost by the time they decide the DLC, which is almost certainly budgeted separately from all the items in the base game, anyway. Their philosophy has always been to make the base game as good as it possibly can and not "save" or purposefully exclude items for later DLC. Doing the best they can for each and every character in that base game that they want to be as good as possible from the start is a primary motivating factor for auxiliary forms of representation like ATs, Trophies, etc. Circumstances for characters can change dramatically between base roster decision time and DLC decision time; previously unforeseen events and circumstances like new releases or ballooning popularities can change a character's priority ranking.
It is not a waste to do the best you can for a character only to later take the opportunity to improve upon that previous representation. Companies make newer, better versions of existing products all the time and it is not a waste. In this case the original AT could potentially still serve its original purpose in the game alongside the new PC, which makes it even more of a non-issue.

 

[Sucumbio]

I think it's pretty telling when the point of dlc is to push pass sales as well as to promote the idea of a evergreen title. In which there's little to no point to include ATs in which almost none of that is likely to achieve that result within the same game.

Or promote other franchises. But yes. I think falling in love with an AT from base game and expecting to come out later as DLC is kind of backwards since the ATs are already the characters that won't be playable in that game. That's not a pattern btw that's just game dev resource distribution.

Also pretty telling when in the 20 year history of smash we only got 3 promotes between entries, none of whom were dlc.

Yep.

Yea yea, patterns and all, but is there even any first party ATs which would pull in new audiences or other 3rd parties which would be much more lucrative but made 0 sense as a one-off cameo, like the whole host of 3rd party dlc in ultimate?

Uh.... Wut?

 

[SPEN18]

promote the idea of a evergreen title

Nintendo and Sakurai have never concretely indicated that they want Smash or Ultimate in particular to become an evergreen title. If anything, they have indicated otherwise by not continuing to work on the game at least for a while.

there's little to no point to include ATs in which almost none of that is likely to achieve that result within the same game.

Again, even if you think the current ATs aren't the kind that are profitable DLC choices, that says basically nothing about AT promos in general principle. A current AT could become a profitable DLC choice due to changing circumstances, or could be raised in priority simply as a result of others above them making it as playable. And we could also get a future AT that would be profitable as a DLC choice as well.

Also pretty telling when in the 20 year history of smash we only got 3 promotes between entries, none of whom were dlc.

Er, well, ATs didn't exist until Brawl. So there's basically just 4 and Ult to consider for AT promos. While AT promos have been rarer than I would like, there is no hard indication that same-game promos are impossible.

is there even any first party ATs which would pull in new audiences

I think yes, but even if you think no then we could very well get an AT in the next base game that fits the category.

--

As another topic of conversation, what do you all think about AT demotions? Like, are there any characters currently on the roster where you think they could, would, or should be cut but still have an AT created in place of the PC, to keep them represented in some high form?

 

[dream1ng]

It doesn't take some direct statement to see Nintendo treats Smash, and Smash is, an evergreen title. Same with Kart, and Marios 2D and 3D, and Zelda, and AC, etc.

Since Melee, Smash has shown up, or at least been intended to show up, in the first year or two of a console's life (3DS aside), which is often where Nintendo front-loads evergreens. It continues to move units regularly throughout the life cycle of the system. It's a system seller. It's obviously an evergreen title, you don't need Nintendo to publish some list saying as much.

If your barometer is saying after three years of DLC, the DLC ended, therefore it's not evergreen... Nintendo would have no evergreen titles. That's not how it's gauged, and the fact that Smash did get so much DLC compared to usual Nintendo fare is additional proof of it being a game with massive legs.

 

[fogbadge]

on the subject of ATs, if we're past the stage where niche nintendo characters can get in perhaps they could be ATs? it'd be nice to see chibi-robo, qbby and a rhythm paradise character

you know once i've clamed down from them not making the roster

 

[SPEN18]

It doesn't take some direct statement to see Nintendo treats Smash, and Smash is, an evergreen title. Same with Kart, and Marios 2D and 3D, and Zelda, and AC, etc.

