Official Next Smash - Speculation & Discussion Thread

[Perkilator]

He makes high quality videos but I highly disagree with his roster selection. I don’t think I can ever accept cutting Ganondorf and replacing Metaknight for Bandana Dee that he proposed in the lead up to Ultimate. He does make some great moveset concept videos though.

Not the choices specifically but the number, just to be clear.

 

[DarthEnderX]

no you can’t

Ep 4-6. KotOR 1+2. Bits and pieces of Clone Wars/Rebels/Mando. Anything with Thrawn.

Unless it's written by Jay-Jay the Jet Plane ,

JJ doesn't write stories. He writes incomplete thoughts.

 

[Gengar84]

Not the choices specifically but the number, just to be clear.

I think 53 could work with some kind of huge shakeup in the direction. We either need an awesome campaign mode of some kind or completely shift the philosophy of the game’s direction (like turning it into Nintendo vs.). If it’s mostly just Ultimate again but with half the characters, I think I’ll just stick with Ultimate itself.

 

[fogbadge]

Ep 4-6. KotOR 1+2. Bits and pieces of Clone Wars/Rebels/Mando. Anything with Thrawn.

so no

 

[DarthEnderX]

so no

You read bad.

 

[Gengar84]

so no

I can attest to some Star Wars stories being pretty good. My brother has been a huge fan his whole life so I’ve seen pretty much everything. I’d check out Rogue One and Andor. Those are both pretty great on their own. Rebels and Clone Wars were a mixed bag but there were definitely some good arcs in there. I personally enjoyed the Kenobi show but most others I’ve talked to didn’t care for it.

 

[DarthEnderX]

I can attest to some Star Wars stories being pretty good. My brother has been a huge fan his whole life so I’ve seen pretty much everything. I’d check out Rogue One and Andor.

Lol, I don't think he's looking for recommendations. He's just trolling.

 

[Gengar84]

Lol, I don't think he's looking for recommendations. He's just trolling.

Lol I know he is but I though I’d throw it out there anyways in case anyone else here is interested.

 

[fogbadge]

Lol, I don't think he's looking for recommendations. He's just trolling.

hey you started it

 

[Sucumbio]

With the way Brawl described SSE, it made it seem like it was not only a mode but also another game. Like, a game within a game.

So how about this; if they do make another SSE, what if it was it's own game, separate from the main Smash fighting game? That way, maybe there won't be any cuts or anything that might effect the development of the main game?

If only we could have nice things! I'd be down for any platformer that follows the Smash Universe... But I dunno has that ever been successful? Maybe something like that was already tried and failed idk...

Edit

Wtf about Star wars now? It's definitely not for everyone to my personal dismay and a love it or hate like no other so I've noticed but I am still able to secretly enjoy when games like Fallen Order still get played by the same people who declare against it.

But yeah not really on topic unless we getting together behind EA for 3rd party rep in Smash and breaking the 4th wall by using video game adjacent material not og. I'm all for it Empire Strikes Back on Atari was true happiness.

 

[Wonder Smash]

If only we could have nice things! I'd be down for any platformer that follows the Smash Universe... But I dunno has that ever been successful? Maybe something like that was already tried and failed idk...

It's never been done as a separate game before. So maybe it could work?

 

[Sucumbio]

It's never been done as a separate game before. So maybe it could work?

I loved the platformer in Tekken 3 and iirc they were experimenting with making one from that cause PS1 dev but idk if it ever took off.

 

[Gengar84]

If only we could have nice things! I'd be down for any platformer that follows the Smash Universe... But I dunno has that ever been successful? Maybe something like that was already tried and failed idk...

Edit

Wtf about Star wars now? It's definitely not for everyone to my personal dismay and a love it or hate like no other so I've noticed but I am still able to secretly enjoy when games like Fallen Order still get played by the same people who declare against it.

But yeah not really on topic unless we getting together behind EA for 3rd party rep in Smash and breaking the 4th wall by using video game adjacent material not og. I'm all for it Empire Strikes Back on Atari was true happiness.

I suppose it could technically be on topic if we want to speculate on potential Nintendo vs. crossovers. I could definitely see the appeal of something like Nintendo vs. Disney, especially if they expanded that to Disney owned properties like Star Wars, Marvel, AVP, and the Simpsons.

