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!
Why not just make them playable at that point?
I think that's a pretty bad idea that outright wouldn't work with a lot of assist characters and feels both unnecessary and clunky at the same time.
Yeah, imagine playing undefeateble Assist on match.
…Suddenly, the timeline where an AT was promoted in Vol. 2 doesn’t sound nearly as bad as I made it out to be. And that’s saying a lot, considering how controversial I am about that idea by itself.
Because it'd make it more likely I'd get base game newcomers that aren't just the obligatory new Pokemon or FE rep if the whole roster doesn't come back?I don't see why not on Ultimate DX.I'd buy it. So would millions of other people.
Or I have an Idea: Now assists are your companions like Sukapon.
And some people might be annoyed if they sold them the same game again but with more content. The Pokemon fandom had to deal with GF doing that for 2 decades.
Hello, you must be new to fighting games.
or DJ Octavio as Boss!
True, the engine was build off from Smash 4. That's totally obvious, the models too. But if it's not broken, why fix it ? Ultimate has a great engine, a great speed that's great for both competitive and casual play, great balance amongst the cast too, and a huge and lovable cast, the only problem I see is the input delay and bad online. If those can be improved, graphics get a good upgrade, one player mode is improved upon or at least there's promise for a massive one player adventure mode which might be DLC, or the simple return of a mode like Smash Run, add a couple of newcomers half being Echoes (going from Ken like Echoes to Isabelle types of newcomers) and I think the game would be a massive succes.
The Pokemon fandom is not mad about games being similar.
As someone who liked USUM since it's release, I can guarantee that this is false. The fanbase was whining very hard about how it's the same game without any differences unlike Platinum or Emerald (in spite of USUM changing far more than both, and really only losing to BW2 in the department of changing stuff the original did).
Features
My are similar, but those things I could want:
I think instead a better system would be:
That would be cool!
Swamp was mostly referring to the basic gameplay of Pokemon being very similar across generations, not how similar SM and USM were.
But the problem there is...ports don't get enough funding to do all that. At best they'd only receive enough funds to relicense every fighter and base game spirit that needs relicensing, nothing more.
I'm not sure if Pokken DX is the best example as the four of the five newcomers added at base not only already existed in the arcade version (as you said) but were intentionally locked out of the Wii U version as they had code in the game for their inclusion, but they were saved for the next game. Unless they scrapped some newcomers very late in their development an Ultimate DX is not going to have those completed assets ready and waiting for use upon making the next game and would have to be made from scratch like Decidueye, of which we only had it as a newcomer going into base DX.
It seems pretty unlikely they'd do a port with a big AAA budget like that. It's a huge business risk to put a ton of money into trying to resell something that is fundamentally the same game as before.
BOTW is not a good comparison because in the RPG genre you can use the same engine to deliver an entirely new full-length story experience and it is much easier in that genre to add significant new gameplay mechanics on top of the engine. For a fighting game like Smash, any new story/adventure mode they could add would be side-content at best and it is hard to introduce significant new core mechanics without creating a workload and balancing nightmare. But mainly it's that RPGs are much more story-centric and so two games on the same console with the same engine is much more desirable to do.
Nice idea, but probably not worth it from the developer's perspective. Most likely this would take too much work to balance properly and would come at a risk of alienating casuals. Like, imagine going to someone else's place to play the game only to find out that it's at a completely different pace and mechanical feel. Homogeneity of gameplay is more conducive to people actually getting together to compete against each other.
As has already been stated, it might not even be workable on the next console. But even if it is workable, maybe they still want to do something new and quite possibly better. "Not broken, why fix" is not really a great attitude to have for developing any new game anyway.
I don't want to go too far down this road as it risks being off-topic, but (1) I know several Pokemon fans that are discontent or even stopped buying the games in part because they haven't changed much from gen to gen; and (2) just because people are angry about removals doesn't mean the anger is justified or that adding back the removed content would actually make the game any better, especially from a game design perspective. Having 800+ playable characters in almost any game is just a gimmick more than it is actually good design. And if anything, Game Freak put themselves into a corner much faster than was necessary by not reigning in the number of new Mons in each gen. EiH could end up being a parallel, where fans focus so much on everyone getting their single most favorite character back that they stop caring about actually making a well-designed game with a roster selection that is as fair as is practically possible.
Haven't they kind of been doing that since Gen 6? Less than 100 mons per gen, with alternate forms for older mons taking priority over reaching triple digits when it comes to all-new pocket monsters.
Yeah but I think it was too little too late. It doesn't seem like a coincidence that Gen 6 is also when they had to switch to 3D models instead of sprites.
