Official Next Smash - Speculation & Discussion Thread

[Momotsuki]

In some wholly unrelated news, I've been daydreaming about a fighter I think would be a lot of fun over the past few days.

I don't wanna name 'em until I've finished the concept in my head, but one hint I'll give is that, interestingly enough, they're sort of a brainsibling of the Smash modding scene as we know it, a factoid that led me to start thinking about how they could work as a fighter. Which might give it away if you already know of a character that fits such criteria, haha.

 

[TCT~Phantom]

...did I just read this right? Did you just run over a bunch of criticism of Ultimate by stating the people complaining about the roster's size are being ungrateful? I'm hoping that's just a gross overgeneralization I made, and not remotely close to what I read.

Read the larger post I made up above about it, this is more of a TLDR.

It is moreso about people letting any progress Ultimate has made be the enemy of their perfect Smash game. It's that people act like if you cut half of the roster, nuked third parties, and burned the foundation to the ground we would somehow get the perfect Smash game with every bell and whistle one could imagine. It is frustrating to see people think by subtracting so much they will automatically get exactly what they dreamed of, when that is just never the case. Smash games are never exactly what you hope they are. I have plenty of issues with Ultimate such as disappointing online, their approach to all star mode, or the overuse of the Hands in Classic mode. I would not be lying if I wished characters that did not make it in did. But nuking the roster will not solve that. You do not get addition by subtraction. Ultimate is far from beyond criticism, but burning its foundation to the ground is not the answer.

I have to be honest, this reads like a strawman argument. I won't deny that there are those who are thinking selfishly like that, but most of the people talking about cuts in this topic are not doing so out of personal bias or a desire to 'purge' the roster, but rather discussing potential directions the game could take and how it could shape up with the pressures of following Ultimate. Taking all of that and dumbing it down to a 'they just mad they didn't get what they wanted' is being completely dismissive of the legitimate points brought up for the topic and quite frankly is very damaging on discussion as well.

As above, this is an abridged TLDR.

Reboot talk might have been interesting at one point, but how interesting is it when on average three times a month we are having this same song and dance? After a certain point it becomes less about speculation about the next game and more about an airing of grievances. I am just calling it as I see it. Does everyone who passively discusses a hard reboot wish fall under that statement? No, obviously. But it happens on a regular basis on here from certain people.

Believe me, I would much rather talk about anything else in regards to the next smash game. Not just because of the discourse this thing generates, but series or company and speculation on how it could come to the next game is great. It is so much more fun when people speculate on the potential new ideas that could come from the next Smash. It is so fun seeing people gush about their dreams for what could be in the next Smash. It is so much more fun thinking about positive additions to Smash than having a discussion about cuts or a hard reboot for the thirtieth time this year.

 

[Momotsuki]

Something that I think a reboot or Ultimate rerelease would both help facilitate (albeit for different reasons) is some meaty single-player content more than anything. Doesn't even have to be a story mode, a variety of fun, substantial modes suffices. A Melee-style Adventure mode is something I've daydreamt about a lot, with Galacta Knight serving as the hidden boss like Giga Bowser did in Melee.

 

[RodNutTakin]

I don't want a mass trimming of the fighter selection because I feel that would stifle discussion by a gross amount.
Ultimate's scope in what series it covered opened the door for a lot of new cases for characters going forward, and I'd crumple like a paper bag if all that was tossed away, just because we'd be back at square one with character discussion.
It feels like a lot of people have forgotten that the whole reason Everyone is Here happened was because the veterans that didn't make it to Smash 4's base roster got an overwhelming amount of discussion and ballot votes dedicated towards them. An extreme reboot would cloud most interesting newcomer discussion with "I want so and so back in the game!!", on top of the most-likely lessened third-party presence further limiting options, and it'd just overall leave the community worse off in my eyes.

