Official Next Smash - Speculation & Discussion Thread

[Quillion]

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.

Eh, if they can just recycle Sheik's model and animations, I don't think they can gain much by throwing them out. It will just be a net loss in itself.

 

[Diddy Kong]

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.

Problem with Sheik is that she's gatekeeping other Zelda characters, mainly Impa, but other Zelda one offs too. We'd be better off with a one off from Zelda as one of the Champions.

 

[Gengar84]

Problem with Sheik is that she's gatekeeping other Zelda characters, mainly Impa, but other Zelda one offs too. We'd be better off with a one off from Zelda as one of the Champions.

How exactly is Sheik gatekeeping Impa or any other Zelda character? Impa plays nothing like Sheik in Hyrule Warriors. Even Impa’s moveset in Age of Calamity is completely different from Sheik’s Smash moveset. There’s no reason that Impa has to be a Sheik clone and, even if she was, that shouldn’t prevent her inclusion. That’s like saying Rosalina is gatekeeping Waluigi or Geno.

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

Not necessarily. We got Twilight Princess Zelda in Brawl even though Sheik remained as a transformation. The only version of Zelda that ever transformed into Sheik in the home series was from Ocarina of Time. There’s nothing stopping Smash taking creative liberties a second time.

While I’d prefer the two have still been a pair, I was honestly okay with them being separated. My biggest problem is all the talk of Sheik being unnecessary and that she should be cut for other characters. I don’t think this would be happening if she was never separated from Zelda, at least not to the same extent.

We haven’t had a unique Zelda character since Melee and if we cut Sheik, the only real options left are Impa and Ganon if people are serious about the no one-offs rule. After that, we pretty much never get another Zelda character again no matter how many Smash games we get unless we want Beetle or Tingle but I’m not sure if there’s really much demand for either character.

 

[Geno Boost]

isnt Sheik just a one off NPC in ocarina of time that only served as a plot twist and doesnt even fight or anything until 20 years later in hyrule warriors?

 

[fogbadge]

isnt Sheik just a one off NPC in ocarina of time that only served as a plot twist and doesnt even fight or anything until 20 years later in hyrule warriors?

yes but as she's zelda a lot of people say she isn't really a one shot

 

[Dan Quixote]

isnt Sheik just a one off NPC in ocarina of time that only served as a plot twist and doesnt even fight or anything until 20 years later in hyrule warriors?

So much this. Let's get Toon Zelda transforming into Tetra if they want that concept so much! At least Tetra's in a few games.

 

[osby]

Problem with Sheik is that she's gatekeeping other Zelda characters, mainly Impa, but other Zelda one offs too. We'd be better off with a one off from Zelda as one of the Champions.

Citation needed.

We don't know what Sakurai thinks when he (doesn't) picks Zelda newcomers but there's no reason to assume that he rejects Skull Kid or Impa just because Sheik is playable.

It's not like there's a glass ceiling rule saying that Zelda can only have six characters and one of them needs to be cut if we want more.

 

[Gengar84]

isnt Sheik just a one off NPC in ocarina of time that only served as a plot twist and doesnt even fight or anything until 20 years later in hyrule warriors?

Are you sure you want to be criticizing one-off characters from games from over 20 years ago that haven’t appeared since with your user name (unless that was sarcasm and I missed the joke)?

Besides,

20+ year old spoilers

Spoiler

Sheik is Zelda so she isn’t really a one-off character.

 

[chocolatejr9]

Say, remember those old surveys where Nintendo asked if we wanted animated projects based on their IPs? Well, they may be taking steps to make it happen:

There was a problem fetching the tweet

Either that, or improve the quality of their cutscenes. Not quite sure yet...

 

[Geno Boost]

Are you sure you want to be criticizing one-off characters from games from over 20 years ago that haven’t appeared since with your user name (unless that was sarcasm and I missed the joke)?

