Official Next Smash - Speculation & Discussion Thread

[Oracle Link]

well mario's reason for inclusion is that sakurai claims for the original he selected who he considered to be nintendo's main characters at the time. iirc

im moretalking about nowadays its either Beloved character or promotional pick (Which shouldnt be done anymore IMO)
And if it really was still "The Main Nintendo chars" Than im worried about sakurais mental state!

 

[fogbadge]

im moretalking about nowadays its either Beloved character or promotional pick (Which shouldnt be done anymore IMO)
And if it really was still "The Main Nintendo chars" Than im worried about sakurais mental state!

he’s a game dev, you should be worried about his mental state anyway

 

[True Blue Warrior]

To make things worse, they justified it by claiming that the characters are just functions and that no one should care that the characters are cut because others in the game can do similar things.

Characters are indeed just functions.

 

[Opossum]

Not gonna lie it's really weird to try to explain the failings of MvC Infinite and PSASBR as being the result of...including a focus on character interaction.

Infinite was ugly and had a roster that was gutted by executive mandates. It had absolutely horrible word of mouth during prerelease due to the god-awful PR it had.

PSASBR was released during a time where platform fighters were considered Smash ripoffs instead of a genre, had very little budget, was criticized for its third party selections and omissions, and from a gameplay perspective, missed the mark by making super moves the only things that could kill.

None of the failings of these games had anything to do with character interaction. I'll be honest, a lot of the pushback the idea of more character interaction has been receiving feels a lot like insecurity. It's as though people don't want to admit that Smash isn't perfect and can, in fact, be improved by doing things that basically every other game already does.

Like, it's okay that Smash is bad at something.

 

[Nabbitfan730]

More like brand loyalty and lack of care than insecurity. We still complain about Smash here

Like i said before, if Smash Bros is supposed to be a celebration of video games then what are celebrating and how are going to do it is just as important as the game itself.

Just showing you have the legal rights to a fictional character just isn't special anymore. These days it feels more like corporations bragging about quarterly reports of what rights/licenses they own.

 

[chocolatejr9]

Not gonna lie it's really weird to try to explain the failings of MvC Infinite and PSASBR as being the result of...including a focus on character interaction.

Infinite was ugly and had a roster that was gutted by executive mandates. It had absolutely horrible word of mouth during prerelease due to the god-awful PR it had.

PSASBR was released during a time where platform fighters were considered Smash ripoffs instead of a genre, had very little budget, was criticized for its third party selections and omissions, and from a gameplay perspective, missed the mark by making super moves the only things that could kill.

None of the failings of these games had anything to do with character interaction. I'll be honest, a lot of the pushback the idea of more character interaction has been receiving feels a lot like insecurity. It's as though people don't want to admit that Smash isn't perfect and can, in fact, be improved by doing things that basically every other game already does.

Like, it's okay that Smash is bad at something.

We're not saying that Smash doesn't have problems: we're saying that lack of character interaction isn't one of them.

 

[True Blue Warrior]

Not gonna lie it's really weird to try to explain the failings of MvC Infinite and PSASBR as being the result of...including a focus on character interaction.

Infinite was ugly and had a roster that was gutted by executive mandates. It had absolutely horrible word of mouth during prerelease due to the god-awful PR it had.

PSASBR was released during a time where platform fighters were considered Smash ripoffs instead of a genre, had very little budget, was criticized for its third party selections and omissions, and from a gameplay perspective, missed the mark by making super moves the only things that could kill.

None of the failings of these games had anything to do with character interaction. I'll be honest, a lot of the pushback the idea of more character interaction has been receiving feels a lot like insecurity. It's as though people don't want to admit that Smash isn't perfect and can, in fact, be improved by doing things that basically every other game already does.

Like, it's okay that Smash is bad at something.

People really hated PSASBR for the inclusion of characters like Reboot Dante and Evil Cole as well as the exclusion of characters like Crash, Spyro and Cloud.

 

[Schnee117]

Ehh... at least part of the graphical issues and gutted roster was due to it focusing on being this crossover.