 

[Gengar84]

I’ve brought up Lu Bu on here before as a character to represent the Warriors series in general but what does everyone think of Nobunaga Oda as another possibility? He and Yukimura Sanada are the faces of Samurai Warriors as Zhao Yun and Lu Bu are to Dynasty Warriors.

Nobunaga has a few things going for him over the others. First, he is the Namesake of Koei’s older series, Nobunaga’s ambition, which predated even Dynasty Warriors. Second is that he played the role of the main antagonist to a Nintendo crossover in Pokémon Conquest. I feel like a major role in a Pokémon spinoff, which even featured him prominently on the cover could only help.

Of course, the most likely Koei-Tecmo rep is Ryu Hyabusa from Ninja Gaiden but there are no guarantees in Smash. Even if a character feels the most likely, Sakurai loves to throw curveballs so I never rule anything out. There’s also the more likely possibility that we could get two Koei-Tecmo characters and we could get either Lu Bu or Nobunaga in addition to Hyabusa.

 

[Hadokeyblade]

If Young Link comes back in the future i want his final smash to include him turning into Fierce Diety Link.

I think it's stupid that they didnt do it this way

 

[fogbadge]

I’m just gonna list all the characters I want cut and the incredibly bias reasons why. I won’t say they’re likely to happen but I won’t pretend this isn’t bias either

Mewtwo: even though I am a massive Pokemon fan there’s a few I don’t like. and I’ve never liked mewtwo

Snake: I’ve never taken to this character and every time I try to learn more about his games I just become more convinced kojima may the most insane game developer ever

Bayo: I can’t stand everything about this one. from her replant personality to her stupid gun shoes

Daisy: I hate her. seemingly for no reason but I’d still cut her

Terry: I honestly forget he’s in the roster

one of the Belmonts: did we have to have two?

Pyra/Mythra: the whole reveal felt like a bit of a middle finger

Piranha Plant: what novelty there was wore off

Kazuya: I feel we could have had a more interesting character from this series

Ken: I just don’t see the point

Dark Pit: he was pointless enough in uprising never mind smash

Inceneroar: he looks so stupid and was the lamest gen 7 Pokemon

Roy and Robin: I think the fe cast needs a bit of trimming and we should make chrom unique and byleth should be reworked into something like how he is in game

think that’s everyone.

 

[SPEN18]

I'd just recommend that we come to terms with the fact that pretty much no singular piece of content or even chunk of old content is going to make or break the game. Unless we're back to joking about cutting Mario or something.

Arguments like "but they've been in X number of games" or "but people will miss them / be disappointed" are IMO largely immaterial at this point without further context, analysis, and nuance.
I don't see why appearing in more Smash games should matter; attendance is just an easy yet ultimately artificial way to assign priorities to characters.
The "people will miss them" argument is generic and applicable to literally anybody; even the root sentiment of disappointment that a character didn't make it can apply to potential newcomers just as much as vets.
People will be disappointed if old content isn't there, and people will be disappointed if potential new content isn't there. There's no difference, so you just have to weigh the pros and cons of including each (and I will just add that when it comes to compelling selling points for a new game, new content usually wins out over "every last drop of the old").

 

[Gengar84]

I'd just recommend that we come to terms with the fact that pretty much no singular piece of content or even chunk of old content is going to make or break the game. Unless we're back to joking about cutting Mario or something.

Arguments like "but they've been in X number of games" or "but people will miss them / be disappointed" are IMO largely immaterial at this point without further context, analysis, and nuance.
I don't see why appearing in more Smash games should matter; attendance is just an easy yet ultimately artificial way to assign priorities to characters.
The "people will miss them" argument is generic and applicable to literally anybody; even the root sentiment of disappointment that a character didn't make it can apply to potential newcomers just as much as vets.
People will be disappointed if old content isn't there, and people will be disappointed if potential new content isn't there. There's no difference, so you just have to weigh the pros and cons of including each (and I will just add that when it comes to compelling selling points for a new game, new content usually wins out over "every last drop of the old").