The Difference is Geno is a playable character from the game that does make up a full on moveset not just an NPC

 

[Dan Quixote]

Say, remember those old surveys where Nintendo asked if we wanted animated projects based on their IPs? Well, they may be taking steps to make it happen:

There was a problem fetching the tweet

Either that, or improve the quality of their cutscenes. Not quite sure yet...

I can see it being the latter considering how good the animations are in that list of games there.

 

[Gengar84]

The Difference is Geno is a playable character from the game that does make up a full on moveset not just an NPC

I think Sheik’s moveset works fine in Smash but it was even better in Hyrule Warriors. Both Super Mario RPG and Hyrule Warriors can be classified as spinoff games so I’d say that if Geno counts as a playable character, Sheik does now too. That’s not even to mention being a Smash veteran since Melee. I don’t want to give the impression I’m hating on Geno because I’ve always loved Super Mario RPG.

I wonder why Zero Suit Samus doesn’t seem to get the same criticism as Sheik. She’s in the exact same situation to me in my opinion as an alternate version of a character that hasn’t really shown up since.

 

[fogbadge]

Say, remember those old surveys where Nintendo asked if we wanted animated projects based on their IPs? Well, they may be taking steps to make it happen:

There was a problem fetching the tweet

Either that, or improve the quality of their cutscenes. Not quite sure yet...

I suppose the biggest question

The Difference is Geno is a playable character from the game that does make up a full on moveset not just an NPC

like having a natural move set matters

 

[Geno Boost]

I think Sheik’s moveset works fine in Smash but it was even better in Hyrule Warriors. Both Super Mario RPG and Hyrule Warriors can be classified as spinoff games so I’d say that if Geno counts as a playable character, Sheik does now too. That’s not even to mention being a Smash veteran since Melee. I don’t want to give the impression I’m hating on Geno because I’ve always loved Super Mario RPG.

I wonder why Zero Suit Samus doesn’t seem to get the same criticism as Sheik. She’s in the exact same situation to me in my opinion as an alternate version of a character that hasn’t really shown up since.

Yes I do agree Sheik after Hyrule Warrior makes more sense to add but before that she is basically like Il Piantissimo from Mario sunshine

 

[osby]

The Difference is Geno is a playable character from the game that does make up a full on moveset not just an NPC

I mean, said NPC has been playable in Smash 20 years longer than Geno so that difference is obviously irrelevant.

 

[Geno Boost]

I mean, said NPC has been playable in Smash 20 years longer than Geno so that difference is obviously irrelevant.

I didn’t count smash as a factor when it comes to one off Zelda characters her inclusion was only due to transformation gimmick
characters such bosses and playable character from the Zelda series does make more sense to include than NPC especially when even the NPC doesn’t even have a moveset I am talking about before Hyrule Warrior

 

[fogbadge]

I didn’t count smash as a factor when it comes to one off Zelda characters her inclusion was only due to transformation gimmick
characters such bosses and playable character from the Zelda series does make more sense to include than NPC especially when even the NPC doesn’t even have a moveset I am talking about before Hyrule Warrior

so Zelda

 

[Gengar84]

I didn’t count smash as a factor when it comes to one off Zelda characters her inclusion was only due to transformation gimmick
characters such bosses and playable character from the Zelda series does make more sense to include than NPC especially when even the NPC doesn’t even have a moveset I am talking about before Hyrule Warrior

Neither did Fox or Captain Falcon before getting into Smash but that didn’t stop them. I’m not going to bother with spoilers because everyone already knows but Sheik isn’t some random one-off character. She is Zelda herself, the titular character of the whole series. She’s at least as important as Zero Suit Samus in my opinion. Don’t forget that Ganondorf was just as much a one-off character as Sheik when they were added to Melee and he’s only been in two more mainline games than she has.

 

[Sucumbio]

I think in hindsight Sheik turned out to be a happy accident. OoT was immensely popular and Melee was another vehicle to show the Zelda series and OoT especially a lotta love. As has been stated by Shigeru Miyamoto in the past he'd always pushed hard for the Zelda series to push boundaries into realism and Melee was an excellent vehicle to showcase the OoT cast (Adult and Young Link, Ganondorf, and Zelda/Sheik) with combat skills and moves that would feel right to a Zelda fan. I'm not going to get into how Dorf ended up a bit shafted there. But Sheik turned out to be top tier in Melee so the hype surrounding her was huge and it eventually stuck as she's returned in every game.

