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!
This is just objectively false on Hero. Hero was a huge request for Smash, especially in Japan that has been requesting the characters for years. Sakurai even said that Hero was added because there was a lot of request for the characters (which could be referencing the ballot).
Actually, that should be the point; they matter to us, the Smash fanbase. So if you just take them out for no good reason, you're going to have a negative impact on the fanbase. Besides, Terry is pretty well-known in Japan and Mexico and the Smash Bros series is pretty important to the Ice Climbers recognition outside of their own game. So much to the point that fans were really happy to see them come back for Ultimate. So it will definitely have an impact on more people than you think.
Well, the Dragon Quest part has already been addressed. Tekken, as you said, is also a very popular series and as we can even tell by the way Kazuya fights, it's not like Tekken is anything like Street Fighter. It's a pretty significant series with Kazuya having a fanbase of his own, so cutting him is not going to do it for fans who will likely want more from the series, not less.
Heihachi has more of a push as the mascot, and Jin has more of a push as the protagonist. Or had, until Tekken 7 pushed Jin out of the spotlight so it could focus on Kazuya finishing his conflict with Heihachi.
What do you mean "more of a push"? And what does it have to do with Kazuya's undeniable popularity? Besides, Kazuya was the very first protagonist of the series.
It's what makes me think people unfamiliar with Tekken wouldn't recognize Kazuya.
If they do recognize Tekken, they'll recognize Kazuya. He's one of the main characters in the series and his popularity was what brought him back after he was missing in Tekken 3.
Well I'd be fine with being wrong, but I can't really find any data that confirms this. The only DQ character I've seen in the polls is Slime, and not that often. The only quote I can find from Sakurai is him saying that requests for a DQ rep "have been around for a long time", which doesn't actually tell us very much. I can't find anything that tells us what characters specifically from DQ people wanted.
With respect, that isn't what I said. I said Kazuya and Hero weren't quite as well known as the series they hail from. For example, I'd say it's accurate to say that more people know of Tekken than they know specifically of Kazuya. That's not to say he isn't well known, just not AS well known when compared to characters like Ryu who are pretty much synonymous with their series. That was just one of the reasons I decided on cutting Kazuya though. Again, I don't WANT to cut him. This was just an exercise to see who I would cut if I had no choice.
I already knew about of the European Micro-Computer Boom.
Yeah there's definitely a point to be made about how gaming history and the stuff that's passed down is being rewritten to center more and more around Nintendo to the point that to many people it's Almost All they would know about old video games. It's very concerning - don't get me wrong Nintendo always were massively popular and important, but they were by no means the only innovators and it feels like many of the other innovators are getting less and less recognitionWhile its easy to just say that Nintendo (and by virtue Smash) fans are in a bubble, I think the context is a little trickier than that. About two years ago, there was a Twitter dustup started by this thread:
But I think phenomenon like this is a case where there's many factors; putting the cart before the horse (YouTubers can only do so much in shaping the culture), Croc not enduring for many players, and one other major element that also I think affects perceptions in Smash speculation. The thing is nostalgia, continuity, & reverence of past games is essentially baked into a lot of Nintendo's IP's in general. Trophies/spirits in Smash, stages in Mario Kart, highlighted titles on the online service, etc. The company makes you very aware of its titles and their legacy is so consistently brought up that even non first party games like Banjo-Kazooie fall into the (company created, fandom continued) sphere of remembering and appreciating what came before.
That's not to say they're the only company that does this, but so many various other publishers and developers have major games that have fallen by the wayside and aren't reinforced by a PR culture of recalling them that a YouTube retrospective about them isn't happening with that much frequency. Sega is one of the most famous game companies out there and half of their IP's are in deep hibernation or barely remembered because they were only big in certain regions.
And when you get to really old stuff like Atari or the British microcomputer scene, it gets worse because there's no effective media or delivery system to even tell people that titles from the time were good and/or popular. There's no contemporary piece of gaming media to introduce new generations or remind old ones about the releases on ZX Spectrum or Amstrad CPC, and so they increasingly become the domains of older niche fans while the Nintendo legacy/nostalgia culture becomes self reinforcing again and again.
Nintendo is only one of the biggest video game companies in the world, its also one that has a strong sense of historical continuity that eventually flows in the fandom (specifically the Western one) significantly as a result, expanding the reach of games far beyond what their sales reflected and naturally (albeit unintentionally) shutting out series outside that paradigm to a degree.
like Zap Branigan?
Everyone can play what they want, that's not the issue. The issue is when people with no knowledge say things like "DQ and Tekken were not popular". At the very least, if you're not familiar with those franchises because you mostly played on Nintendo consoles, do some ressearch. It takes seconds to see that Tekken 7 alone sold more than 10 million copies.
