• 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!

Official Next Smash - Speculation & Discussion Thread

Joined
Oct 31, 2018
Messages
1,057
hating characters cause they aren’t “hype” is always been a baffling notion to me. it says something that a very popular character from a very popular series like Isabelle can be considered bad cause she’s obvious
It's probably important to note that the main reason given for disliking Isabelle on the poll is her moveset. It feels a little half-baked.

I think that people subconsciously use hype because it appeals to the group in a way that they can't by saying a character is boring. Most of the time hype isn't what people actually care about unless they legitimately just want a roster that makes the most people happy possible.
 

fogbadge

Smash Obsessed
Joined
Jun 29, 2012
Messages
21,194
Location
Scotland
The results show that the primary reason Isabelle wasn't liked was that she's fairly redundant. Most players feel like she doesn't do enough to separate her from Villager, while also not being an echo fighter meaning she took more or less the same development time and effort as a typical fighter. The result? A character who hit the perfect middle ground between too much and too little effort to make people dislike those who weren't fans of her before.
the number of moves she shares with villager kinda proves she didn’t take as much time as the average. Oh well gamers have always had an odd view of development

It's probably important to note that the main reason given for disliking Isabelle on the poll is her moveset. It feels a little half-baked.

I think that people subconsciously use hype because it appeals to the group in a way that they can't by saying a character is boring. Most of the time hype isn't what people actually care about unless they legitimately just want a roster that makes the most people happy possible.
well I suppose that makes a bit more sense

ah I see
 

LiveStudioAudience

Smash Master
Joined
Dec 1, 2019
Messages
4,028

The fact that a good chunk of Sony's Japan Studio went to Nintendo is both kinda funny and pretty telling of Sony's current priorities.

Also, I was gonna make a joke about PSABR devs working on Smash, but then I remembered that was a completely different team...
I honestly don’t think some people realize just how much Sony has lost that market thanks to the Switch’s appeal and the gradual de-emphasis by the former with games the Japanese audience actually likes.

Granted it was just one week, but the graph kind of says it all:

 

DarthEnderX

Smash Hero
Joined
Nov 10, 2014
Messages
7,718
What would be your thoughts if these were the only veterans that returned to Smash 6 with most of them coming with reworks and updates?
Bad.

Plus, I know some people are hoping for a Star Fox Zero Switch port. Granted, it's not TOO many people, but... you never know.
Only if they remove the motion controls.
 
Last edited:

osby

Smash Obsessed
Joined
Apr 25, 2018
Messages
23,551
Saying that Isabelle took the same effort as a regular fighter is why I don't trust this fandom's opinions on anything.
 

smashkirby

Smash Hero
Joined
Feb 15, 2014
Messages
6,858
Location
Smashville

The fact that a good chunk of Sony's Japan Studio went to Nintendo is both kinda funny and pretty telling of Sony's current priorities.

Also, I was gonna make a joke about PSABR devs working on Smash, but then I remembered that was a completely different team...
Interestingly, I've heard that a good chunk of the folks that worked on Sony's Hot Shots games left Sony to work on Smash 4 and even more of that staff went on to help out on Ultimate.
 

fogbadge

Smash Obsessed
Joined
Jun 29, 2012
Messages
21,194
Location
Scotland

The fact that a good chunk of Sony's Japan Studio went to Nintendo is both kinda funny and pretty telling of Sony's current priorities.

Also, I was gonna make a joke about PSABR devs working on Smash, but then I remembered that was a completely different team...
that is funny
 

Diddy Kong

Smash Obsessed
Joined
Dec 8, 2004
Messages
25,969
Switch FC
SW-1597-979602774

The fact that a good chunk of Sony's Japan Studio went to Nintendo is both kinda funny and pretty telling of Sony's current priorities.

Also, I was gonna make a joke about PSABR devs working on Smash, but then I remembered that was a completely different team...
Didn't watch the video cause am on my data, but, would this mean Nintendo has a chance to buy Square? Cause that would honestly be pretty damn awesome.
 

osby

Smash Obsessed
Joined
Apr 25, 2018
Messages
23,551
Didn't watch the video cause am on my data, but, would this mean Nintendo has a chance to buy Square?
That has nothing to do with the contents of the video. Square-Enix is not owned by Sony.

Cause that would honestly be pretty damn awesome.
Is it, really?