The game was pushing the crossover narrative hard, complete with a brand new story mode. By focusing on these interactions and single player content, they alienated their core audience. Obviously roster complaints were going to screw that game over; its roster is basically an MCU checklist and a weaker Capcom side did not help matters. Story was front and center when it came to roster decisions. It was a major focus not only for the devs themselves, but Marvel themselves (I had an article for this but the link is dead now on Wikipedia as a source). Does this mean we would have gotten Dr. Doom or Wolverine? No, of course not. But we could have gotten a better looking game with perhaps a more salvageable roster. By focusing resources on the story mode hard, it cut into what they could and could not do. Their focus on the story mode pushed them into the roster that we got, which was widely maligned. The bulk of resources going into making over two hours of cutscenes that needed to be reviewed by Marvel ate into the presentation.

Was the crossover aspect the main thing that killed Infinite? No, the core issues of the roster and presentation alienated fans. But those do stem from the decision to focus as hard on the story and crossover elements as they did.

My guy, you don't have to make **** up about Infinite just because people are saying it does it's crossover better than Smash lmao

More like brand loyalty and lack of care than insecurity. We still complain about Smash here

Like i said before, if Smash Bros is supposed to be a celebration of video games then what are celebrating and how are going to do it is just as important as the game itself.

Just showing you have the legal rights to a fictional character just isn't special anymore. These days it feels more like corporations bragging about quarterly reports of what rights/licenses they own.

The Smash complaints here are generally isolated to Smash itself or something where you quite simply can't disagree though. There's no other fighting game where Ganondorf is playable for example and I don't think anyone could defend Smash's online here.

It's when you point out that other games have done better than Smash in certain regards that the pushback to wanting Smash to be a better crossover with "I don't want KH nonsense" or "But my resources" or quite literally making **** up about other games just becomes insecurity.

We're not saying that Smash doesn't have problems: we're saying that lack of character interaction isn't one of them.

But it is
Sorry y'all have no standards

 

[TCT~Phantom]

My guy, you don't have to make **** up about Infinite just because people are saying it does it's crossover better than Smash lmao

I didn’t make anything up. Multiple sources, such as dev interviews, show their attempt to make a crossover story was the highest priority. They literally out and out said the roster was chosen for their story mode first, which was a massive focus. The game suffered because the issues people had, like the roster and the presentation, were not priorities to the dev team or Marvel. They focused all their resources into the story mode and the game suffered as a result. Besides, it’s not like they even did the crossover stuff well in the first place.

I literally provided sources (except one where the original source wasn’t archived properly by Wikipedia) for my claims in the post you replied to. It’s not like I’m “making **** up”. I find it a bit insulting you say that I am and that just because I have reservations towards making the crossover aspect the number one priority that I “have no standards”.

 

[Opossum]

We're not saying that Smash doesn't have problems: we're saying that lack of character interaction isn't one of them.

Admitting that something is a problem is the first step toward solving said problem.

 

[Schnee117]

I didn’t make anything up. Multiple sources, such as dev interviews, show their attempt to make a crossover story was the highest priority. They literally out and out said the roster was chosen for their story mode first, which was a massive focus. The game suffered because the issues people had, like the roster and the presentation, were not priorities to the dev team or Marvel. They focused all their resources into the story mode and the game suffered as a result. Besides, it’s not like they even did the crossover stuff well in the first place.

They literally didn't.
Your first article has multiple paragraphs about how loads goes into picking the roster where the story part is just "okay what interactions can we do"
They cite different playstyles and having to come with agreements with Marvel. The story part is relatively unimportant when Marvel has enough power to veto characters from their side of the roster, which they did with the X-Men and Doom. You are inherently working on the backfoot when you are actively prohibited from using the X-Men in a Marvel crossover.

The second one's mention of story is simply just "yeah we want to do more with Marvel"

The roster is ass because they couldn't use the X-Men or Doom and because they're a huge presence in the previous game, they had to cut as many Capcom characters because of roster parity (that they dropped in the DLC anyway lmao). It's all studio politics and wanting to reuse as many assets as possible, there's a reason why the base roster only had five newcomers plus Thanos returning from MvC2 who all looked noticeably better than anyone that was in UMvC3. And in speaking of DLC... half of the DLC characters had a major presence in the story mode with Venom also being suspiciously absent from the Symbiote part. Capcom cut these characters out to sell as dlc and Sigma was announced as dlc months before launch.