Honestly it's not that surprising when Smash is trying to have some picks like Banjo that are explicitly and exclusively there for being Nintendo-centric and others which get in on completely opposite lines of reasoning, i.e. for simply being big names in general gaming. Of course less knowledgeable people would end up conflating the two lines of thinking even though they ought to be very clearly distinct when putting Banjo next to, say, Tekken.
Well FWIW, Croc is the one of the two that's getting a remaster in the future...While its easy to just say that Nintendo (and by virtue Smash) fans are in a bubble, I think the context is a little trickier than that. About two years ago, there was a Twitter dustup started by this thread:
But I think phenomenon like this is a case where there's many factors; putting the cart before the horse (YouTubers can only do so much in shaping the culture), Croc not enduring for many players, and one other major element that also I think affects perceptions in Smash speculation. The thing is nostalgia, continuity, & reverence of past games is essentially baked into a lot of Nintendo's IP's in general. Trophies/spirits in Smash, stages in Mario Kart, highlighted titles on the online service, etc. The company makes you very aware of its titles and their legacy is so consistently brought up that even non first party games like Banjo-Kazooie fall into the (company created, fandom continued) sphere of remembering and appreciating what came before.
That's not to say they're the only company that does this, but so many various other publishers and developers have major games that have fallen by the wayside and aren't reinforced by a PR culture of recalling them that a YouTube retrospective about them isn't happening with that much frequency. Sega is one of the most famous game companies out there and half of their IP's are in deep hibernation or barely remembered because they were only big in certain regions.
And when you get to really old stuff like Atari or the British microcomputer scene, it gets worse because there's no effective media or delivery system to even tell people that titles from the time were good and/or popular. There's no contemporary piece of gaming media to introduce new generations or remind old ones about the releases on ZX Spectrum or Amstrad CPC, and so they increasingly become the domains of older niche fans while the Nintendo legacy/nostalgia culture becomes self reinforcing again and again.
Nintendo not is only one of the biggest video game companies in the world, its also one that has a strong sense of historical continuity that eventually flows in the fandom (specifically the Western one) significantly as a result, expanding the reach of games far beyond what their sales reflected and naturally (albeit unintentionally) shutting out series outside that paradigm to a degree.
This reminds me of the whole "Nintendo saved video games" thing, when they didn't. Like, at all actually. They were still really popular in Japan and Europe, with Europe in particular just using computers. And even when Nintendo came to Europe, the master system was more popular. I'm 18, but I can still easily see that here, I know way more adults who grew up on Alex kidd and sonic than Nintendo franchises, including those who know nothing about games. And there's loads of classic PC games that'd be popular here. I'd be surprised to meet an American who'd even heard of a bbc micro, but it's just common knowledge here.While its easy to just say that Nintendo (and by virtue Smash) fans are in a bubble, I think the context is a little trickier than that. About two years ago, there was a Twitter dustup started by this thread:
But I think phenomenon like this is a case where there's many factors; putting the cart before the horse (YouTubers can only do so much in shaping the culture), Croc not enduring for many players, and one other major element that also I think affects perceptions in Smash speculation. The thing is nostalgia, continuity, & reverence of past games is essentially baked into a lot of Nintendo's IP's in general. Trophies/spirits in Smash, stages in Mario Kart, highlighted titles on the online service, etc. The company makes you very aware of its titles and their legacy is so consistently brought up that even non first party games like Banjo-Kazooie fall into the (company created, fandom continued) sphere of remembering and appreciating what came before.
That's not to say they're the only company that does this, but so many various other publishers and developers have major games that have fallen by the wayside and aren't reinforced by a PR culture of recalling them that a YouTube retrospective about them isn't happening with that much frequency. Sega is one of the most famous game companies out there and half of their IP's are in deep hibernation or barely remembered because they were only big in certain regions.
And when you get to really old stuff like Atari or the British microcomputer scene, it gets worse because there's no effective media or delivery system to even tell people that titles from the time were good and/or popular. There's no contemporary piece of gaming media to introduce new generations or remind old ones about the releases on ZX Spectrum or Amstrad CPC, and so they increasingly become the domains of older niche fans while the Nintendo legacy/nostalgia culture becomes self reinforcing again and again.
Nintendo not is only one of the biggest video game companies in the world, its also one that has a strong sense of historical continuity that eventually flows in the fandom (specifically the Western one) significantly as a result, expanding the reach of games far beyond what their sales reflected and naturally (albeit unintentionally) shutting out series outside that paradigm to a degree.
Its the cultural continuity issue again. The genuine legacy of the British computer scene is only really being maintained outside the UK by select content creators and hobbyists with a lot of the games from time not really being accessible with modern platforms. Either than or the self fulfilling prophecy of people not talking about them leading to less younger fans willing to try them out and thus less people talking about them. Japan's pre-Famicom video game history is even less discussed outside the big hits like Pac-Man and Space Invaders with that entire era rarely highlighted partially because (unlike American console makers pre-NES) you don't have the key figures being interviewed about it.