 

[fogbadge]

I suppose it could technically be on topic if we want to speculate on potential Nintendo vs. crossovers. I could definitely see the appeal of something like Nintendo vs. Disney, especially if they expanded that to Disney owned properties like Star Wars, Marvel, AVP, and the Simpsons.

or we could stick with disney. all jokes aside i really am tired of things like SW and marvel showing up in disney crossovers

 

[CannonStreak]

or we could stick with disney. all jokes aside i really am tired of things like SW and marvel showing up in disney crossovers

Yeah, I would like to see Disney's original content more than any of the IPs of previously independent studios the Big D has brought out. I'd bet that all of Disney combined would outnumber what Nintendo has, anyway.

 

[fogbadge]

Yeah, I would like to see Disney's original content more than any of the IPs of previously independent studios the Big D has brought out. I'd bet that all of Disney combined would outnumber what Nintendo has, anyway.

without a doubt

 

[Gengar84]

or we could stick with disney. all jokes aside i really am tired of things like SW and marvel showing up in disney crossovers

I think there’s plenty of room for both the classic animated Disney characters and their acquired properties. Disney’s side would feel a little samey if it was limited to just their classic animated movie characters. We already have Kingdom Hearts that focuses primarily on their original content. Then again, I’m probably biased because I personally prefer Marvel, AVP, Star Wars, and the Simpsons to any of Disney’s original characters. What’s the point of acquiring these if they aren’t going to use them?

On that same note, I don’t think a hypothetical Microsoft Smash game would or should leave out RARE, Bethesda, or Activision/Blizzard characters just because they weren’t developed internally.

 

[NonSpecificGuy]

Sakurai’s recent statements on his YouTube does make me think that we may get Ultimate+ or something like that. He’s said Time and time again that each game they’ve made a game they didn’t think was possible at the time and literally said something like “we’ll see what the future holds”.

What I mean by Ultimate+ isn’t a port with with a little new stuff. I mean I literally think they’ll try to one-up Ultimate. I’m sure a lot of assets will be reused the same way Ultimate reused For’s but if Ultimate is what we got out of For then I can’t imagine what we would get out of Ultimate for a sequel. Like Sakurai said, “we’ll see” I guess.

 

[Gengar84]

Sakurai’s recent statements on his YouTube does make me think that we may get Ultimate+ or something like that. He’s said Time and time again that each game they’ve made a game they didn’t think was possible at the time and literally said something like “we’ll see what the future holds”.

What I mean by Ultimate+ isn’t a port with with a little new stuff. I mean I literally think they’ll try to one-up Ultimate. I’m sure a lot of assets will be reused the same way Ultimate reused For’s but if Ultimate is what we got out of For then I can’t imagine what we would get out of Ultimate for a sequel. Like Sakurai said, “we’ll see” I guess.

I really hope we can keep a really high roster count. Beyond still wanting to play as my favorite current characters, it’s basically the only chance some of my most wanted characters from less popular properties really have. If they confirm early that we’ll see a drastically smaller roster in the next game, that would pretty much kill any interest I had in speculating future characters since only the most iconic characters could make it at that point.

 

[Perkilator]

Sakurai’s recent statements on his YouTube does make me think that we may get Ultimate+ or something like that. He’s said Time and time again that each game they’ve made a game they didn’t think was possible at the time and literally said something like “we’ll see what the future holds”.

What I mean by Ultimate+ isn’t a port with with a little new stuff. I mean I literally think they’ll try to one-up Ultimate. I’m sure a lot of assets will be reused the same way Ultimate reused For’s but if Ultimate is what we got out of For then I can’t imagine what we would get out of Ultimate for a sequel. Like Sakurai said, “we’ll see” I guess.

I don't mean to be a Debbie Downer, but the closest thing I see to an Ultimate+ is that being the title for an enhanced port of Ultimate with more new fighters.

 

[Gengar84]

I don't mean to be a Debbie Downer, but the closest thing I see to an Ultimate+ is that being the title for an enhanced port of Ultimate with more new fighters.

Besides a good single player/co-op mode, that’s all I really need out of a new Smash game so that’s fine.

 

[HyperSomari64]

or we could stick with disney. all jokes aside i really am tired of things like SW and marvel showing up in disney crossovers

Let's pray to SqueEnix to not include SW and Marvel and FOX.

And instead include Muppets and Disney TV Animation shows .