Nothing points to the story mode doing anything other than putting Chun and Dante's ugly as **** faces front and centre to dominate any and all discourse about the game and everything points to Marvel ****ery and Capcom Fighters leadership being awful, everyone that actually paid attention to the game from announcement until beyond the final dlc is in agreement on this.

Considering the circumstances, they did well enough and the fact it's still better than what Smash does is just further indictment of Smash

tl;dr
Story mode is not the cause, it's studio politics, bad leadership and atrocious marketing.

I find it a bit insulting you say that I am and that just because I have reservations towards making the crossover aspect the number one priority that I “have no standards”.

You do realise that there's multiple people involved yes? And that it was specifically in reply to someone saying it isn't a problem?

 

[Will]

I remember the limited deluxe edition of MvC:I where you get exclusive Infinity Stones Easter Eggs. That was funny.

**** the mouse for putting the series in its grave.

 

[Schnee117]

I remember the limited deluxe edition of MvC:I where you get exclusive Infinity Stones Easter Eggs. That was funny.

**** the mouse for putting the series in its grave.

All these Eggs and they had the audacity to cut Wesker smh

 

[Ivander]

Admitting that something is a problem is the first step toward solving said problem.

Please don't. Just because some other people may not see a problem with it doesn't mean they are in denial.

 

[Hadokeyblade]

They should just give each character a classic mode ending that shows them interacting with other characters or assist trophies in wacky scenarios like Marvel vs capcom 3 did. That would be cool.

 

[PinkFlare]

They should double the amount of Metal Gear content in the next game

 

[NonSpecificGuy]

They should double the amount of Metal Gear content in the next game

Raiden and Rising Music here we ****ING GOOOOOO!!!

 

[Opossum]

Please don't. Just because some other people may not see a problem with it doesn't mean they are in denial.

Nah, I stand by what I said. The amount of mental gymnastics some people do in order to downplay how bad Smash's lack of character interaction is is like, notably awful. It's absolutely an issue.

 

[Soy_Man]

The next Smash story mode should just copy tales of. As in be a top down rpg, but all the combat encounters are event mode challenges.

 

[dream1ng]

I think the distinction here is something that would enhance the game were it present, but is ultimately unexpected, often unprecedented, and superfluous and something that by its absence makes the game worse, therefore making its omission a problem.

I don't think the limited interactions is a problem, but I think Smash would overall improve with them. I don't think the lack of character DLC skins is a problem, but I think Smash would overall improve with them. I think amiibo functionality overall improves Smash, but removing it wouldn't hinder the overall quality of the game. I think the unique character entrances improves Smash, but removing them like Melee did wouldn't hinder the overall quality.

I think Cloud and Sephiroth being able to use their English VAs would improve Smash (in the west), but not having them doesn't really make things worse.

These things are supplemental to the gameplay and the core content. So having them is great, but not having them, to me, doesn't entail a glaring problem. They're like... a flourish.

I do agree this site is very inconsistent in accepting criticism, though. Many aspects of the package seem like fair game - stages, modes, ATs, items, UI, potential candidates, marketing, online especially, but then if you disparage something on the roster, yeesh, better hold on. It's a little hypocritical.

 

[fogbadge]

Nah, I stand by what I said. The amount of mental gymnastics some people do in order to downplay how bad Smash's lack of character interaction is is like, notably awful. It's absolutely an issue.

bit harsh

 

[TCT~Phantom]

Admitting that something is a problem is the first step toward solving said problem.

Yes, because saying anyone who disagrees with you is in denial is a healthy mindset.

They have a right to their own opinion. Some people would like more character interaction, but others are more ambivalent on it. I could not care less about crossover elements myself. I would like more but they are very low on the hierarchy of needs for Smash for me. Obviously, others are entitled to what they want out of the next Smash. Some people want Smash to be a better museum of gaming history. Some will prioritize Nintendo's history. Some want a fine tuned competitive experience. Some want a massive party game they can play with friends. Some want a huge single player experience. Are all of those naturally at each other's throats? No, but people will have their own hierarchy of needs. Different people will have their own personal vision of what Smash is and what it could/should be.