For example, Sephiroth is my favorite Smash character and he’s usually at the top of most people’s cut list. Sheik is another favorite of mine and she seems to get more cut discussion than anyone, even among Zelda fans.

 

[TCT~Phantom]

Bayo: I can’t stand everything about this one. from her replant personality to her weird face

Umm... maybe don't talk about a woman's "weird face" or "personality" when you discuss a character cut? Or like, in general?

This low key comes off as super sexist. Boiling Bayonetta down to physical traits or her personality comes off as sexist. It's gross. I know other people besides me have told you this in the past but it reads as quite sexist.

 

[Perkilator]

Okay, so I'm going to try my hand at what I think a next game would look like that isn't a reboot. Among the fighters I cut, there are a few particular fighters that I was sad to, whereas my list of newcomers is mix of a wishlist and who I find reasonable. Either way, I wanted to approach this roster with as open of a mind as possibe, and it wasn't made assuming all of these characters will be in the base game.

Spoiler: Returning characters

1. Mario
2. Luigi
3. Peach
4. Daisy
5. Bowser
6. Rosalina & Luma
7. Bowser Jr.
8. Donkey Kong
9. Diddy Kong
10. King K. Rool
11. Link
12. Zelda
13. Ganondorf
14. Samus
15. Zero Suit Samus
16. Ridley
17. Yoshi
18. Kirby
19. Meta Knight
20. King Dedede
21. Fox
22. Falco
23. Pikachu
24. Charizard
25. Jigglypuff
26. Mewtwo
27. Lucario
28. Greninja
29. Ness
30. Captain Falcon
31. Ice Climbers
32. Marth
33. Roy
34. Ike
35. Robin
36. Mr. Game & Watch
37. Pit
38. Palutena
39. Wario
40. Olimar
41. Villager
42. Shulk
43. Pyra / Mythra
44. Inkling
45. Isabelle
46. Sonic
47. Bayonetta
48. Mega Man
49. Ryu
50. Ken
51. PAC-MAN
52. Terry
53. Mii Fighters

Spoiler: New fighters

1. Waluigi
2. Pauline
3. Dixie Kong
4. Raven Beak
5. Bandana Waddle Dee
6. Magolor
7. Meowscarada
8. Alear
9. Ashley
10. Oatchi
11. Tom Nook
12. Noah & Mio
13. Octolings
14. Ring Fit Trainee
15. Dr. Eggman
16. Zero
17. Any character from a franchise not represented through playable characters, 1st or 3rd party

 

[SPEN18]

Thread's been going fast so I can't cover everything I'd like.

But I think Mac can be tuned up to satisfaction. I think Mother is memorable, "cult-classic," and influential enough to stay on as a legacy franchise with at least Ness, the rep with the worldwide release. Also I think a lot of the Villager cuts talk comes from a deep-rooted aversion to "generic no-name avatar" characters; but I think Smash 4 made most people ok with the likes of Villager, Inkling, and Robin.

 

[Sucumbio]

"Only a white man would believe you could cut a foot off the top of the blanket, sew it onto the bottom of the blanket, and you'd be left with a longer blanket." -Old Native American

I don't know why I'm reminded of this all of a sudden, as it's actually a comment made after Daylight Savings Time was "explained" to an unknown Native American. Just seems like that same failure in logic is somehow always present in cut talk discourse.

 

[Laniv]

...so I guess I'm alone in thinking Joker is gonna be one of the first on the chopping block, huh

 

[SPEN18]

...so I guess I'm alone in thinking Joker is gonna be one of the first on the chopping block, huh

nah, he's probably toast

 

[Hadokeyblade]

For example, Sephiroth is my favorite Smash character and he’s usually at the top of most people’s cut list. Sheik is another favorite of mine and she seems to get more cut discussion than anyone, even among Zelda fans.

People want Sephiroth cut?

...Why?