These days I could actually see them revamp the Zelda rep in Smash but I think being a vet means she's more likely to stay that not.

 

[Quillion]

Problem with Sheik is that she's gatekeeping other Zelda characters, mainly Impa, but other Zelda one offs too. We'd be better off with a one off from Zelda as one of the Champions.

I don't think "gatekeeping" is the right word; it's more that she sets a precedent for one-shot Zelda characters that hasn't yet been followed to this day.

Neither did Fox or Captain Falcon before getting into Smash but that didn’t stop them. I’m not going to bother with spoilers because everyone already knows but Sheik isn’t some random one-off character. She is Zelda herself, the titular character of the whole series. She’s at least as important as Zero Suit Samus in my opinion. Don’t forget that Ganondorf was just as much a one-off character as Sheik when they were added to Melee and he’s only been in two more mainline games than she has.

Thing is, the Zero Suit is Samus's standard undersuit for her armor since Zero Mission, and it seemingly always will be.

Ganondorf is Ganon's humanoid form. That form was first mentioned in the manual of A Link to the Past (and in Japan as well), and as far into BotW, Ganon being a Gerudo is part of the series' lore.

Sheik as a facet of Zelda doesn't seem like it will be part of the Zelda series again. Her only claims to fame are OoT being as pivotal as it is, and Smash itself.

I think in hindsight Sheik turned out to be a happy accident. OoT was immensely popular and Melee was another vehicle to show the Zelda series and OoT especially a lotta love. As has been stated by Shigeru Miyamoto in the past he'd always pushed hard for the Zelda series to push boundaries into realism and Melee was an excellent vehicle to showcase the OoT cast (Adult and Young Link, Ganondorf, and Zelda/Sheik) with combat skills and moves that would feel right to a Zelda fan. I'm not going to get into how Dorf ended up a bit shafted there. But Sheik turned out to be top tier in Melee so the hype surrounding her was huge and it eventually stuck as she's returned in every game.

These days I could actually see them revamp the Zelda rep in Smash but I think being a vet means she's more likely to stay that not.

Sheik's definitely going to stay. But I'll think she'll continue to grow as a sore point among some fans due to her status in the Zelda series. She sits in the gray area of being a Zelda AND being a one-shot.

Like you said, Sheik was a Bob Ross happy little accident, and I can even say the same for Ganondorf. There's just the wrinkle of how the Zelda franchise's portrayals of Zelda and Ganon (including Sheik and Ganondorf) have diverged from how Smash keeps them. I can imagine it's quite a thorn (especially Ganon) to the Smash devs since they do want to keep characters mostly the way they are both to save resources and not alienate fans, but Zelda and Ganon are at a point that keeping them the same will alienate other fans.

 

[Gengar84]

I don't think "gatekeeping" is the right word; it's more that she sets a precedent for one-shot Zelda characters that hasn't yet been followed to this day.



Thing is, the Zero Suit is Samus's standard undersuit for her armor since Zero Mission, and it seemingly always will be.

Ganondorf is Ganon's humanoid form. That form was first mentioned in the manual of A Link to the Past (and in Japan as well), and as far into BotW, Ganon being a Gerudo is part of the series' lore.

Sheik as a facet of Zelda doesn't seem like it will be part of the Zelda series again. Her only claims to fame are OoT being as pivotal as it is, and Smash itself.



Sheik's definitely going to stay. But I'll think she'll continue to grow as a sore point among some fans due to her status in the Zelda series. She sits in the gray area of being a Zelda AND being a one-shot.

Like you said, Sheik was a Bob Ross happy little accident, and I can even say the same for Ganondorf. There's just the wrinkle of how the Zelda franchise's portrayals of Zelda and Ganon (including Sheik and Ganondorf) have diverged from how Smash keeps them. I can imagine it's quite a thorn (especially Ganon) to the Smash devs since they do want to keep characters mostly the way they are both to save resources and not alienate fans, but Zelda and Ganon are at a point that keeping them the same will alienate other fans.