 

[fogbadge]

I think there’s plenty of room for both the classic animated Disney characters and their acquired properties. Disney’s side would feel a little samey if it was limited to just their classic animated movie characters. We already have Kingdom Hearts that focuses primarily on their original content. Then again, I’m probably biased because I personally prefer Marvel, AVP, Star Wars, and the Simpsons to any of Disney’s original characters. What’s the point of acquiring these if they aren’t going to use them?

ok but that is the same logic as all rpg sword fighters are the same

also of course they’re using the acquisitions why do you think I’m tired of it

Let's pray to SqueEnix to not include SW and Marvel and FOX.

And instead include Muppets and Disney TV Animation shows .

I’d take Kermit and luz over any Jedi

 

[Gengar84]

ok but that is the same logic as all rpg sword fighters are the same

also of course they’re using the acquisitions why do you think I’m tired of it

As long as we still get the big classic characters, what’s wrong with also getting the other properties? In a hypothetical Vs. game, I think each side could get 25-30 characters, which is plenty to represent most major properties to some degree.

Here’s a quick list just off the top of my head:

Mickey
Donald
Goofy
Scrooge
Chip/Dale
Darkwing Duck
Simba
Scar
Aladdin
Cruella Deville
Ariel
Maleficent
Hercules
Peter Pan
Beast
Winney the Pooh
Mulan
Jack Sparrow
Jack Skellington
Stitch
Elsa
Buzz Lightyear
Spider-Man
Wolverine
Yoda
Darth Vader
Alien
Predator
Homer
Bart

There’s plenty others you can add as DLC later like Captain Hook, Woody, Baymax, Ralph, Venom, Boba Fett, and others but this could work well as a base roster in my opinion.

 

[fogbadge]

As long as we still get the big classic characters, what’s wrong with also getting the other properties. In a hypothetical Vs. game, I think each side could get 25-30 characters, which is plenty to represent most major properties to some degree.

well by the same reasoning what’s wrong with not having them? I mean it sounds like your counting all of Disneys cartoons as one franchise

 

[Gengar84]

well by the same reasoning what’s wrong with not having them? I mean it sounds like your counting all of Disneys cartoons as one franchise

Am I? I don’t think I’ve ever implied as such. The roster is still primarily first party Disney cartoons but there’s room for at least a fourth to a third of those to be other properties.

 

[fogbadge]

Am I? I don’t think I’ve ever implied as such. The roster is still primarily first party Disney cartoons but there’s room for at least a fourth to a third of those to be other properties.

but it doesn’t need to be

 

[Gengar84]

but it doesn’t need to be

It doesn’t need to be but I think it’s more fun to include them. Smash doesn’t technically need third party guests at all but it gives us more variety and brings in more fans. Just like Nickelodeon didn’t need to include TMNT in Allstars but they’re basically the only characters I truly care about in those games. Avatar and Korra were good shows but they aren’t on that level for me.

 

[fogbadge]

It doesn’t need to be but I think it’s more fun to include them. Smash doesn’t technically need third party guests at all but it gives us more variety and brings in more fans. Just like Nickelodeon didn’t need to include TMNT in Allstars but they’re basically the only characters I truly care about in those games. Avatar and Korra were good shows but they aren’t on that level for me.

yeah well Star Wars isn’t on any level for me. And marvel has enough fighting games of its own. Give someone else a chance

 

[Louie G.]

Let's bring it back to Smash - I've been wondering, do you guys make a distinction on which kinds of third party series and characters feel like "base game" candidates vs "DLC" candidates for the future? Naturally Square Enix and presumably Microsoft look like DLC fodder, but beyond that...?

Like, in my mind I make this weird distinction that Monster Hunter feels like a base roster series, and Resident Evil feels like a DLC one. No real difference in how difficult it might be to secure the rights, they're both Capcom and they're game for just about anything, but perhaps the more specialized, dark nature of RE's setting and its potential for a more "DLC gimmick" kinda kit involving resource management might explain it? Not to mention Monster Hunter already has its foot in the door via Rathalos - it's really chalked up to feeling here more than anything but I find that mental difference compelling and I'm wondering if anyone else feels the same. In this hypothetical I feel like one would get in on base roster, and one would be added as DLC - that kinda puts a cute little bow on Capcom's heaviest hitting IPs so I'm very interested in rounding that off.

Looking back as well, with the exception of on our Brawl roster third party newcomers tend to be mascot-y in nature (), or historical / classic Nintendo icons (), or both (). I think this has kind of created a mental image of the most "fitting" third parties in some people's minds. Hence someone like Ryu Hayabusa, or perhaps Arle feel like they could fall somewhere within that wheelhouse. But for big studios like Ubisoft or Activision, despite having highly requested characters in that range (Rayman, Crash) their scale and their international status make me feel as if those are better to negotiate DLC with later on. After all, Ultimate's DLC collaborations were done in part to "improve relations" with business partners if I remember correctly. And western third parties are still sort of a new frontier that we're exploring now.