SE already is one of the big supporters of Switch with Harvestella, Nier Automata, Dragon Quest 11, Triangle Strategy, Octopath Traveler, and a lot more. Pretty much the only big releases Nintendo fans miss are the high-graphics games that wouldn't run on the console anyway.

Nintendo buying Square-Enix would only hurt the gamers on other platforms without much substantial return. On the contrary, it would essentially monopolize the big JRPG games under a single umbrella which sounds cool on paper but would be terrible for competition.
 
Last edited:

NonSpecificGuy

The Extraordinary is in What We Do
Super Moderator
Premium
Writing Team
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
14,003
Location
Mother Base
NNID
Goldeneye2674
3DS FC
0989-1770-6584
View attachment 361387


What would be your thoughts if these were the only veterans that returned to Smash 6 with most of them coming with reworks and updates?
Snake, Ike, Terry, Banjo, K. Rool, Mega Man, Kazuya, Simon/Richter, Bayonetta, and Young Link are all some of my most played characters so this roster is damn near a 0/10 for me…

That’s unfortunate too because I can see a reboot where this would be the case and I would, for the first time ever, have 0 interest in one of my favorite franchises of all time.
 
Last edited:

chocolatejr9

Smash Hero
Joined
Sep 30, 2018
Messages
8,281
Didn't watch the video cause am on my data, but, would this mean Nintendo has a chance to buy Square? Cause that would honestly be pretty damn awesome.
I don't think Nintendo would buy ALL of Square Enix (not unless we get a scenario where SE screws up SO BADLY that a buyout might be the only way to save the company), but maybe someone like Team Asano? Or really any SE devs that specialize in Switch games?

(Also, I recommend watching the video at some point. Very informative.)
 

Sucumbio

Smash Giant
Moderator
Writing Team
Joined
Oct 7, 2008
Messages
8,163
Location
Icerim Mountains
I don't think Nintendo would buy ALL of Square Enix (not unless we get a scenario where SE screws up SO BADLY that a buyout might be the only way to save the company), but maybe someone like Team Asano? Or really any SE devs that specialize in Switch games?

(Also, I recommend watching the video at some point. Very informative.)
To some this video may actually confirm to them "why" SE divested their dev talent ... Some companies refuse to keep their old guards because eventually even the lowest dev member has an idea that gets shot down and humans only put up with that for so long before they begin to leverage their contributions. The industry has many devs who went from hero to 0 and back again. Or not depending lol. But for sake of argument...

Wild Arms

Shadow of the Colossus

Not to diss fans of the devs "set free" and getting Kickstarter money and whatever or to diss them either! but to many these titles were crap. And this probably led to that team bleeding it's strongest devs and the ones stepping up as they go one or two at a time the "team" becomes a daily tug of war.

The PlayStation is (lol) VERY good for the now SquareEnix. And also Switch. (>.<) Just not those guys projects.
 
Last edited:

Swamp Sensei

Today is always the most enjoyable day!
BRoomer
Joined
Jan 4, 2013
Messages
37,950
Location
Um....Lost?
NNID
Swampasaur
3DS FC
4141-2776-0914
Switch FC
SW-6476-1588-8392
Didn't watch the video cause am on my data, but, would this mean Nintendo has a chance to buy Square? Cause that would honestly be pretty damn awesome.
Diddy. I just want to understand your thought process.

How on earth did Square come up in the conversation? Sony's Japanese studios were the ones being discussed.
 

Ivander

Smash Legend
Joined
Dec 1, 2014
Messages
10,324
Shadow of the Colossus

Not to diss fans of the devs "set free" and getting Kickstarter money and whatever or to diss them either! but to many these titles were crap.
Yeah, because a title that was part of a 3-set trilogy(and whose director used to be one of Sony's biggest names that was cheered upon at their mention at E3), got a remake, has gotten much love from some of the biggest Youtubers and Film directors, was used as inspiration for some of the biggest games and including later God of War games, Breath of the Wild and Elden Ring, and even made appearances in movies was in reality a crap game to many.

It's not without flaws, that's for sure. But flaws don't make a game automatically crap to many, regardless of this age's mindset and whatnot. There is good reason why Shadow of the Colossus is loved, remembered and referenced to this day.
 