...so I guess I'm alone in thinking Joker is gonna be one of the first on the chopping block, huh

Not as long as P5's characters continue to make money for Sega lol

 

[Perkilator]

People want Sephiroth cut?

...Why?

Well, for me, "want" is a strong word. I only cut him from my take on a new Smash because I cut Cloud as well, among other characters because of various potential roadblocks.

 

[Soy_Man]

It is moreso about people letting any progress Ultimate has made be the enemy of their perfect Smash game. It's that people act like if you cut half of the roster, nuked third parties, and burned the foundation to the ground we would somehow get the perfect Smash game with every bell and whistle one could imagine. It is frustrating to see people think by subtracting so much they will automatically get exactly what they dreamed of, when that is just never the case. Smash games are never exactly what you hope they are. I have plenty of issues with Ultimate such as disappointing online, their approach to all star mode, or the overuse of the Hands in Classic mode. I would not be lying if I wished characters that did not make it in did. But nuking the roster will not solve that. You do not get addition by subtraction. Ultimate is far from beyond criticism, but burning its foundation to the ground is not the answer.

Burning its foundation to the ground? How is making another Smash game, that has less characters and does things differently, going to erase Ultimate? It will always exist as a finished product. Maybe you think it's a waste not to use Ultimate as some kind of platform to perpetually add on to, but what I want is to see Smash take on differing forms and evolve at it's core, because I find that more exciting. And I think keeping even the majority of the roster would greatly limit what the series can do going forward. And just so you know I think the vast majority of Ultimate's roster are worthy inclusions, and are beautifully realised. I couldn't give less of a **** that bandana dee or whoever didn't make it.

 

[SPEN18]

For example, Sephiroth is my favorite Smash character and he’s usually at the top of most people’s cut list. Sheik is another favorite of mine and she seems to get more cut discussion than anyone, even among Zelda fans.

I get that it's not the most fun thing in the world to have someone tell you your favorite dream picks shouldn't be in or aren't good choices. Remember it's nothing personal, just opinions about fictional characters.

 

[fogbadge]

Umm... maybe don't talk about a woman's "weird face" or "personality" when you discuss a character cut? Or like, in general?

This low key comes off as super sexist. Boiling Bayonetta down to physical traits or her personality comes off as sexist. It's gross. I know other people besides me have told you this in the past but it reads as quite sexist.

sorry disliking a personality is sexist? how? that's literally personal. you're just seeing what you want to see as usual. the face thing is cause it's pure uncanny valley it'd be weird no matter who or what it was on

 

[Momotsuki]

sorry disliking a personality is sexist? how? that's literally personal. you're just seeing what you want to see as usual

You could just say you don't like her games. That's fine, they're not for everyone.
I'm not accusing you of having any ill intent but it's easy to see how one could get that impression from how you're talking about the character. If that's not intentional on your part then it might be worth reconsidering your phrasing.

 

[fogbadge]

You could just say you don't like her games. That's fine, they're not for everyone.
I'm not accusing you of having any ill intent but it's easy to see how one could get that impression from how you're talking about the character. If that's not intentional on your part then it might be worth reconsidering your phrasing.

well i've edited it to something else at least but i've explained to phantom in the past that have communication problems so at this point i find it hard to believe it's not just being spiteful about someone hating her. especially as he makes this accusation every time I try to criticise her

 

[Gengar84]

Well, for me, "want" is a strong word. I only cut him from my take on a new Smash because I cut Cloud as well, among other characters because of various potential roadblocks.

Yeah, I think it’s more that people expect Sephiroth to be cut rather than want, although I’m sure there’s some of each. Sheik tends to land more on the want side from what I’ve seen. People make good points that she’s not exactly relevant to the series anymore but I just think she’s really cool and that’s all I need.

 

[Momotsuki]

Every Square newcomer having debuted as DLC says a lot business-wise, I'd say. I really wonder what arm-twisting it took from Sakurai to get Cloud in base-game Ultimate. My best guess is having Hero be DLC as it seems likely that FP1 was decided before launch. Hero's a really fun character in his own right though so I'm not complaining.