Snarky one liners shutting people down just isn't it man. It isn't the most toxic thing you can do; at least you are not wishing harm on others. But it is still toxic to shut others down just because they have a different opinion than yourself and act like its completely unreasonable. It's just rude to respond to someone being civil and acting like that. Even moreso when you are choking out their opinions with snide one liners for the crime of...not caring about crossover fan service.

You have the right to think the lack of character interaction is a problem. They also have the right to think it isn't. You don't have the right to be a jerk because someone disagrees with you.

 

[CannonStreak]

Yes, because saying anyone who disagrees with you is in denial is a healthy mindset.

They have a right to their own opinion. Some people would like more character interaction, but others are more ambivalent on it. I could not care less about crossover elements myself. I would like more but they are very low on the hierarchy of needs for Smash for me. Obviously, others are entitled to what they want out of the next Smash. Some people want Smash to be a better museum of gaming history. Some will prioritize Nintendo's history. Some want a fine tuned competitive experience. Some want a massive party game they can play with friends. Some want a huge single player experience. Are all of those naturally at each other's throats? No, but people will have their own hierarchy of needs. Different people will have their own personal vision of what Smash is and what it could/should be.

Snarky one liners shutting people down just isn't it man. It isn't the most toxic thing you can do; at least you are not wishing harm on others. But it is still toxic to shut others down just because they have a different opinion than yourself and act like its completely unreasonable. It's just rude to respond to someone being civil and acting like that. Even moreso when you are choking out their opinions with snide one liners for the crime of...not caring about crossover fan service.

You have the right to think the lack of character interaction is a problem. They also have the right to think it isn't. You don't have the right to be a jerk because someone disagrees with you.

Of course.

It seems (no offense) that you are on a high horse, Opossum . You were acting rather toxic to Ivander, and being rather harsh, too. That is not how discussions should go. Everyone has a right to their own opinion, after all. Having an opinion does not make another person uncultured for having an opinion different than yours, and there was not need to act high and mighty and act like there is something about you that is superior to others like Ivander, when there is not. Being snarky like that just makes you look like a jerk, one that is no better than the person you criticize or put down in terms of opinion. You should be more respectful to others regardless of what you think of them. There is no need to be like this. What others like or want should not be considered a threat to you or your views.

 

[dream1ng]

Let's talk about something less divisive

So how about that Geno

 

[True Blue Warrior]

Non Zelda fans want to keep Sheik and Ganondorfs old moveset because they dont really care that sheik and g dorf have no Moves from their games

Honestly, the simplest way to improve Ganondorf is to change his Special Moves. Neutral B could be replaced with a reflect to deal with zoners (or at the very least, give him the ability to reflect with a tap of the B button) and Up B could be him floating to give him a better recovery.

Let's talk about something less divisive

So how about that Geno

Should Geno be in the next Fire Emblem game?

 

[CannonStreak]

Let's talk about something less divisive

So how about that Geno

Well, he certainly has more going for him now.

Question, though, why do you of all people want to talk about Geno? I am just curious to know.

 

[fogbadge]

Let's talk about something less divisive

So how about that Geno

He’s got no strings to hold him down

 

[TCT~Phantom]

Let's talk about something less divisive

So how about that Geno

I hope that they have both the original ost and the new one if they add him. I love the battle theme and beware the forest mushrooms in their original forms. Obviously the new ones might slap too but I hope both are on the table.

 

[chocolatejr9]

Let's talk about something less divisive

So how about that IDW Sonic being canon, thus Tangle and Whisper are eligible for Smash

I think that'd be swell! They're both very different from typical Sonic characters, but I think they'd fit Smash like a glove.

(Did I do the joke right?)

 

[Soy_Man]

Let's talk about something less divisive

So how about that Geno

If we could only have 1 Mario RPG rep, I think Paper Mario is the better choice.

 

[Ivander]

Of course.

It seems (no offense) that you are on a high horse, Opossum . You were acting rather toxic to Ivander, and being rather harsh, too. That is not how discussions should go. Everyone has a right to their own opinion, after all. Having an opinion does not make another person uncultured for having an opinion different than yours, and there was not need to act high and mighty and act like there is something about you that is superior to others like Ivander, when there is not. Being snarky like that just makes you look like a jerk, one that is no better than the person you criticize or put down in terms of opinion. You should be more respectful to others regardless of what you think of them. There is no need to be like this. What others like or want should not be considered a threat to you or your views.