HyperSomari64

Smash Master
Joined
Apr 10, 2018
Messages
3,039
Location
Lima, Peru
I'm going to divide non-video game characters in three groups:
1. Nigh-feasible: Those who are more known for it's video game adaptions than it's souce material. (The Witcher, Turok, Sam & Max, VOCALOID)
2. Neutrally-feasible: While their games were world phenomenons, they are mostly known by the source material. (Tony Hawk's Pro Skater, Dragon Ball, TMNT, Disney (most of the times), Popeye, Batman)
3. Not-feasible: The ones that people clamors that an obscure shovelware game they played decades ago acts as "Gaming Legacy", or in the worst case, that didn't have any video game whatsoever (Shrek, SpongeBob SquarePants, E.T.)
 

Gengar84

Smash Hero
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
5,597
hmm i'd like to divide 4th party characters into groups as well if i may

impossible: all of them
What do you think the chances are of someday seeing a Mercedes automobile featured in a Mario Kart or Baby Metal and Hello Kitty featured in a Mario game? I’d say those are equally impossible, wouldn’t you agree?
 
Last edited:

fogbadge

Smash Obsessed
Joined
Jun 29, 2012
Messages
21,194
Location
Scotland
What do you think the chances are of someday seeing a Mercedes automobile featured Super Mario Kart or Baby Metal and Hello Kitty featured in a Mario game? I’d say those are equally impossible, wouldn’t you agree?
no. Because their creator/director of the series never said it wasn’t happening
 

fogbadge

Smash Obsessed
Joined
Jun 29, 2012
Messages
21,194
Location
Scotland
Sakurai also said Villager and Ridley weren’t happening. People can change their minds. I’m not saying non video game characters are likely, but to say that they are outright impossible is being close minded in my opinion.
as someone who’s been waiting for him to change his mind on toad for 4 years I beg to differ
lets not forget that it took the smash ballot to get him to change his mind on Ridley. And if you think no one submitted 4th party characters in the ballot when then that’s just naive
 

Diddy Kong

Smash Obsessed
Joined
Dec 8, 2004
Messages
25,969
Switch FC
SW-1597-979602774
hmm i'd like to divide 4th party characters into groups as well if i may

impossible: all of them
This was funny, and I genuinely hope so. Ever since Ultimate I'm finally adjusted to third party characters and even loving some of them. This would be too much.

Sakurai also said Villager and Ridley weren’t happening. People can change their minds. I’m not saying non video game characters are likely, but to say that they are outright impossible is being close minded in my opinion.
But this, this is the most likely scenario. We can't completely rule them out.
 

fogbadge

Smash Obsessed
Joined
Jun 29, 2012
Messages
21,194
Location
Scotland
Another thing to remember is that sakurai didn’t see villager was impossible he said it would be something of a tone clash. And he was right look at those memes people made
 

Gengar84

Smash Hero
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
5,597
as someone who’s been waiting for him to change his mind on toad for 4 years I beg to differ
lets not forget that it took the smash ballot to get him to change his mind on Ridley. And if you think no one submitted 4th party characters in the ballot when then that’s just naive
Sakurai did explicitly state that he wouldn’t be counting any votes for non video game characters in the ballot. I’m sure characters like Goku got a ton of votes but he was never getting in due to the ballot because of the pre established rules. What that may have done is show how much interest there was for certain characters and raise the possibility of Sakurai reconsidering his stance at some point down the line.

In my opinion, seeing Goku, Turok, James Bond, Lu Bu, the TMNT, and others in Smash is significantly less out of place than the Nintendo crossovers we’ve already had in Mario Kart and Super Mario Maker. Non video game character crossovers have also been a staple in fighting games over the years in games like Mortal Kombat and Soul Calibur so I really don’t understand what the big deal is with Smash. Smash 64 and Melee were originally just first party Nintendo characters and eventually branched out into third party guests in Brawl. In my opinion, non video game characters is just the next logical step.
 
Last edited:

Diddy Kong

Smash Obsessed
Joined
Dec 8, 2004
Messages
25,969
Switch FC
SW-1597-979602774
hmm i'd like to divide 4th party characters into groups as well if i may

impossible: all of them
This was funny, and I genuinely hope so. Ever since Ultimate I'm finally adjusted to third party characters and even loving some of them. This would be too much.

Sakurai also said Villager and Ridley weren’t happening. People can change their minds. I’m not saying non video game characters are likely, but to say that they are outright impossible is being close minded in my opinion.
But this, this is the most likely scenario. We can't completely rule them out.
 

fogbadge

Smash Obsessed
Joined
Jun 29, 2012
Messages
21,194
Location
Scotland
Sakurai did explicitly state that he wouldn’t be counting any votes for non video game characters in the ballot. I’m sure characters like Goku got a ton of votes but he was never getting in due to the ballot because of the pre established rules. What that may have done is show how much interest there was for certain characters and raise the possibility of Sakurai reconsidering his stance at some point down the line.