Since Melee, Smash has shown up, or at least been intended to show up, in the first year or two of a console's life (3DS aside), which is often where Nintendo front-loads evergreens. It continues to move units regularly throughout the life cycle of the system. It's a system seller. It's obviously an evergreen title, you don't need Nintendo to publish some list saying as much.

If your barometer is saying after three years of DLC, the DLC ended, therefore it's not evergreen... Nintendo would have no evergreen titles. That's not how it's gauged, and the fact that Smash did get so much DLC compared to usual Nintendo fare is additional proof of it being a game with massive legs.

Er, I think I was just operating under a different interpretation of the terminology.
If you qualify a game simply by its ability to continue selling units at full price years after release, then okay, yeah, Smash games are evergreen at least for the duration of their respective console generations.
But I was conflating the terminology with the recently popularized idea that Nintendo might just continue to build off Ultimate indefinitely, which we have no clear indication for as of yet. And in fact we have already had a definite end to the content support, at the very least for the time being.
It's different than something like FE Heroes which is still getting brand new content with no end in sight. Sometimes people talk about titles being "evergreen" in the context of getting continued active and content-related support, even beyond one full console generation.

 

[dream1ng]

on the subject of ATs, if we're past the stage where niche nintendo characters can get in perhaps they could be ATs? it'd be nice to see chibi-robo, qbby and a rhythm paradise character

you know once i've clamed down from them not making the roster

Niche characters have been ATs since the beginning, so sure. It's already kind of strange Chibi-Robo and Rhythm Heaven were never given ATs, but now that those series seem to be of unsure future, becoming an AT doesn't seem as likely as it once did. Though could still happen, you never know.

It's hard out there for a non-retro, non-current series.

Er, I think I was just operating under a different interpretation of the terminology.
If you qualify a game simply by its ability to continue selling units at full price years after release, then okay, yeah, Smash games are evergreen at least for the duration of their respective console generations.
But I was conflating the terminology with the recently popularized idea that Nintendo might just continue to build off Ultimate indefinitely, which we have no clear indication for as of yet. And in fact we have already had a definite end to the content support, at the very least for the time being.
It's different than something like FE Heroes which is still getting brand new content with no end in sight. Sometimes people talk about titles being "evergreen" in the context of getting continued active and content-related support, even beyond one full console generation.

Well under that definition Nintendo would have no evergreen titles apart from the mobile stuff, which is really just that service model since those games are usually free. Especially if three years of DLC, which is a pretty good amount of time even for a non-Nintendo game falls short of qualifying. At that point it really would mostly be mobile and GaaS stuff.

I was under the impression 'evergreen' was a title that continues to move significant units the duration of the console's life. One that doesn't fall off. There were evergreen titles before DLC even became a thing. Perhaps there are different definitions, though that would be confusing.

 

[Sucumbio]

Evergreen. Trees. .... The Great Deku Tree for smash?

:O

Mmm! Imagine the down smash..... F min min his roots will hit off stage regardless of position. Even in the air..... And he's super floaty! Madness.

 

[fogbadge]

Niche characters have been ATs since the beginning, so sure. It's already kind of strange Chibi-Robo and Rhythm Heaven were never given ATs, but now that those series seem to be of unsure future, becoming an AT doesn't seem as likely as it once did. Though could still happen, you never know.

It's hard out there for a non-retro, non-current series.

is rhythm paradise's future uncertain? i thought megamix did quite well

 

[SPEN18]

on the subject of ATs, if we're past the stage where niche nintendo characters can get in perhaps they could be ATs? it'd be nice to see chibi-robo, qbby and a rhythm paradise character

Yeah in the case that characters I like don't make the PC roster, ATs for them is still better than nothing, and still better than Sticker- or Trophy-type representation.

Well under that definition Nintendo would have no evergreen titles apart from the mobile stuff, which is really just that service model since those games are usually free. Especially if three years of DLC, which is a pretty good amount of time even for a non-Nintendo game falls short of qualifying. At that point it really would mostly be mobile and GaaS stuff.

I was under the impression 'evergreen' was a title that continues to move significant units the duration of the console's life. One that doesn't fall off. There were evergreen titles before DLC even became a thing. Perhaps there are different definitions, though that would be confusing.