Sephiroth meanwhile feels a lot less cynical in terms of the reason he's there. Like Cloud in Smash 4, it probably did boil down to a combination of "this would be cool" from Sakurai and "this would make us some money" from Nintendo and Square.

Sure, there was the FF7 remake, but I don't buy that being the primary motivation for including Sephiroth to be quite honest with you. FP2 wasn't set in stone prior to launch - not its fighters nor its existence - so it's not like there were any promises made on that front.

 

[TheLamerGamer]

I feel like if they did an ultimate port it'd be cool if they went even further with "everyone is here" - include the few missing stages and then mostly focus on expanding the existing series' content in the base game, then go mental with the third parties in the dlc like in ultimate.

Like, for mario they could add more spin-off content, for persona they could include some content from 1 and 2, from final fantasy include some content from the other games (like that's ever going to happen...), include some more modern kirby content, etc.

Honestly I'd be happy with more music over anything else, but that's probably just me.

 

[fogbadge]

Every Square newcomer having debuted as DLC says a lot business-wise, I'd say. I really wonder what arm-twisting it took from Sakurai to get Cloud in base-game Ultimate. My best guess is having Hero be DLC as it seems likely that FP1 was decided before launch. Hero's a really fun character in his own right though so I'm not complaining.

Sephiroth and Sora (who is kind of a whole other can of worms, really) meanwhile feel a lot less cynical in terms of the reason they're there. Like Cloud in Smash 4, it probably did boil down to a combination of "this would be cool" from Sakurai and "this would make us some money" from Nintendo and Square.

Sure, there was the FF7 remake, but I don't buy that being the primary motivation for including Sephiroth to be quite honest with you. FP2 wasn't set in stone prior to launch - not its fighters nor its existence - so it's not like there were any promises made on that front.

yeah I’m sure we’d have gotten sephiroth regardless of the remake. strikes me as a situation where all parties would be on board

 

[LiveStudioAudience]

At this point, I don't believe there is any one logical path for Smash to take. While the series definitely had certain elements which arguably were mistakes, for the most part each successive entry has felt natural follow-ups to the previous one.

Now its at a crossroads where either likely path (a somewhat adjusted continuation of the 2018 game or effectively a reboot to put the series in a new direction) quite frankly both make sense. Ultimate was in so many ways the wish fulfillment title and the most effective celebration of what the franchise was; a Smash game built upon and paying tribute to what had come before. Given that success the most market logical thing to do is continue it and keep that structure that has rendered it the best selling fighting game of all time. Heck as someone who still has character preferences and mode ideas (user driven content in break the targets, spirit battles, etc) there is a great deal that can be added to what's there.

However, so much of Nintendo has been a willingness to try new things and to let go of a winning formula for the sake of seeing if something different can work just as well or better. Even as someone with very mixed opinions on the experiments that certain series tried (Donkey Kong with bongos, Zelda with touch screen/motion controls, Star Fox with... everything) I'd be lying if I said I wasn't generally curious to see what a new take on Smash would be. Its the irresistible question of what if; even as fun as someone like Mario is to play as in SSB... could a new perspective on him be even more interesting? The series isn't anywhere close to stagnating, yet I'm wondering if the next game being Ultimate + in its core form would be disappointing on some level, even if unconsciously.

"Don't fix what isn't broken" and "make the old new again" both have entirely valid points and I'd like to think I wouldn't begrudge the franchise or following either idea.

 

[Momotsuki]

I meant to edit a post, quoted it instead. Delete please!
Cut me some slack, it's been a while!

 

[Rie Sonomura]

I feel like if they did an ultimate port it'd be cool if they went even further with "everyone is here" - include the few missing stages and then mostly focus on expanding the existing series' content in the base game, then go mental with the third parties in the dlc like in ultimate.