You’ve got me there. I’m not really an expert on Zelda lore, I just like the characters as a casual fan so that was good to learn. I think most fan’s issue is actually less that we have Sheik and Ganondorf and more that we haven’t had a unique newcomer since Melee. There’s no reason we can’t get new characters without cutting the unique ones we already have. I think Zelda is important enough to warrant at least few more original characters without having to cut anyone.

 

[fogbadge]

On the subject of Zelda characters, if one shot characters are largely a no go then what about recurring races? Gorons and zoras. And I don’t mean a specific one I mean just one. Perhaps with a few alts based on the different designs throughout the series. It’d be no different than piranha plant.

 

[Diddy Kong]

On the subject of Zelda characters, if one shot characters are largely a no go then what about recurring races? Gorons and zoras. And I don’t mean a specific one I mean just one. Perhaps with a few alts based on the different designs throughout the series. It’d be no different than piranha plant.

Gorons and Zoras? Look no further than Daruk and Mipha. Those would be solid choices, any Champion would. I specify the BotW Champions due to the massive leap of direction the game brought for the series, we got both a spin off and a coming sequel. That's a bigger legacy than Ocarina of Time, thus a Champion would be the safest bet for a one-off newcomer.

Impa and Ganon would be the safest bet for a legacy newcomer, both have been around since the start and will continue to appear in future titles.

I would, without hesitation, cut both Ganondorf and Sheik for Ganon and Impa. Doesn't matter they could coexist, I know. I'd want that too personally. I'd throw out Young Link too, and revamp Toon Link or maybe toss him out too, not too sure. But all I know in case of a revamp, I'd be willing to get rid of all Zelda characters but Link and Zelda. Maybe that safes room for even another BotW Champion.

Potential reboot Zelda roster could be something like: Link, Zelda, Impa, humanoid Calamity Ganon or classic Ganon, Mipha and Urbosa / Daruk.

Playing it safe : Link, Zelda, Ganondorf, Sheik, Impa, revamped Young Link and Skull Kid, maybe a Champion too.

Just too many directions to go with Zelda.

 

[Sucumbio]

I feel that they missed an opportunity not making tp link even More tp like give him a wolf transformation or a familiar on some moves like Toad for peach but Midna and used differently obv.

I'd love a Goron tho...

 

[Gengar84]

The more I hear about all this talk about cutting my favorite characters like Ganondorf, Sheik, and Sephiroth, the more I think I might just stick with Ultimate forever.

 

[fogbadge]

Gorons and Zoras? Look no further than Daruk and Mipha. Those would be solid choices, any Champion would. I specify the BotW Champions due to the massive leap of direction the game brought for the series, we got both a spin off and a coming sequel. That's a bigger legacy than Ocarina of Time, thus a Champion would be the safest bet for a one-off newcomer.

Impa and Ganon would be the safest bet for a legacy newcomer, both have been around since the start and will continue to appear in future titles.

I would, without hesitation, cut both Ganondorf and Sheik for Ganon and Impa. Doesn't matter they could coexist, I know. I'd want that too personally. I'd throw out Young Link too, and revamp Toon Link or maybe toss him out too, not too sure. But all I know in case of a revamp, I'd be willing to get rid of all Zelda characters but Link and Zelda. Maybe that safes room for even another BotW Champion.

Potential reboot Zelda roster could be something like: Link, Zelda, Impa, humanoid Calamity Ganon or classic Ganon, Mipha and Urbosa / Daruk.

Playing it safe : Link, Zelda, Ganondorf, Sheik, Impa, revamped Young Link and Skull Kid, maybe a Champion too.

Just too many directions to go with Zelda.

im not sure you read my post properly. I was suggesting generic gorons and zoras as an alternative to characters who may vanish one day

 

[Sucumbio]

The more I hear about all this talk about cutting my favorite characters like Ganondorf, Sheik, and Sephiroth, the more I think I might just stick with Ultimate forever.