Just rambling a bit, but I wanna provoke a bit of a new conversation here since I've felt like this thread has been a little dry and a little off topic for a few days. Does what I'm talking about here make any sense to anyone else, or maybe there's no clear difference in your eyes? I'm trying to lock in which third parties I can see returning / being added and it's definitely been the most difficult sticking point for me at the moment.

 

[Hadokeyblade]

Let's pray to SqueEnix to not include SW and Marvel and FOX.

And instead include Muppets and Disney TV Animation shows .

You act like a Darth Vader boss battle in Kingdom hearts wouldnt be the coolest **** in that series.

 

[fogbadge]

You act like a Darth Vader boss battle in Kingdom hearts wouldnt be the coolest **** in that series.

lamest the word is lamest

 

[TheFirstPoppyBro]

Let's bring it back to Smash - I've been wondering, do you guys make a distinction on which kinds of third party series and characters feel like "base game" candidates vs "DLC" candidates for the future? Naturally Square Enix and presumably Microsoft look like DLC fodder, but beyond that...?

Like, in my mind I make this weird distinction that Monster Hunter feels like a base roster series, and Resident Evil feels like a DLC one. No real difference in how difficult it might be to secure the rights, they're both Capcom and they're game for just about anything, but perhaps the more specialized, dark nature of RE's setting and its potential for a more "DLC gimmick" kinda kit involving resource management might explain it? Not to mention Monster Hunter already has its foot in the door via Rathalos - it's really chalked up to feeling here more than anything but I find that mental difference compelling and I'm wondering if anyone else feels the same. In this hypothetical I feel like one would get in on base roster, and one would be added as DLC - that kinda puts a cute little bow on Capcom's heaviest hitting IPs so I'm very interested in rounding that off.

Looking back as well, with the exception of on our Brawl roster third party newcomers tend to be mascot-y in nature (), or historical / classic Nintendo icons (), or both (). I think this has kind of created a mental image of the most "fitting" third parties in some people's minds. Hence someone like Ryu Hayabusa, or perhaps Arle feel like they could fall somewhere within that wheelhouse. But for big studios like Ubisoft or Activision, despite having highly requested characters in that range (Rayman, Crash) their scale and their international status make me feel as if those are better to negotiate DLC with later on. After all, Ultimate's DLC collaborations were done in part to "improve relations" with business partners if I remember correctly. And western third parties are still sort of a new frontier that we're exploring now.

Just rambling a bit, but I wanna provoke a bit of a new conversation here since I've felt like this thread has been a little dry and a little off topic for a few days. Does what I'm talking about here make any sense to anyone else, or maybe there's no clear difference in your eyes? I'm trying to lock in which third parties I can see returning / being added and it's definitely been the most difficult sticking point for me at the moment.

I feel like I mostly feel that way with characters like Geno or Reimu, but it's less to do with their kit and more to do with "I dunno that these guys are really big enough for a DLC release to feel warranted from a business perspective" lol

 

[Perkilator]

Let's bring it back to Smash - I've been wondering, do you guys make a distinction on which kinds of series and characters feel like "base game" candidates vs "DLC" candidates for the future? Naturally Square Enix and presumably Microsoft look like DLC fodder, but beyond that...?

Like, in my mind I make this weird distinction that Monster Hunter feels like a base roster series, and Resident Evil feels like a DLC one. No real difference in how difficult it might be to secure the rights, they're both Capcom and they're game for just about anything, but perhaps the more specialized, dark nature of RE's setting and its potential for a more "DLC gimmick" kinda kit involving resource management might explain it? Not to mention Monster Hunter already has its foot in the door via Rathalos - it's really chalked up to feeling here more than anything but I find that mental difference compelling and I'm wondering if anyone else feels the same.

Looking back as well, with the exception of on our Brawl roster third party newcomers tend to be mascot-y in nature (), or historical / classic Nintendo icons (), or both (). I think this has kind of created a mental image of the most "fitting" third parties in some people's minds. Hence someone like Ryu Hayabusa, or perhaps Arle feel like they could fall somewhere within that wheelhouse. But for big studios like Ubisoft or Activision, despite having highly requested characters in that range (Rayman, Crash) their scale and their international status make me feel as if those are better to negotiate DLC with later on. After all, Ultimate's DLC collaborations were done in part to "improve relations" with business partners if I remember correctly.