Like, for mario they could add more spin-off content, for persona they could include some content from 1 and 2, from final fantasy include some content from the other games (like that's ever going to happen...), include some more modern kirby content, etc.

Honestly I'd be happy with more music over anything else, but that's probably just me.

There is a slight issue with Everywhere Is Here - one of the Smash 4 stages has Boss Ridley, I forgot the name but the only way I can see that stage return is if they replace Boss Ridley with some other Metroid boss

I know some other Wii U stages couldn’t make it due to the amount of particle generation or something. Hopefully the next system is stronger

 

[Momotsuki]

My one criticism with Sephiroth in Ultimate is that the Sephiroth challenge shouldn't have had difficulty options and that the hardest option - in this case the only one - should have been harder. Like, it should've been difficult to the point where beating it actually felt like skipping the line.

If the Sephiroth challenge had been the permanent way of obtaining him after purchase, I'd be fine with it having easier options since people shouldn't be permanently skill-gated from something they spent money on.

But here, seeing as those that couldn't do it - which in this scenario would be many if not most - would still get to use him once he released proper, there was really no reason to not go all-out and make managing to pull it off actually feel like unlocking him early rather than have it feel like the release in all but name.

 

[Perkilator]

There is a slight issue with Everywhere Is Here - one of the Smash 4 stages has Boss Ridley, I forgot the name but the only way I can see that stage return is if they replace Boss Ridley with some other Metroid boss

I know some other Wii U stages couldn’t make it due to the amount of particle generation or something. Hopefully the next system is stronger

I guess you could replace it with a brand-new Mecha Ridley, working as a robotic replacement.

 

[MasterCheef]

It really shouldn't need any explanations in the first place. They're fan favorites and series staple.

I mean, you even cut Ness, character that's been in every game in the series? And from the most well-known game in his own series?

Zero Suit Samus? I remember seeing how fans were disappointed when Sakurai joked that she wasn't coming back for Smash 4 and you want to cut her for real?

Little Mac? One of the most wanted first-party characters from a well-loved Nintendo series and you want him cut? And after just two playable appearances?

A lot of these wrongs with these cuts besides just that ((such as Ice Climber and Mr. Game & Watch).

I am interested , How is , Little Mac , one of the most wanted First Party characters ?

Zero Suit Samus , makes perfect sense because Samus should not be without her armor

Again , Earthbound / Mother , series is dead. Additionally i REALLY DON'T want any young children playable characters in Smash

 

[fogbadge]

I am interested , How is , Little Mac , one of the most wanted First Party characters ?

Zero Suit Samus , makes perfect sense because Samus should not be without her armor

Again , Earthbound / Mother , series is dead. Additionally i REALLY DON'T want any young children playable characters in Smash

Mother is finished cause the guy who creates it was done telling the story. dead implies they stopped making games cause they did badly

 

[StrangeKitten]

Hot take: No fighter needs a huge rework. When it comes to Ganondorf, DK, Little Mac, Sonic, Samus, etc. they only need to change around 2 or 3 moves to achieve something that suits the character far better. And that's already something they've done plenty of times. Dedede lost his Waddle Dees and got a completely different back air in the transition from Brawl to 4. Bowser has gotten at least one changed move each game since arriving in Melee if memory serves. Palutena was pretty heavily reworked in the transition from 4 to Ultimate due to custom moves no longer being a thing, The aforementioned Ganondorf got new Smash attacks in Ultimate, even if they were just reskins of Ike's and Cloud's. I'm sure these aren't all the moveset changes, but they are the ones that pop into my mind. And still, despite plenty of move changes happening between 4 and Ultimate, EiH still happened. So I don't think sweeping cuts to the roster are necessary if they want to change the characters people are hoping to see changed, which isn't that many characters. Though if one is hoping for a lot more than character changes, like also getting far greater single player content, I can see the arguments for pretty big cuts in that case.