It's not entirely the service model since other F2P mobile games don't do well enough to end up with the lasting support that FEH has gotten (though under my previous usage of the term, mobile titles would comprise a large portion of such titles, as you allude to).
But in any case, I jumped the gun in assuming I was interpreting the term the in some generally accepted way. It's probably not worth saying too much further at this point.

 

[Quillion]

As another topic of conversation, what do you all think about AT demotions? Like, are there any characters currently on the roster where you think they could, would, or should be cut but still have an AT created in place of the PC, to keep them represented in some high form?

Just Sheik, on the off chance they want to harden the "no Zelda one-shots" pattern to apply retroactively.

Dr. Mario probably could on the current aversion to Mario spin-off characters by that same token. But they'd have to start allowing crazy things like Cat Mario, OoT Link, and Metroid Suit Samus to be ATs too.

 

[Sucumbio]

Shadow Link from Zelda II would be neat...

 

[Gengar84]

Just Sheik, on the off chance they want to harden the "no Zelda one-shots" pattern to apply retroactively.

Dr. Mario probably could on the current aversion to Mario spin-off characters by that same token. But they'd have to start allowing crazy things like Cat Mario, OoT Link, and Metroid Suit Samus to be ATs too.

The “no one-shots” fan rule never made any sense to me. Why limit what characters can appear in Smash, especially if the character is very popular and owned by Nintendo? Eventually Smash is going to run out of interesting characters who have appeared in several games and I see absolutely nothing wrong with including fan favorites like Midna or Skull Kid. Who cares if they only appeared in one mainline Zelda game? Hyrule Warriors shows that there is still a lot of love for these characters. The same applies to one-offs from other series.

 

[Quillion]

The “no one-shots” fan rule never made any sense to me. Why limit what characters can appear in Smash, especially if the character is very popular and owned by Nintendo? Eventually Smash is going to run out of interesting characters who have appeared in several games and I see absolutely nothing wrong with including fan favorites like Midna or Skull Kid. Who cares if they only appeared in one mainline Zelda game? Hyrule Warriors shows that there is still a lot of love for these characters. The same applies to one-offs from other series.

I don't necessarily like or dislike the pattern; I'm just more resigned to that pattern being in place since Brawl.

That said, a surprising amount of people (example) seem to be against the idea of treating different franchises differently. Some people want all franchises to be open to having their one-shots constantly come in like Pokémon and Fire Emblem. Others (like me currently) want all franchises to have a "wait and see" approach like Mario.

But no one seems to want different franchises to be treated differently. Clearly yes, some franchises are being treated differently now, but I can't think of anyone who actually likes it.

 

[fogbadge]

Shadow Link from Zelda II would be neat...

that's dark link, shadow link is from four sword adventures

 

[DarthEnderX]

that's dark link, shadow link is from four sword adventures

They should be the same thing, even though I know they aren't...

 

[fogbadge]

They should be the same thing, even though I know they aren't...

well they're probably the same thing in the same way, link, young link and toon link are all the same thing. the exact same thing but different enough to start getting technical

 

[SPEN18]

Just Sheik, on the off chance they want to harden the "no Zelda one-shots" pattern to apply retroactively.

Dr. Mario probably could on the current aversion to Mario spin-off characters by that same token. But they'd have to start allowing crazy things like Cat Mario, OoT Link, and Metroid Suit Samus to be ATs too.

With Sheik, you also bring up the more general question of whether people would want the various incarnations of Link/Zelda/Ganon to be ATs (or have other auxiliary representation, like how Ganon is a boss in Ult). My sense is that most people would rather see other characters get the AT treatment, but probably some would also enjoy things like Tetra or Sheik in that role.

My opinion is that Dr. Mario is best suited as a simple alt costume, akin to the builder or wedding reference costumes. I could see an AT to represent Dr. Mario in place of or in addition to that, though, maybe something like the viruses rather than the doctor himself to avoid opening the floodgates to the items you mentioned.

