• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

Official Next Smash - Speculation & Discussion Thread

Gengar84

Smash Hero
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
6,618
Smash could use more undead characters. I’d love to see Arthas, Raziel, or Death make it into Smash one day.

It's bad enough that fan requested characters that haven't been relevant for a while are thrown under the bus but what's even worse is actively seeing people wanting to throw out beloved Smash mainstays like Marth and Captain Falcon because 'they aren't relevant anymore'.

Representing legacy franchises and games isn't a bad thing guys....
I feel like Smash works best when it's like a museum for a wide variety of different eras, not just serving as a piece of promotion for just the stuff that's relevant
I totally agree. I think too many people put too much focus on Smash as just an advertisement for the latest games and forget that it’s supposed to be a celebration of gaming in general. I think it’s best if we get a good mix of both old and new characters.
 

Opossum

Thread Title Changer
BRoomer
Joined
Aug 10, 2011
Messages
34,026
Location
This Thread
NNID
OpossumGuy
3DS FC
4742-4911-3431
Switch FC
SW 2859 6322 5208
I know the prompt was "If Smash came out for the first time today with a twelve character roster," but even assuming all other non-Smash games still existed and everything played out exactly the same way, Marth would almost certainly be the Fire Emblem character picked for it.

He's popular, iconic, and the face of the franchise (yes, more than Anna is). Four main series titles with him as the main protagonist, one where he's an important background lore character, the most recent one where he's an important supporting character, and a character with six versions of himself in Heroes. His existing popularity is what got him into Melee to begin with, and more recently, the backlash from fans during CYL2 literally changed how Choose Your Legends tallying was done from CYL3 onwards. He's the Fire Emblem Lord.


Even ignoring the absolutely ridiculous claim that you can't be a main character if you die in the story (especially considering Marth ISN'T EVEN DEAD in Engage's timeline; the game takes place in an entirely different universe and all of the Emblems are manifestations of Heroes from other worlds, so the only one who's explicitly postmortem is Sigurd), Marth's relevance never even faded.

Literally the only way he wouldn't be the one picked is if they went for one of the House Leaders, simply due to just how popular those three are over literally every other character in the franchise, but even then Marth would be the pick nine times out of ten. And even then, one could always get in as a second character, which wouldn't be out of the question (but that's a talk for another time).
 
Last edited:

TCT~Phantom

Smash Master
Writing Team
Joined
Dec 10, 2013
Messages
3,965
NNID
TCT~Phantom
It's bad enough that fan requested characters that haven't been relevant for a while are thrown under the bus but what's even worse is actively seeing people wanting to throw out beloved Smash mainstays like Marth and Captain Falcon because 'they aren't relevant anymore'.

Representing legacy franchises and games isn't a bad thing guys....
I feel like Smash works best when it's like a museum for a wide variety of different eras, not just serving as a piece of promotion for just the stuff that's relevant
I agree when this is referring to existing vets, although for newcomers I am gonna pump the breaks a bit. I think people asking for Marth or Falcon to be cut are an extremely small minority, those two are fan favorites for a reason.

I think it is important to keep your expectations realistic though. Odds are, Smash will mainly still have promotional picks. The next Smash game will probably have first party picks like Waluigi, Pauline, Bandana Dee, A Gen IX/X Pokemon, Mio and/or Noah, Alear or a new Fire Emblem Character, Officer Howard, Ring Fit Trainee, and so on. I would brace yourself for a first party lineup that has more in common with Smash 4's. The vast majority of Smash 4's first party newcomer choices were new and/or relevant faces. Really, the only obvious exceptions was Duck Hunt. Everyone else falls into that newer/promotional aspect of fighters.

Ultimate did show that they still are willing to do curveballs and adhere to fan demand. If anything, this is why we should support more niche ideas. If Isaac fans could gather the wide swath of support that Ridley or K Rool did pre Ultimate, they would have a real solid shot for example. I also think part of the beauty of smash speculation is that you can dream big. If you want Isaac or Ashley, you can find people who share your dream. If you want something esle, you can convince others that your dream pick has a shot and would be sick.