Yeah... Actually we seem to circle through cut talk, mergers and acquisitions, and then dream characters and one offs then back to cuts...

 

[Gengar84]

Yeah... Actually we seem to circle through cut talk, mergers and acquisitions, and then dream characters and one offs then back to cuts...

I hate talking about cuts in general because I don’t want to see anyone go but the names that always seem to come up the most just happen to be some of my favorite characters in Smash.

 

[Sucumbio]

I hate talking about cuts in general because I don’t want to see anyone go but the names that always seem to come up the most just happen to be some of my favorite characters in Smash.

Lol and you're not alone. A factor that will heavily play into the next Smash's development. Whoever doesn't come back should it go that way they'll surely have a prepared statement as to why. But it'll still disappoint some players so it seems that not bringing everyone back is by definition a lead towards disappointment. But as a silver lining there is nothing saying a character not in base isn't coming out as dlc during that same game's lifetime so...

And inb4 Isaac misses base but is first dlc

 

[chocolatejr9]

Yeah... Actually we seem to circle through cut talk, mergers and acquisitions, and then dream characters and one offs then back to cuts...

Have I ever told you the definition of insanity?

 

[Sucumbio]

Have I ever told you the definition of insanity?

Is it something about doing the same thing over and over but expecting different results?

Remember the ride never stops.

Insert that image here

/Lazy

 

[Gengar84]

I’ve mentioned it before but the only way I’d be fine with a large amount of cuts, even if it meant many of my favorites would leave as well, is if there was a radical change to the concept of what Smash is. One idea could be turning the series into “Nintendo vs Company” which could change for each game. That could be one way to get a fresh cast each game while easing developing negotiations since they only have to work with a single third party developer. I don’t really have much interest in playing “Ultimate 2 but without any of your favorite characters”.

 

[SPEN18]

Eh, if they can just recycle Sheik's model and animations, I don't think they can gain much by throwing them out. It will just be a net loss in itself.

Well, in the context of a brand new game the upside from straight-up reusing old models and animations is minimal. And even with the ability to reuse things, the models and animations are only a fraction of all the work that goes into making a character playable.

Zero Suit Samus

I mean, I also criticize ZSS still being here. I feel that ZSS was likely a combination of Sakurai not viewing any other Metroid characters as good candidates at the time ZSS was chosen and also ZSS fitting in with the transformation gimmick they were seemingly pushing in Brawl. Neither of those circumstances are especially relevant now.
At this point I'd rather see them save the effort on ZSS, and we have other Metroid reps now in Dark Samus and Ridley as well as other potential newcomers that could come later. Even if they're fixated on having transformation characters, there are IMO even better options for that now if we have to have them, even though I'm not a big fan of the transformation character gimmick myself.

Don’t forget that Ganondorf was just as much a one-off character as Sheik when they were added to Melee and he’s only been in two more mainline games than she has.

I mean, two more mainline appearances where you serve as a main antagonist and major boss are a pretty big deal.

This is also a good time to reiterate that the way the usages of Ganondorf and Sheik have diverged in the main series since the two debuted in Smash is a primary reason that Sheik gets more cuts criticism than Ganondorf.

I think most fan’s issue is actually less that we have Sheik and Ganondorf and more that we haven’t had a unique newcomer since Melee. There’s no reason we can’t get new characters without cutting the unique ones we already have. I think Zelda is important enough to warrant at least few more original characters without having to cut anyone.

I mean, there would probably be less cuts chatter for Sheik if we had gotten, like, something along the lines of Ghirahim in 4 and/or Skull Kid in 4 or Ult. But even if we had gotten that, I'd still be arguing for Sheik to be cut because the saved effort doesn't necessarily have to be explicitly redirected towards Zelda stuff. Even with other Zelda characters on the roster I'd still view Sheik as a Melee relic.

what about recurring races? Gorons and zoras. And I don’t mean a specific one I mean just one. Perhaps with a few alts based on the different designs throughout the series

I think Mipha and Daruk do pretty good jobs themselves of representing what Zoras and Gorons do in general, while also having a lot more personality and other unique abilities to fill out the moveset with a little more flair. I don't see big gains representation-wise or gameplay-wise from using generic Zoras and Gorons. And even if the Champions eventually vanish from being a central marketing focus, they still directly represent BotW as legacy picks, which was a landmark game.