In my opinion, seeing Goku, Turok, James Bond, Lu Bu, the TMNT, and others in Smash is significantly less out of place than the Nintendo crossovers we’ve already had in Mario Kart and Super Mario Maker. Non video game character crossovers have also been a staple in fighting games over the years in games like Mortal Kombat and Soul Calibur so I really don’t understand what the big deal is with Smash.
yeah he also said it was for newcomers, didn’t stop people from voting for but veterans

the big deal is that one of the major aspects of smash’s identity was the ways it stood out from the other fighters. So doing things cause other fighters do them is counter productive. Another part of smash’s identity was a game about Nintendo all stars, now that part is gone so if it’s identity changes anymore it won’t be smash. And then of course there’s the idea of budget, many of these 4th party characters have their rights spread over multiple holders so licensing the likes of goku is going to be way harder than FF or DQ and cost a lot more too. Look at bond, they gotta get game rights, movie rights, character rights and the likeness of the actor that’s a lot of money taken away free m other things. In short it is impractical, needlessly expensive and will cost the last few things that makes smash, smash
 

Gengar84

Smash Hero
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
5,597
yeah he also said it was for newcomers, didn’t stop people from voting for but veterans

the big deal is that one of the major aspects of smash’s identity was the ways it stood out from the other fighters. So doing things cause other fighters do them is counter productive. Another part of smash’s identity was a game about Nintendo all stars, now that part is gone so if it’s identity changes anymore it won’t be smash. And then of course there’s the idea of budget, many of these 4th party characters have their rights spread over multiple holders so licensing the likes of goku is going to be way harder than FF or DQ and cost a lot more too. Look at bond, they gotta get game rights, movie rights, character rights and the likeness of the actor that’s a lot of money taken away free m other things. In short it is impractical, needlessly expensive and will cost the last few things that makes smash, smash
I understand where you’re coming from but I also think the concept of what makes Smash Smash is fairly subjective. Some people may argue that ship sailed long ago in Brawl with the introduction of third parties. If Nintendo characters are what gives Smash its identity, then what difference does it make if the guest is Master Chief or James Bond? I’d argue that James Bond is actually much more relevant to Nintendo’s history than Master Chief is. The TMNT games were huge on Nintendo consoles and would feel a lot more relevant to their history than Kratos, Nathan Drake, or Joel from Sony, despite not originating from a video game.
 
Last edited:

fogbadge

Smash Obsessed
Joined
Jun 29, 2012
Messages
21,194
Location
Scotland
I understand where you’re coming from but I also think the concept of what makes Smash Smash is fairly subjective. Some people may argue that ship sailed long ago in Brawl with the introduction of third parties. If Nintendo characters are what gives Smash its identity, then what difference does it make if the guest is Master Chief or James Bond? I’d argue that James Bond is actually much more relevant to Nintendo’s history than Master Chief is. The TMNT games were huge on Nintendo consoles and would feel a lot more relevant to their history than Kratos, Nathan Drake, or Joel from Sony, despite not originating from a video game.
I said that ship had sailed, my point was anymore sailing and it’s not smash. Smash was about Nintendo, now it’s about gaming if it becomes a game about everything then I think it’s become mugen

also nice job listing only characters I’d hate to see in smash
 

Gengar84

Smash Hero
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
5,597
I said that ship had sailed, my point was anymore sailing and it’s not smash. Smash was about Nintendo, now it’s about gaming if it becomes a game about everything then I think it’s become mugen

also nice job listing only characters I’d hate to see in smash
I guess my argument is that you can include non game characters and actually make it more about Nintendo than it currently is. I love Joker and Sephiroth but they have no relation to Nintendo. Licensed games that were fairly high profile like GoldenEye and Turtles in Time have a lot stronger ties than many other characters that debuted in games. If the criteria currently is to add anyone just because they debuted in a game, regardless to whether they had any relation to Nintendo at all, what is Smash’s identity as it currently stands?

What I’m trying to say is whether the character debuted from a video game seems arbitrary if you care about Smash’s identity as a Nintendo focused roster. What would matter more to me is how relevant a property was on a Nintendo console and how synonymous it is with the Nintendo brand. Several non game properties have much stronger ties to Nintendo than many highly requested characters that debuted in games.