I would prefer a more varied roster than the Switch's Greatest Hits or Thats What I Call Nintendo 2017-2024. I would like picks like Rhythm Heaven, Golden Sun, or Murasame Castle to get that second lease on life. But I think we should all collectively try to brace for a Switch era dominated roster.
 

Gengar84

Smash Hero
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
6,618
Smash 4 had its share of older characters as well. It wasn’t all newer promotional picks. We had Duck Hunt, Bowser Jr., Little Mac, Palutena, Villager, Mega Man, Pac Man, Cloud, and Ryu who debuted between the NES and GameCube at the latest. Pac Man was even older than the NES. Palutena debuted on the NES even if she regained relevancy thanks to Uprising. It’s almost an even split between characters that debuted on GameCube or earlier with those that debuted more recently. Nine older and ten newer if we count the Miis as one character.

As for likely Smash 6 characters, Waluigi and Bandana Dee you mentioned above would classify as older characters as well. Waluigi specifically is likely almost entirely due to fan demand rather than as a promotional pick.
 
Last edited:

Gengar84

Smash Hero
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
6,618
I can't be Tiki because she is actually a dragon type. Also I am pretty sure if you crushed Marth with a rock it would be super effective.
I still think it’s funny that Charizard and Gyarados aren’t Dragon types but Alolan Exeggutor and Altaria are. If you show each pair to anyone who doesn’t play Pokémon and asked them which were dragons, I think almost 100% would say the former. Weird that they even made the Dragon type of Charizard and Gyarados don’t qualify. Gen 1 had some weird typing choices like not making Golduck and Psyduck part Psychic.
 
Last edited:

osby

Smash Obsessed
Joined
Apr 25, 2018
Messages
24,016
I still think it’s funny that Charizard and Gyarados aren’t Dragon types but Alolan Exeggutor and Altaria are. If you show each pair to anyone who doesn’t play Pokémon and asked them which were dragons, I think almost 100% would say the former. Weird that they even made the Dragon type of Charizard and Gyarados don’t qualify. Gen 1 had some weird typing choices like not making Golduck and Psyduck part Psychic.
At least Altaria has draconic inspirations behind it, Alolan Executor is just a joke and it's amazing.
 

TCT~Phantom

Smash Master
Writing Team
Joined
Dec 10, 2013
Messages
3,965
NNID
TCT~Phantom
Smash 4 had its share of older characters as well. It wasn’t all newer promotional picks. We had Duck Hunt, Bowser Jr., Little Mac, Palutena, Villager, Mega Man, Pac Man, Cloud, and Ryu who debuted between the NES and GameCube at the latest. Pac Man was even older than the NES. Palutena debuted on the NES even if she regained relevancy thanks to Uprising. It’s almost an even split between characters that debuted on GameCube or earlier with those that debuted more recently. Nine older and ten newer if we count the Miis as one character.

As for likely Smash 6 characters, Waluigi and Bandana Dee you mentioned above would classify as older characters as well. Waluigi specifically is likely almost entirely due to fan demand rather than as a promotional pick.
I mean, for the first parties all of those but Duck Hunt were relevant when the roster was chosen. Jr. was a mainstay Mario character at that point. Rosalina became a spinoff regular and repped the galaxy games. Little Mac just had Punch Out on the Wii. Villager had City Folk and New Leaf. Palutena had Kid Icarus Uprising as a huge 3DS title. You even have the Miis who were extremely relevant. Just because a character is older for first parties does not automatically take away the fact they are relevant when the roster was chosen.
 

Gengar84

Smash Hero
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
6,618
I mean, for the first parties all of those but Duck Hunt were relevant when the roster was chosen. Jr. was a mainstay Mario character at that point. Rosalina became a spinoff regular and repped the galaxy games. Little Mac just had Punch Out on the Wii. Villager had City Folk and New Leaf. Palutena had Kid Icarus Uprising as a huge 3DS title. You even have the Miis who were extremely relevant. Just because a character is older for first parties does not automatically take away the fact they are relevant when the roster was chosen.
Conversely, just because a character has a newer game doesn’t mean that they aren’t a classic character. To my knowledge, neither Mega Man or Pac Man really had anything big going on at the time they were trying to advertise. It’s definitely a bonus if the character still has relevancy due to newer releases so they tend to go with characters that are currently relevant in some way I don’t think they have to limit themselves to just those characters. All Smash games have a least one purely classic character like Duck Hunt that hasn’t seen a game in a while.