 

[Dinoman96]

Neither did Fox or Captain Falcon before getting into Smash but that didn’t stop them. I’m not going to bother with spoilers because everyone already knows but Sheik isn’t some random one-off character. She is Zelda herself, the titular character of the whole series. She’s at least as important as Zero Suit Samus in my opinion. Don’t forget that Ganondorf was just as much a one-off character as Sheik when they were added to Melee and he’s only been in two more mainline games than she has.

To be fair, Ganondork was also added in as a last minute clone character.

I'd say clone characters seem to be exempt from the "one-off" issue. Dark Pit is also a one-off supporting character, as obviously his only other real game appearance is Kid Icarus Uprising, but he was also a very little effort echo fighter, more so than any of the clones in Melee even. Just seems they don't want to put in the full blown fighter effort into characters like Midna, Ghirahim, etc unfortunately.

And that's what makes Sheik stand out so much, she's a one-off non-protagonist type that actually has a unique moveset, she's the closest thing Smash has to a Geno, Midna, etc type of character...but it's also counterbalanced by the fact that she's just Zelda in another outfit.

A really strange relic of Melee, she is.

 

[Wonder Smash]

It's made by Konami.

And to add to that, Yu-Gi-Oh! characters were also in the Jump Superstar games, which were in listed in the Chronicles list in the Japanese version of Brawl.

I use to watch Yu-Gi-Oh! all the time.

RIP Kazuki Takahashi

 

[fogbadge]

I think Mipha and Daruk do pretty good jobs themselves of representing what Zoras and Gorons do in general

hmm apart from TP i dont think the zora often use spears and i certainly dont recall any gorons using daruk's weapon. also healing and shields aren't really commonly used by them. so no

 

[Gengar84]

I’m holding to my stance that the “one-off” rule was never a thing and other characters just had higher priority so far.

 

[TCT~Phantom]

Problem with Sheik is that she's gatekeeping other Zelda characters, mainly Impa, but other Zelda one offs too. We'd be better off with a one off from Zelda as one of the Champions.

I know you have had your vendetta against Sheik since Smash 4, but this is just wildly untrue. Sheik being in the game does not gatekeep a one off Zelda character from ever joining the roster. If anything, she helps the argument because she is a one off Zelda character that joined the roster. Just becuase you might want Impa in and see Sheik as this obstacle for that does not mean that Sheik is this obstacle for anyone to get in the game.

I mean, there would probably be less cuts chatter for Sheik if we had gotten, like, something along the lines of Ghirahim in 4 and/or Skull Kid in 4 or Ult. But even if we had gotten that, I'd still be arguing for Sheik to be cut because the saved effort doesn't necessarily have to be explicitly redirected towards Zelda stuff. Even with other Zelda characters on the roster I'd still view Sheik as a Melee relic.

This is a stupid argument. Cuts are not done out of some arbitrary reason like this. The alternative to getting Sheik in 4/Ultimate was not getting Ghirahim or Midna or Skull Kid. The alternative to having Sheik was not having Sheik. Cuts in most games tend to veer in this direction, especially in Smash. They have never cut someone for a reason this arbitrary.

I will also highlight that any talk of Sheik being cut is a very, very vocal minority. She is a super popular character in general in terms of Smash, both casually and competitively. Even if we were to cut almost a dozen characters or so for the next game, Sheik would not be on that list. Smashboards already especially now is not a perfect representative sample. Not many people are actively theorizing or discussing a hypothetical next game that does not even exist yet. Even then, this is one thread on one website that has plenty of wildly different opinions on the matter. Sheik as a cut has historically even on here been a controversial idea, which only had people talking about it when Zelda was shown with a new Down B in Smash 4.