 

[HyperSomari64]

Again , Earthbound / Mother , series is dead. Additionally i REALLY DON'T want any young children playable characters in Smash

A 'ittle ironic. I remember a non-videogame character for Smash thread, and you said you wanted Himawari (Naruto's daughter) in Smash, a young child.

just go to this thread, pretty sure that he will edit it after this post.

You can add one non-videogame character to Smash. Who?

Id personally say James Bond (honorable mention to Geralt & general Nintendo owned characters like Captain N) although when I think of non-gaming characters in Smash the 1st name that comes to mind for myself & potientially many other people is Goku.

smashboards.com

 

[TheLamerGamer]

I’m just gonna list all the characters I want cut and the incredibly bias reasons why.

I'm really not a fan of this mindset. Sure, there are characters I wouldn't mind losing, but I don't actually want them gone, because plenty of people would miss them, and there are no characters I actively dislike because... it's a kids' game. At worst my response has been "I would've preferred X character, but I'm sure they'll be cool", and then they always are.

Kaz.. erm how do you pronounce it?

I... really don't like this. Like, it's no more difficult than something like Jaqueline or Elijah, and I never see people struggling with those - it's literally just pronounced how it's spelt.

 

[Momotsuki]

I'm really not a fan of this mindset. Sure, there are characters I wouldn't mind losing, but I don't actually want them gone, because plenty of people would miss them, and there are no characters I actively dislike because... it's a kids' game. At worst my response has been "I would've preferred X character, but I'm sure they'll be cool", and then they always are.

Oh my gosh thank you for putting this so well. "Maybe it's worth slimming down the roster so that energy can be spent on X or Y" is something worth discussing to be certain, but I really don't like the idea of actively pushing cuts as worthwhile in and of themselves. Which, to avoid strawmanning anyone, I don't think that many people are doing. But it's still frustrating when it does come up.

 

[fogbadge]

I'm really not a fan of this mindset. Sure, there are characters I wouldn't mind losing, but I don't actually want them gone, because plenty of people would miss them, and there are no characters I actively dislike because... it's a kids' game. At worst my response has been "I would've preferred X character, but I'm sure they'll be cool", and then they always are.

like I said I was being deliberately bias. I wasn’t saying they would be cut or should be cut

I... really don't like this. Like, it's no more difficult than something like Jaqueline or Elijah, and I never see people struggling with those - it's literally just pronounced how it's spelt.

what an odd thing to be bothered by. as it happens I usually work out how to spell by how they’re pronounced. so I can’t spell cause I’ve never heard it out loud

 

[Wonder Smash]

I am interested , How is , Little Mac , one of the most wanted First Party characters ?

Zero Suit Samus , makes perfect sense because Samus should not be without her armor

Again , Earthbound / Mother , series is dead. Additionally i REALLY DON'T want any young children playable characters in Smash

The same way lots of other characters were wanted in Smash. People loved the Punch-Out series and they want its main character to be playable in Smash. You'd know that if you were actually around before he became playable.

Samus has been without her suit before. Who are you to decide that she shouldn't?

Oh please! There's nothing wrong with characters like Ness or Lucas, who fight in their own series, being playable characters in Smash, so don't bring that nonsense here. If you're taking Smash that seriously, then maybe you shouldn't even be playing these games.

A 'ittle ironic. I remember a non-videogame character for Smash thread, and you said you wanted Himawari (Naruto's daughter) in Smash, a young child.

just go to this thread, pretty sure that he will edit it after this post.

You can add one non-videogame character to Smash. Who?

Id personally say James Bond (honorable mention to Geralt & general Nintendo owned characters like Captain N) although when I think of non-gaming characters in Smash the 1st name that comes to mind for myself & potientially many other people is Goku.

smashboards.com

Well, dang! lol

 

[Sucumbio]

OMG Momotsuki I knew I recognized that font welcome back where u been? Still making mods? This is almost shaping up to be like the old thread! Missing some other key posters tho haha