Again, it goes back to my point that Smash is currently supposed to be a celebration of gaming as a whole rather than an advertisement. If anything, an older character getting into Smash might renew interest in a dormant series and inspire a reboot like Pit did in Brawl. I could easily see the same being true for a character like Isaac from Golden Sun. Even if you want to view everything as an advertisement, something like this diversifies Nintendo’s appeal and drives interest in potential future games.

It never really made much sense to me for Smash to advertise games that are already a few years old by the time it actually comes out. If they want to use it as an advertisement, I think it makes more sense to get people hyped about Nintendo’s future. That can be done through either modern characters or classic characters from dormant franchises in order to help rebuild interest in the IP. It’s also important to consider Smash itself. People will be more excited to play as characters they care about, both old and new, than if we got nothing but the safest picks from the just newest games.
 
Last edited:

fogbadge

Smash Obsessed
Joined
Jun 29, 2012
Messages
22,687
Location
Scotland
I still think it’s funny that Charizard and Gyarados aren’t Dragon types but Alolan Exeggutor and Altaria are. If you show each pair to anyone who doesn’t play Pokémon and asked them which were dragons, I think almost 100% would say the former. Weird that they even made the Dragon type of Charizard and Gyarados don’t qualify. Gen 1 had some weird typing choices like not making Golduck and Psyduck part Psychic.
I wouldn’t say it just gen 1. Luralantist isn’t bug. Solgaleo not being fire really threw people etc
 

Gengar84

Smash Hero
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
6,618
I wouldn’t say it just gen 1. Luralantist isn’t bug. Solgaleo not being fire really threw people etc
Lurantis does make sense once you know what it’s based on. In nature, there are several insects that camouflage themselves as plants in order to either hide from predators or prey. Lurantis is kind of doing that in reverse in that it’s a plant that is in disguise as a bug.
 

Aligo

Smash Ace
Joined
Jun 12, 2021
Messages
535
Lurantis does make sense once you know what it’s based on. In nature, there are several insects that camouflage themselves as plants in order to either hide from predators or prey. Lurantis is kind of doing that in reverse in that it’s a plant that is in disguise as a bug.
To be specific, lurantis is based of a combination of praying mantises and wasp orchids.
 

Gengar84

Smash Hero
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
6,618
To be specific, lurantis is based of a combination of praying mantises and wasp orchids.
Thanks to Lockstin Gnoggin for all that random Pokémon trivia I never would have known otherwise.
 
Last edited:

Aligo

Smash Ace
Joined
Jun 12, 2021
Messages
535
That is a good one, being a flower-shaped insect (as well as fitting in with lurantis learning sweet scent, as orchid mantises also use scent to attract prey). I also thought of the wasp orchid it is both an insect-shaped plant, and it fits thematically with the range of hp-draining attacks lurantis can learn, as orchids are parasites.
 
Last edited:

Nabbitfan730

Smash Ace
Joined
Dec 15, 2020
Messages
632
Quite a thought to think about. Smash has lasted for over 20 years yet not a competitor can stand against consistently.

Not NASB or Multiversus. I wonder why that is.....

There was a problem fetching the tweet
 
Last edited:

Gengar84

Smash Hero
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
6,618
Quite a thought to think about. Smash has lasted for over 20 years yet not a competitor can stand against consistently.

Not NASB or Multiversus. I wonder why that is.....

There was a problem fetching the tweet
Yeah, you’d think another game of this kind would have been more successful by now. It’s just like monster collection and battling games can’t seem to come close to the success of Pokémon. Pokémon is far from perfect and has a ton of room to build and improve upon the foundation so it’s strange that more games haven’t tried to build on their formula.
 
Last edited:

fogbadge

Smash Obsessed
Joined
Jun 29, 2012
Messages
22,687
Location
Scotland
Quite a thought to think about. Smash has lasted for over 20 years yet not a competitor can stand against consistently.

Not NASB or Multiversus. I wonder why that is.....