They weren't to me? Aside from talking about the Miiverse and Twitter photo posts, I wasn't involved in the discussion until they started being rather assumptive about others' opinions which only then I posted and was like, "Please don't. Let's not go there." And even then, their reply to me wasn't so much toxic as more as it was throwing out some frustration.

Anyway, let's move from the topic and continue onto something else.

 

[CannonStreak]

If we could only have 1 Mario RPG rep, I think Paper Mario is the better choice.

Shun the nonbeliever, shun!

Nah, just kidding! You're cool, and so are your thoughts.

I prefer Geno still, but Paper Mario would be cool too, actually.

 

[dream1ng]

I hope that they have both the original ost and the new one if they add him. I love the battle theme and beware the forest mushrooms in their original forms. Obviously the new ones might slap too but I hope both are on the table.

BtFM is almost guaranteed to get a Smash remix, that would presumably be his trailer music. Fight Against an Armed Boss and Culex Battle seem like likely suspects for remixes as well.

I suspect the rips will lean heavier towards the remake, but probably not preclude the original entirely.

Should Geno be in the next Fire Emblem game?

Well if costumes count, he's already been in two: Smash 4 and Ultimate. So chances are looking up he'll be in the next iteration of this FE spin-off series.

If we could only have 1 Mario RPG rep, I think Paper Mario is the better choice.

Mario, Luigi, Peach, and Bowser aside, of course.

I think that'd be swell! They're both very different from typical Sonic characters, but I think they'd fit Smash like a glove.

(Did I do the joke right?)

Making it seem like I know anything about the Sonic comics is defamation of character

Well, he certainly has more going for him now.

Question, though, why do you of all people want to talk about Geno? I am just curious to know.

Because I wanted to change the topic but telling people what to talk about doesn't always work so good so I thought I'd make a joke instead

 

[CannonStreak]

They weren't to me? Aside from talking about the Miiverse and Twitter photo posts, I wasn't involved in the discussion until they started being rather assumptive about others' opinions which only then I posted and was like, "Please don't. Let's not go there." And even then, their reply to me wasn't so much toxic as more as it was throwing out some frustration.

Anyway, let's move from the topic and continue onto something else.

Look, I can see that you weren't offended by it, obviously, but the way he worded it can still be offensive. Even if you weren't offended, Opossum was still kind of mean and snarky, one user aside from myself noted one thing he said as harsh, and another person, who I replied to to add to it, did not find it cool either, but rather disrespecting. Just because you do not see it as toxic doesn't mean it can't be so, and that should not get a free pass just because how you see it.

I know, I am kind of harsh myself here, but his wording was obviously bad, regardless of how you see it.

I don't mean to be mean or anything, I am just saying.

 

[SPEN18]

Guys, don't get it twisted. Fawful is actually the optimal choice for a Mario RPG rep.

 

[CannonStreak]

Guys, don't get it twisted. Fawful is actually the optimal choice for a Mario RPG rep.

Nice.

By which I mean, that could so work.

 

[dream1ng]

Waluigi is optimal Mario RPG choice

 

[CannonStreak]

Anyway, for a RPG character in Smash from the Mario series, I think Geno is most likely.

I mean, Paper Mario and maybe Fawful are requested, but don't see much suggesting they are as requested as Geno. I would like to be proven wrong, but you can't ignore Geno's popularity, and that Sakurai said he wanted him. I could be wrong, but I can see that Geno has the advantage over the other two in that regard, and the remake helps with Geno's case.

 

[DarthEnderX]

Let's talk about something less divisive

So how about that Geno

Geno is no longer divisive. He's the star of an upcoming smash hit game. All the old arguments are dead.

 

[CannonStreak]

Geno is no longer divisive. He's the star of an upcoming smash hit game. All the old arguments are dead.

I would hate to be that guy, but those old arguments are only dead for now. There is a chance they will come back up if Geno does not get into the next Smash Bros., and if the period leading up to the next Smash is long, those old arguments might have merit again.