Just rambling a bit, but I wanna provoke a bit of a new conversation here since I've felt like this thread has been a little dry and a little off topic for a few days. Does what I'm talking about here make any sense to anyone else, or maybe there's no clear difference in your eyes? I'm trying to lock in which third parties I can see returning / being added and it's definitely been the most difficult sticking point for me at the moment.

Actually, that sparks another topic in my mind: which prior Smash game do you think would be the best point to introduce characters you want? For me:

• 64
  • Meowth
• Melee
  • Ayumi (as a semi-clone of Peach and Zelda)
  • Mach Rider (as Captain Falcon's Echo Fighter)
  • Bubbles (as Kirby's Echo Fighter)
  • Scizor
• Brawl
  • Lyn
  • Plusle & Minun
  • Tetra
  • Isaac
  • DeMille
• Sm4sh
  • Paper Mario
  • Dixie Kong (as Diddy Kong's Echo Fighter)
  • Ghirahim
  • Alph (as Olimar's Echo Fighter)
  • Takamaru
  • Rayman (DLC)
  • Azura (DLC)
• Ultimate
  • Waluigi
  • Revali
  • Bandana Waddle Dee
  • Dr. Eggman (DLC)
  • Chun-Li (DLC)
  • Crash Bandicoot (DLC)
  • Estelle Bright (DLC)
  • Ring Fit Trainee (DLC)
  • Shantae (DLC)

 

[Gengar84]

Let's bring it back to Smash - I've been wondering, do you guys make a distinction on which kinds of third party series and characters feel like "base game" candidates vs "DLC" candidates for the future? Naturally Square Enix and presumably Microsoft look like DLC fodder, but beyond that...?

Like, in my mind I make this weird distinction that Monster Hunter feels like a base roster series, and Resident Evil feels like a DLC one. No real difference in how difficult it might be to secure the rights, they're both Capcom and they're game for just about anything, but perhaps the more specialized, dark nature of RE's setting and its potential for a more "DLC gimmick" kinda kit involving resource management might explain it? Not to mention Monster Hunter already has its foot in the door via Rathalos - it's really chalked up to feeling here more than anything but I find that mental difference compelling and I'm wondering if anyone else feels the same. In this hypothetical I feel like one would get in on base roster, and one would be added as DLC - that kinda puts a cute little bow on Capcom's heaviest hitting IPs so I'm very interested in rounding that off.

Looking back as well, with the exception of on our Brawl roster third party newcomers tend to be mascot-y in nature (), or historical / classic Nintendo icons (), or both (). I think this has kind of created a mental image of the most "fitting" third parties in some people's minds. Hence someone like Ryu Hayabusa, or perhaps Arle feel like they could fall somewhere within that wheelhouse. But for big studios like Ubisoft or Activision, despite having highly requested characters in that range (Rayman, Crash) their scale and their international status make me feel as if those are better to negotiate DLC with later on. After all, Ultimate's DLC collaborations were done in part to "improve relations" with business partners if I remember correctly. And western third parties are still sort of a new frontier that we're exploring now.

Just rambling a bit, but I wanna provoke a bit of a new conversation here since I've felt like this thread has been a little dry and a little off topic for a few days. Does what I'm talking about here make any sense to anyone else, or maybe there's no clear difference in your eyes? I'm trying to lock in which third parties I can see returning / being added and it's definitely been the most difficult sticking point for me at the moment.

I don’t really make much distinction but if I did, I think it makes some amount of sense to include characters that have some historical ties to Nintendo in the base roster. Some examples we already have here are Sonic, Mega Man and Simon. Future characters like Fulgore or Crono could make sense here. Characters like Joker who don’t really have that connection can be fun surprise DLC picks. Not really too concerned either way as long as the end result leads to playing as cool fun to play characters but that’s what I’d say if I was going to make a distinction somehow.

 

[RodNutTakin]

Not gonna lie pretty much every post i see from you kinda feels like:

"There will be tons of cuts"
Refuses to elaborate further
Leaves.

lol

Yeah sorry, I gotta agree with Hadokeyblade, a lot of these posts (including your latest one) are giving me this "My way or the highway" impression. I get trying to temper your expectations a bit, but insisting that only one outcome is likely without any real reasons beyond "licensing/development issues" isn't really adding much to the conversation. We don't even know what approach will be taken with developing the next game, for all we know they might end up pushing the next title into being a "middle of system's life" release with a longer development period, for example.