 

[Dinoman96]

My opinion is that Dr. Mario is best suited as a simple alt costume, akin to the builder or wedding reference costumes.

That was actually the plan back in Smash 4, they were originally just gonna make Doc an alternate costume of Mario. It's just that they realized his fans from Melee wouldn't be happy with him returning as a simple costume of Mario with none of his unique attributes that he had before, so they just made him his own character again.

Sakurai Explains Why Dr. Mario is His Own Character in Smash Bros.

When Doctor Mario made his triumphant return to Super Smash Bros. For Wii U, the development team had a bit of a headache over how to go about designing him. Speaking in a recent interview, Smash Bros. and Kirby creator Masahiro Sakurai discussed...

web.archive.org

Honestly I think it'd go down better if they made Mario more akin to how he is in Project M, essentially combining the best of both into one fighter. Though Ultimate kinda complicates things by giving Doc some of his own actual unique moves like his down aerial.

 

[Gengar84]

With Sheik, you also bring up the more general question of whether people would want the various incarnations of Link/Zelda/Ganon to be ATs (or have other auxiliary representation, like how Ganon is a boss in Ult). My sense is that most people would rather see other characters get the AT treatment, but probably some would also enjoy things like Tetra or Sheik in that role.

My opinion is that Dr. Mario is best suited as a simple alt costume, akin to the builder or wedding reference costumes. I could see an AT to represent Dr. Mario in place of or in addition to that, though, maybe something like the viruses rather than the doctor himself to avoid opening the floodgates to the items you mentioned.

Sheik is one of my favorite Smash Bros. characters and this is one of the main reasons I wish she had never been separated from Zelda. I realize that the two were never really balanced properly as a duo fighter but I thought it made them really fun and interesting to have two completely unique playstyles to swap between, kind of like Pokémon Trainer but with one less fighter. Stand-alone Sheik feels a bit out of place but I really want to keep her if possible. Partially because I’ve just always found her to be a really cool character and partially because she’s become a Smash staple at this point. She’s one of the few unique Zelda characters we have and her seniority would almost feel like cutting Captain Falcon, Falco, or Jigglypuff at this point. All three could be argued based on relevancy but they are iconic due to Smash.

 

[Dinoman96]

Pyra and Mythra are such a far better implementation of the "dual fighter" concept it ain't even funny.

It really helps a lot that, while they have different Up/Neutral/Side specials, they also have the same basic A moveset, with the primary differences just being the frame data, damage, and knockback, They feel very much like two sides of the same coin, as opposed to Zelda and Sheik in Melee/Brawl which were two completely different characters and thus had little to no cohesion with each other.

 

[Geno Boost]

The thing I dislike about is that they take away down special when they could just switch using a taunt instead

 

[Gengar84]

Pyra and Mythra are such a far better implementation of the "dual fighter" concept it ain't even funny.

It really helps a lot that, while they have different Up/Neutral/Side specials, they also have the same basic A moveset, with the primary differences just being the frame data, damage, and knockback, They feel very much like two sides of the same coin, as opposed to Zelda and Sheik in Melee/Brawl which were two completely different characters and thus had little to no cohesion with each other.

I never really saw anything wrong with having two completely different movesets to swap between. I don’t see nearly as much hate for Pokémon Trainer and that’s exactly the same thing with an extra character. My only complaint is that I would change the transformation method from a down special to a taunt for all characters that transform. A shield special or other “extra” move would work as well, just as long as the characters don’t lose out on an otherwise complete moveset.

I kind of wish Smash 3DS never existed because I’m pretty sure we’d still have Zelda/Sheik and the gliding mechanic otherwise. I think both were removed due to technical limitations and they just decided not to add them back. At least we got Squirtle and Ivysaur back as transformations for Charizard.

 

[Ivander]

I kind of wish Smash 3DS never existed because I’m pretty sure we’d still have Zelda/Sheik and the gliding mechanic otherwise. I think both were removed due to technical limitations and they just decided not to add them back. At least we got Squirtle and Ivysaur back as transformations for Charizard.

I'm fine with Zelda and Sheik being separated. Cause we probably wouldn't have gotten ALttP/ALBW Zelda otherwise.