There was a problem fetching the tweet
I think it’s cause everyone expects these games to be just like smash

Yeah, you’d think another game of this kind would have been more successful by now. It’s just like monster collection and battling games can’t seem to come close to the success of Pokémon. Pokémon is far from perfect and has a ton of room to build and improve upon the foundation so it’s strange that more games haven’t tried to build on their formula.
I dunno, monster collecting games seem to do better than platform fighters. But Pokémon is one of the best selling gaming franchises so it’s not unreasonable that they don’t come close
 
Last edited:

chocolatejr9

Smash Hero
Joined
Sep 30, 2018
Messages
8,389
Yeah, you’d think another game of this kind would have been more successful by now. It’s just like monster collection and battling games can’t seem to come close to the success of Pokémon. Pokémon is far from perfect and has a ton of room to build and improve upon the foundation so it’s strange that more games haven’t tried to build on their formula.
Maybe it's not as simple as "let's do our own version of this thing"? Like, for the Pokemon example, I'm pretty sure that's why Temtem exists: that game always gave me the vibe that the devs wanted to make a better Pokemon game than the actual Pokemon devs, only to run into problems of their own.

In the case of Smash, Multiversus was meant to be a free-to-play with microtransactions and battle passes, so I'm not entirely sure if they were REALLY going for the same market as Smash. And that's without taking into account the IRL stuff going on at WB that, for all we know, may have made certain things needlessly difficult for the devs...
 

Hadokeyblade

Smash Legend
Joined
Dec 5, 2018
Messages
10,823
Yeah, you’d think another game of this kind would have been more successful by now. It’s just like monster collection and battling games can’t seem to come close to the success of Pokémon. Pokémon is far from perfect and has a ton of room to build and improve upon the foundation so it’s strange that more games haven’t tried to build on their formula.
There's one difference i think between these two comparable things.

With monster catching games the reason Pokemon is still king is because of the character designs, other games like Digimon and Yokai watch have objectively better gameplay than Pokemon but Pokemon's monster designs are still the best on the market, the other two are only appealing to specific demographicsso mainstram popularity is is far away from them.

In th case of smash clones, Smash is th one with objectively better gameplay, not that the others are BAD by any means, ive had fun with Nick and Multiversus but Smash bros just feels good with it's controls, it's really snappy.
 

Gengar84

Smash Hero
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
6,618
Yeah, Smash has the unique advantage of having both amazing gameplay and a great roster of fighters. I was really hyped at the idea of a TMNT Smash style game but Smash Up ended up being pretty disappointing. They left out so many iconic characters and the gameplay was a lot more shallow than Smash. If we could get Sakurai and Bandai-Namco to work on a new TMNT Smash style game taking inspiration from the whole series, from the Playmates toy line to the IDW comics and more, it could be amazing.
 
Last edited:

Perkilator

Smash Legend
Writing Team
Joined
Apr 8, 2018
Messages
11,413
Location
The perpetual trash fire known as Planet Earth(tm)
Quite a thought to think about. Smash has lasted for over 20 years yet not a competitor can stand against consistently.

Not NASB or Multiversus. I wonder why that is.....

There was a problem fetching the tweet
I think it’s moreso because people tend to hype up other platform fighters as “Smash killers”, which might turn some people away.
 

Gengar84

Smash Hero
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
6,618
I think it’s moreso because people tend to hype up other platform fighters as “Smash killers”, which might turn some people away.
Yeah, I never liked the term “killer”. We can have multiple games with a similar theme or playstyle without one killing the other. I think Level 5’s Dark Cloud on the PS2 ran into the same problem in relation to Zelda.
 

Arcanir

An old friend evolved
Joined
Jul 8, 2013
Messages
6,664
Location
Getting geared up for the 20th
NNID
Shoryu91
3DS FC
4253-4855-5860
There's one difference i think between these two comparable things.

With monster catching games the reason Pokemon is still king is because of the character designs, other games like Digimon and Yokai watch have objectively better gameplay than Pokemon but Pokemon's monster designs are still the best on the market, the other two are only appealing to specific demographicsso mainstram popularity is is far away from them.