To be fair it wouldn't have been Gen 5 that started the trend anyway. With one of its premises being that all the Pokemon you encounter are new, they really needed to make over 100 mons to make that more interesting.
Yeah Gen 5 was a bit weird in that it tried to hit the soft reboot button but they still left the ability to obtain the mons from previous gens thru transfer. IMO what Gen 5 tried to do wasn't gonna work because many of the early-gen Mons are too iconic for them all to be ditched completely. In hindsight Gen 5 just made the whole situation even harder to deal with and was probably not the best way to go about dealing with a rising number of Pokémon.
Man, remember when everybody hated Gen 5? And now Pokemon has been doing everything it can to avoid doing that again? We didn't realise what we had until it was gone...
I’m completely fine with Gen 5’s way of handling things. As long as all the Pokémon are transferrable, I thought it was actually fun to play through the game with completely new Pokémon. Gen 8 bothers me because there is no way to use a lot of my favorites at all. I understand why they did it but their PR couldn’t have been much worse the way they revealed that.
Gen 5 was fine on its own, but my point was that it exacerbated the already-apparent issue of continuing to add exorbitant amounts of new Pokémon.
That would honestly be fine with me as well. As long as the end result is having all the characters, I’m okay with having to unlock them. A starting roster of all newcomers would be fun as long as the others are fun and not too hard to unlock.
Well first it wasn't always treated like the reused asset game it is today thanks to Sakurai's own admission of such. At the beginning it was absolutely NOT marketed like a port and the fandom at-large had a very negative reaction to anybody that believed (and rightfully they've been vindicated) as such. Only after the game was a success and in the middle of its DLC was Sakurai more willing to admit this. Second it's because it's significantly more realized than Smash 4 was while also still having plenty of room to expand. Actually because of its marketing and success, it's seen as an even bigger opportunity than Smash 4 ever could have been. Smash 4 wasn't like a dozen or so stages away from having Everywhere is Here. Smash 4 didn't have Everyone is Here. Nobody cared about the Wii U so the netcode didn't matter. Reworks weren't talked about. The separated modes between the Wii U/3DS were seen as a feature not a bug and so on and so forth.
Ideally it would fundamentally not be the same game anymore. Stage Builder would be a massive buff with the additions of the likes of BTT and BTP to that mode plus new tools. Rollback netcode, an arsenal of new characters. You could even change the name away from the Ultimate DX we all use to talk about it. It doesn't have to be called Ultimate DX. If it was such a huge business risk then I guess Nintendo likes to take huge business risks because not only have they done it for Smash 4 to Ultimate but they did for MK8 DX, Pokken Tournament DX, New Super Mario Bros DX and yes BOTW2.
I don't see how it's any different really. After all the point at which they're starting is supposedly the most balanced Smash yet. Just maintain the philosophy they used going into Ultimate in regards to balancing if it's working so well. What they could add to an Ultimate DX isn't limited to modes either. Costumes, new characters, new stages, rollback netcode, new attacks, reworks, new special Smash, advanced rules and so on. The sky is the limit hence Sora Unlimited haha have to.
I mostly agree with this but for anybody still interested in this idea look at this! THIS is what's still possible with Ultimate as it exists today and this was just done by passionate modders. I'd love to have these all introduced as toggleable options in an Ultimate DX's advanced rules settings.
www.youtube.com
I think an Ultimate DX can do borderline anything a new ground up entry could and there as some major things like retaining EiH that only an Ultimate DX can do. I think it's fair to believe an Ultimate DX can be just as new and better.
I think the fact that Ultimate didn't live up to all of its potential leaves the room for a more well-designed game. That's what myself and most others on here are advocating for. A more fully-realized Ultimate. If we're being honest the Ultimate Smash has some major pitfalls holding it back. I simply hope a new game could allow for the developers to open up the game to these possibilities.
Smash IS about pushing whatever console it's on to its limit regardless. That's why they did 8-Player Smash as soon as it was viable, and why there can now be 2 ATs active on the Switch instead of one.
It didn't live up to its potential because of the resources that had to be spent on third-party licensing and the roster being huge as-is. Even if the passes weren't about abusing the everliving hell out of third-party hype I'm sure we'd only get 11 more fighters from them so as to not stress out the devs too much.
That doesn't negate that Nintendo isn't chasing graphics and that Smash 4 to Ultimate did see improvements to the graphics and engine while still reusing assets. If Nintendo keeps the hybrid model like they should they literally just can't chase graphics in the same way as the other two.