 

[fogbadge]

I kind of wish Smash 3DS never existed because I’m pretty sure we’d still have Zelda/Sheik and the gliding mechanic otherwise. I think both were removed due to technical limitations and they just decided not to add them back. At least we got Squirtle and Ivysaur back as transformations for Charizard.

thats funny, i kinda wish 8 player smash never existed so we could have had rex

 

[SPEN18]

That was actually the plan back in Smash 4, they were originally just gonna make Doc an alternate costume of Mario. It's just that they realized his fans from Melee wouldn't be happy with him returning as a simple clone of Mario with none of his unique attributes that he had before, so they just made him his own character again.

Yeah, I don't think catering specifically to Melee fans is typically a healthy reason to avoid otherwise beneficial changes.

More generally, I also don't get the whole aversion to allowing characters to play differently than they originally did; and I think Sakurai and the roster deciders are vastly overestimating the likely degree of resulting backlash to such decisions as well as underestimating the gains that can be made from having a character's design updated specifically to fit the needs of the current iteration of Smash they're working on.
In the particular case of Dr. Mario, the guy almost surely wouldn't be in at all except for the premise of him reusing moves from Mario, which anyone who would be truly enraged by an alt Dr. Mario probably ought to realize. I really don't get why they're so averse to causing this form of backlash when it's not even remotely likely to be as loud or impactful as the backlash to plenty of other decisions they make which is largely ignored or only garners some token acknowledgment.

Of course, there are other factors going into the moveset-change aversion. Like potentially Sakurai wanting to keep characters fit to his original vision for them (which I disagree with also if it has certain negative impacts, such as potentially having characters feel like relics implanted in a new game, ignoring altered circumstances since certain characters were first implemented, etc.).

 

[Quillion]

I never really saw anything wrong with having two completely different movesets to swap between. I don’t see nearly as much hate for Pokémon Trainer and that’s exactly the same thing with an extra character. My only complaint is that I would change the transformation method from a down special to a taunt for all characters that transform. A shield special or other “extra” move would work as well, just as long as the characters don’t lose out on an otherwise complete moveset.

I kind of wish Smash 3DS never existed because I’m pretty sure we’d still have Zelda/Sheik and the gliding mechanic otherwise. I think both were removed due to technical limitations and they just decided not to add them back. At least we got Squirtle and Ivysaur back as transformations for Charizard.

TBH, there's reason to believe that a while a few tweaks here and there turned around opinions on PT as a trio, Zelda/Sheik as a stance change may be unsalvageable in terms of moveset design.

There's also the factor of the PT concept still being a core part of the Pokémon franchise, while Zelda becoming Sheik only happened again in a spin-off and otherwise never again.

And there's the third factor of Zelda's combat portrayal diverging from Smash almost as much as it has with Ganondorf. The Zelda series wants to make Zelda the main wielder/creator of Light Arrows, but Smash is fine with doing away with it altogether. This last factor remains a thorn to Smash due to all of the possibilities about retaining movesets that SPEN18 mentioned.

 

[SPEN18]

Sheik is one of my favorite Smash Bros. characters and this is one of the main reasons I wish she had never been separated from Zelda. I realize that the two were never really balanced properly as a duo fighter but I thought it made them really fun and interesting to have two completely unique playstyles to swap between, kind of like Pokémon Trainer but with one less fighter. Stand-alone Sheik feels a bit out of place but I really want to keep her if possible. Partially because I’ve just always found her to be a really cool character and partially because she’s become a Smash staple at this point. She’s one of the few unique Zelda characters we have and her seniority would almost feel like cutting Captain Falcon, Falco, or Jigglypuff at this point. All three could be argued based on relevancy but they are iconic due to Smash.

I mean, I'd be fine with cutting Falco or Jigglypuff, and me thinking Captain Falcon should stay is more motivated by the preservation of the legacy of F-Zero, which I think is a series worthy of a playable spot, and not for the purpose of retaining past relics.

It's fine to like a character, think they're cool, find them fun to play, etc. I personally would just rather see those resources directed elsewhere.