I think Delzethin’s proposed 53-fighter roster is a reasonable size for a soft reboot.

No offense, but Delzethin's roster is pretty much a textbook example of why I wouldn't want a "reboot" like that. The sweeping cuts remove a lot of fan favorites and replace them with safe, boring or outright inferior character choices. Replacing Meta Knight with Waddle Dee and replacing SUPER FIGHTING ROBOT MEGA MAN with a generic Monster Hunter avatar would be the kind of decisions that Nintendo would never be able to live down.
That, and I feel like the golden rule the devs have tried to follow with cuts is to not remove an entire series from playable representation. What happened in SSB4 only happened because of uncontrollable outside factors.

Sakurai’s recent statements on his YouTube does make me think that we may get Ultimate+ or something like that. He’s said Time and time again that each game they’ve made a game they didn’t think was possible at the time and literally said something like “we’ll see what the future holds”.

What I mean by Ultimate+ isn’t a port with with a little new stuff. I mean I literally think they’ll try to one-up Ultimate. I’m sure a lot of assets will be reused the same way Ultimate reused For’s but if Ultimate is what we got out of For then I can’t imagine what we would get out of Ultimate for a sequel. Like Sakurai said, “we’ll see” I guess.

That's somewhat the mentality I had with 6, it'd basically be kind of like the jump from Brawl to 4, but not as drastic style-wise. Having nearly all of the stages that have appeared across the series modernized is something I feel was done partially to futureproof bringing a good number of them back for next game, for example. I imagine that 6's main focus would be generally retaining the scope from Ultimate series-wise, while putting a bigger focus on side content since Ultimate already tackled things primarily from a fighter and stage standpoint.
On the topic of an Adventure Mode, however--I'd honestly rather that be a DLC expansion that doesn't cut into the development of the base game.

 

[Wonder Smash]

hey you started it

Actually, you did kinda dissed his username.

 

[Stratos]

The issue of bringing characters from Marvel and Lucasfilm into the Kingdom Hearts series is an old one, while the one with FOX is new. But in terms of which movies I'd like to see worlds from in the Kingdom Hearts series, here are the following:

Spoiler: New worlds

The Black Cauldron
Marvel Cinematic Universe
Star Wars
Indiana Jones
Pocahontas
Cars
Dinosaur (2000 Disney Movie)
A Bug's Life
Mary Poppins
Robin Hood
The Jungle Book
Brave
The Princess and the Frog
Alien
Predator
Treasure Planet
The Great Mouse Detective
Ice Age
Avatar
Planet of the Apes
WALL-E

Also another issue is the mystery of why Disney said that placing Oswald the Lucky Rabbit in Kingdom Hearts 3 was difficult, they should have given us details on that. I hope they reconsider and put him in the Kingdom Hearts series eventually, I'm sure he'd have a prominent role there, better than he had in the Epic Mickey series.

 

[HyperSomari64]

The issue of bringing characters from Marvel and Lucasfilm into the Kingdom Hearts series is an old one, while the one with FOX is new. But in terms of which movies I'd like to see worlds from in the Kingdom Hearts series, here are the following:

Spoiler: New worlds

The Black Cauldron
Marvel Cinematic Universe
Star Wars
Indiana Jones
Pocahontas
Cars
Dinosaur (2000 Disney Movie)
A Bug's Life
Mary Poppins
Robin Hood
The Jungle Book
Brave
The Princess and the Frog
Alien
Predator
Treasure Planet
The Great Mouse Detective
Ice Age
Avatar
Planet of the Apes
WALL-E

Also another issue is the mystery of why Disney said that placing Oswald the Lucky Rabbit in Kingdom Hearts 3 was difficult, they should have given us details on that. I hope they reconsider and put him in the Kingdom Hearts series eventually, I'm sure he'd have a prominent role there, better than he had in the Epic Mickey series.

What about the TV shows?
Out of the DTVA shows, I'm not sure how Nomura will implement the Disney Channel's Teen sitcoms into KHIV?
Or any of Disney-produced shows on ABC like Once Upon a Time.

 

[Stratos]

To recap, there were no third-party newcomers to the Super Smash Bros series from the following companies:

Koei Tecmo
Arc System Works
The Tetris Company
Ubisoft
Oddworld
NetherRealm Studios

Although I know some other companies escape my mind.