I hate talking about cuts in general because I don’t want to see anyone go but the names that always seem to come up the most just happen to be some of my favorite characters in Smash.

I hate talking about cuts because so many people have arbitrary or outright dumb reasons for wanting cuts. You have people that want to thanos snap the roster, which I think almost everyone can agree is an extremely unlikely concept on top of being one that a lot of people just do not like. People whine about "irrelevant" characters "stealing" spots or being a "relic of another era", when that is never how Smash worked. Characters like Corrin or Zero Suit or Sheik being in Ultimate are not stealing spots from whatever dream character one has. The alternative to Corrin in Ultimate was no Corrin in Ultimate. The alternative to Sheik in Smash 4 was no Sheik in Smash 4. In some very select circumstances, sure, you can apply that train of thought. We got Robin instead of Chrom in 4 and Incineroar instead of Decidueye in Ultimate. But those are very rare circumstances and for newcomers. Cut talk in general feels arbitrary as well and I will stress is a very vocal minority.

People for some reason assume automatically that by cutting characters from the game they do not care for it will automatically give them their dream pick or dream game. Its not like that. Especially in Smash, a series that we know has done everything it can to avoid cuts, even for the "irrelevant" characters. Most discussion of cuts goes in circles because the people whining for cuts want this vision of the game that is unrealistic. Some people in this thread have wanted third parties broadly to get the boot, despite how that is not only wildly unlikely but also something that at least in the Smash zeitgeist beyond here extremely niche and unpopular. Some people want cuts so that their dream character will have a better shot of getting in, when that is just how Smash has never worked. You do not get addition from subtraction, you just get subtraction.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Full bias exposure, I ****ing hate cuts discussion in this thread for many reasons. For one, I think that it is a waste of time to discuss the ideas of removing content for the next game that we do not even know exists yet. We have at best vague statements from Sakurai that you could argue either matters or doesn't matter broadly, but even then the next smash game is not coming for a while. I think wasting time and energy talking about cuts, a very contentious topic that really we have no way of having any proper discussion on, is boring. Its boring to hear the same people make the same points about cuts that people in general do not like. Its boring to see every 5-10 pages we get into cuts talk because it goes nowhere. It never goes in an interesting direction and just lets a few users get to talk about their very niche views on a fringe topic.

We could discuss so many more interesting things in terms of the next Smash. If support threads were still a thing, we could talk about cool character concepts or ideas in them. We could talk about cool stage ideas. We could talk about what characters we would like to see. We could talk about literally anything outside of whether or not Corrin is gonna be in the next game. It is such a boring line of thought to just talk about cuts when no one changes their minds. No one listens to opposing arguments. People are gonna dig their heels until Smash 6, and most likely a lot of the super pro cut people will grumble and moan about how X character did not get cut. I just wish we could talk about literally anything else other than cuts. I honestly wouldn't mind at least periods of time where topics like cuts or other topics that this thread just discusses every 5 pages are blacklisted for at least a certain amount of time. At least then maybe we would discuss something different.

 

[Quillion]

I’m holding to my stance that the “one-off” rule was never a thing and other characters just had higher priority so far.

It's not any sort of rule, but it is an observable pattern.

We do know, however, that Smash's Pokémon choices are influenced by the "future proof" factor. They want Pokémon that can represent the franchise even in the future.

Source: https://www.nintendo-insider.com/sakurai-discusses-how-pokemon-are-chosen-for-super-smash-bros/

Zelda has just seemingly stopped accumulating these "future proof" icons arguably since ALttP. Mario has too albeit much later considering Rosalina and Captain Toad debuted in the same game.

 

[LiveStudioAudience]

It is interesting to imagine Zelda representation in Smash if the former series had embraced spin-offs sooner than they did. A Hyrule Warriors that comes out in 2004 and Age of Calamity equivalent in 2010 potentially shifts a lot of fighter possibilities circa Brawl and Smash 4 respectively.