I've played the Tekken series for a very long time and Kazuya is one of the most prominent characters in the game with the exception of the third entry which is the only game he was absent.
I agree. I feel like characters should be able to qualify in more than just one way. As far as Smash goes, I think history in gaming in general as well as Nintendo specifically should factor into a character’s consideration. In general, if a character has a strong history on Nintendo platforms, that should lower the bar for how iconic the character is overall. In other words, a character like Fulgore from Killer Instinct may not be as popular with the general gaming community as someone like Master Chief but I feel like RARE’s early partnership with Nintendo should at least put him on the table.
tekken was on the wii u was it not?
Yeah, I think so. There have been a few Tekken games on Nintendo consoles if I remember correctly. I think overall though, Tekken is more often associated with Sony and PlayStation than Nintendo. I think this is an example of a character making it in for their general popularity rather than relevance to Nintendo specifically, which is still a perfectly good reason. Banjo on the other hand was likely chosen for his relevance to Nintendo. There are a ton of more iconic franchises overall than Banjo-Kazooie but that game is fondly remembered by many Nintendo fans, which definitely helped his chances. That’s one reason I really like the idea of getting a few more RARE characters as the series moves forward. There’s plenty of room for both generally iconic characters as well as smaller characters that were important to Nintendo fans.
I don't think the point of the conversation was that Banjo don't deserve to be in Smash or that Kazuya deserve to be in Smash more than Banjo. The point was that acting like Kazuya is that super niche character that nobody knows is silly when he's objectively way bigger than many characters on the roster, even among other third party. Of course there's more going on behind the scenes than just "let's pick the characters from the best selling games". Banjo didn't get in for sales, he got in the game because he was a huge request. The conversation wasn't about who deserve to be in the roster, it was about sharing false information. Tekken sold more than 54 millions units with Tekken 7 alone selling more than 10 millions and like I said on my previous post, it takes seconds to google it and find it.
Again, nobody is upset that people here are more familiar with Banjo. Everyone can play the games they want. If you rather play 3d platformer than 3d fighting games that's fine. If you'd rather play N64 games than Playstation games that's fine. Saying stuff like "I'd rather have Banjo in Smash than Kazuya because I'm more familiar with Banjo than Tekken" is also fine. But saying "I'd rather have Banjo in Smash than Kazuya because nobody knows about Kazuya" is not, because again, that's just a misinformation.
there was a toad costume wasn’t there?Yes, it was.
It even had a few exclusive costumes and modes.
Yes, there was.
Yeah. I’m just saying that there are good reasons for people preferring someone like Banjo as well as for those that prefer Kazuya. I don’t think it’s right to put down either opinion. I do somewhat understand the confusion in getting Kazuya over Jin or Heihachi because I always thought the latter two were more generally recognized but I knew all of them beforehand. I’ve only played a couple Tekken games years ago so I don’t have a ton of experience with the franchise. Looking at the sales though, it’s obvious to me that Tekken is a very popular franchise so it makes total sense we got a character. The fact that Kazuya was the original protagonist and has the interesting devil form makes sense too. Ideally, I’d like a good balance of iconic franchises overall with smaller ones with a stronger connection to Nintendo as well as a few surprise picks that don’t really fit into either category that were just chosen because the character has a really fun moveset that fits well in Smash.
unsettlingYes, there was.
One of the people who could wear the Toad costume was Jinpachi, Kazuya's demonic grandfather.
There were also costumes for Luigi, Captain Falcon, Link, Zelda, Sheik, Ganondorf, Zero Suit Samus, and Fox.
This. My initial post was about how people create a conveniently ignorant view of basic facts and history. Anyone who argued Banjo Kazooie is more important historically or less niche than Dragon Quest and Tekken is just choosing to ignore facts. Tekken is huge and one of the most influential games out there. It’s a massive series with a huge fanbase. Same with Dragon Quest. Dismissing both out of hat because they are “niche” is just wrong. They both are far more mainstream than plenty of first party series in smash.
You do know most Nintendo fans own other systems right? Like, there is actual data on this.
Tell me where I say it’s an “issue” that people like characters like Banjo. Tell me where I say people can’t want characters that are “more familiar” to Nintendo switch owners? Here’s a hint. There isn’t one. I never said in this you are in the wrong for wanting Banjo or what have you. I wanted banjo. But Banjo is far from this massive piece of gaming or even Nintendo history.
The only ones I’m aware of are Chrom, Corrin and Robin (I forget whether Lucina is. a child from the future, it’s been a while since I played Awakening). There’s also Samus if you want to count the Metroid as her child.