In th case of smash clones, Smash is th one with objectively better gameplay, not that the others are BAD by any means, ive had fun with Nick and Multiversus but Smash bros just feels good with it's controls, it's really snappy.
Digimon's bigger problem I'd say is mismanagement from its parent company and lack of consistency in the franchise. Say what you will about Pokemon, but Nintendo and TCPi do keep the franchise running and all of its individual parts flowing. Digimon can't even keep a consistent anime going without a hiatus, and the games and TCG are hit consistently with lack of funding, poor translations, and other such issues. Digimon also lacks a consistent theme outside of the monsters themselves as Adventure is pretty different from Frontier, which is pretty different from Savers or XW, and so on, and the games are worse as they have toyed with multiple genres before somewhat settling on the Story games. If the franchise had a consistent theme between its mediums, a consistent game series to fall back on, and a company who's management didn't border on selfsabotage it'd probably be in a better spot.

Yokai Watch's aethestic definitely hurt it outside of Japan, but what was the biggest blow dealt to it was probably its inability to manage its growth. That led to it imploding and falling off in its biggest market and it's been trying to catch up ever since.

Funny enough, there are some similarities between what happened with them and what has happened with Multiversus and NASB. Multiversus enjoyed some great success, but couldn't manage its growth and had its player base bleed out while NASB lacked the funding and the faith of Nick and struggled as a result.
 

HyperSomari64

Smash Master
Joined
Apr 10, 2018
Messages
3,607
Location
Lima, Peru
Yeah, Smash has the unique advantage of having both amazing gameplay and a great roster of fighters. I was really hyped at the idea of a TMNT Smash style game but Smash Up ended up being pretty disappointing. They left out so many iconic characters and the gameplay was a lot more shallow than Smash. If we could get Sakurai and Bandai-Namco to work on a new TMNT Smash style game taking inspiration from the whole series, from the Playmates toy line to the IDW comics and more, it could be amazing.
I wish this new Smash-Up!! by Sora and Bamco had the John Cena villain from Rise.
Kinda lame choice, but underrated.
 

Gengar84

Smash Hero
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
6,618
I wish this new Smash-Up!! by Sora and Bamco had the John Cena villain from Rise.
Kinda lame choice, but underrated.
His name is Baron Draxum. I didn’t want to watch Rise for the longest time because of the character designs and shift in tone but it ended up being pretty good. The Rise movie was particularly great. I think there’s room for Draxum in a theoretical Smash Up sequel. John Cena is also voicing Rocksteady in the new movie.

While I don’t expect Smash to change its stance on non game characters any time soon, it’s cool that the TMNT were featured in two Smash clones. John Cena himself was in another in Brawlhala.
 
Last edited:

fogbadge

Smash Obsessed
Joined
Jun 29, 2012
Messages
22,687
Location
Scotland
Maybe it's not as simple as "let's do our own version of this thing"? Like, for the Pokemon example, I'm pretty sure that's why Temtem exists: that game always gave me the vibe that the devs wanted to make a better Pokemon game than the actual Pokemon devs, only to run into problems of their own.
sounds like a tale of hubris
 

Opossum

Thread Title Changer
BRoomer
Joined
Aug 10, 2011
Messages
34,026
Location
This Thread
NNID
OpossumGuy
3DS FC
4742-4911-3431
Switch FC
SW 2859 6322 5208
What makes Multiversus especially tragic is that, due to being a free to play game hosted on servers, once the game goes End of Service, an entire platform fighter will be just plain Gone. Nothing further, and nothing remaining.

Like, in twenty years you can still play all the Smash games, Rivals of Aether, Slap City, Nickelodeon All-Star Brawl, and even lower grade bad ones like TMNT Smash Up or Cartoon Network Punch-Time Explosion, provided you still own the copies of the games and the hardware to play them. The same won't be able to be said of Multiversus.
 

CannonStreak

Supersonic Warrior
Premium
Joined
Nov 4, 2013
Messages
18,399
Location
Running from the cops in Stardust Speedway.
You know, seeing this talk about MultiVersus, I have been thinking; Phil Spencer of Microsoft's Xbox games said he did not want to do a Microsoft Smash Bros. like game because he felt it would not measure up to the actual Smash Bros. games.

From how the likes of MultiVersus is doing, looks like he is right so far. I can't say I blame him for not making a Microsoft-based Smash Bros. game now.
 
Top Bottom