To make myself clear, I’m cool with anything, non game, third party, or whatever. I do agree that it would be nice to at least have some focus on Nintendo relevance for guests even if it isn’t a requirement. That’s one reason I always push for RARE characters over Master Chief.
 
Last edited:

fogbadge

Smash Obsessed
Joined
Jun 29, 2012
Messages
21,194
Location
Scotland
I guess my argument is that you can include non game characters and actually make it more about Nintendo than it currently is. I love Joker and Sephiroth but they have no relation to Nintendo. Licensed games that were fairly high profile like GoldenEye and Turtles in Time have a lot stronger ties than many other characters that debuted in games. If the criteria currently is to add anyone just because they debuted in a game, regardless to whether they had any relation to Nintendo at all, what is Smash’s identity as it currently stands?

To make myself clear, I’m cool with anything, non game, third party, or whatever. I do agree that it would be nice to at least have some focus on Nintendo relevance for guests even if it isn’t a requirement. That’s one reason I always push for RARE characters over Master Chief.
nintendo nor their subsidiaries ever made a tmnt game though so theyre about as connected as seph. as for smash's current identity well sakurai told us, it a celebration of gaming
 

Gengar84

Smash Hero
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
5,597
nintendo nor their subsidiaries ever made a tmnt game though so theyre about as connected as seph. as for smash's current identity well sakurai told us, it a celebration of gaming
I never claimed that they did. What I’m comparing it to is how several people relate CastleVania and Mega Man to Nintendo despite being third party. Sakurai also only made that description about Smash’s identity after he introduced several third party guest characters. Smash 64 and Melee were never envisioned as a “celebration of gaming”. Even Brawl couldn’t make that claim with only two guests. That description only became applicable starting with Smash 4.
 

fogbadge

Smash Obsessed
Joined
Jun 29, 2012
Messages
21,194
Location
Scotland
I never claimed that they did. What I’m comparing it to is how several people relate CastleVania and Mega Man to Nintendo despite being third party. Sakurai also only made that description about Smash’s identity after he introduced several third party guest characters. Smash 64 and Melee were never envisioned as a “celebration of gaming”. Even Brawl couldn’t make that claim with only two guests. That description only became applicable starting with Smash 4.
well they shouldn’t cause tmnt has an even looser connection than those two. And I told you smash’s identity had already changed I didn’t say that’s what it had always been
 

Gengar84

Smash Hero
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
5,597
well they shouldn’t cause tmnt has an even looser connection than those two. And I told you smash’s identity had already changed I didn’t say that’s what it had always been
TMNT did already have its very own Smash style game made by several of the people that made Brawl if that means anything but I get where you’re coming from. I still feel they have stronger ties to Nintendo than Master Chief, Joel, Kratos, Nathan Drake and many other characters that debuted in games but never appeared on a Nintendo console (or at least aren’t known to have major appearances on the platform).

On a side note, I find it kind of funny that I find myself doing this a lot. I’m not even really that invested in whether Smash gets non game characters, even if I think it would be kind of cool. I’m totally fine either way. I always just end up defending whatever the minority opinion is on most subjects. Especially if I see someone say something is impossible or I feel an idea is being dismissed by everyone.
 
Last edited:

fogbadge

Smash Obsessed
Joined
Jun 29, 2012
Messages
21,194
Location
Scotland
TMNT did already have its very own Smash style game made by several of the people that made Brawl if that means anything but I get where you’re coming from. I still feel they have stronger ties to Nintendo than Master Chief, Joel, Kratos, Nathan Drake and many other characters that debuted in games but never appeared on a Nintendo console (or at least aren’t known to have major appearances on the platform).

On a side note, I find it kind of funny that I find myself doing this a lot. I’m not even really that invested in whether Smash gets non game characters, even if I think it would be kind of cool. I’m totally fine either way. I always just end up defending whatever the minority opinion is on most subjects. Especially if I see someone say something is impossible or I feel an idea is being dismissed by everyone.
yeah well the general consensus seems to be that ties to Nintendo don’t seem to matter as much. appearing on Nintendo consoles is another matter
 

Gengar84

Smash Hero
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
5,597
yeah well the general consensus seems to be that ties to Nintendo don’t seem to matter as much. appearing on Nintendo consoles is another matter
That’s where the argument about Smash’s identity is lost on me. So if Master Chief appears as a Minecraft skin on a Nintendo game, that’s somehow equivalent to a series with a long history with several high profile games on the console. I don’t have any problems with Chief in Smash but I’ve long accepted that Smash’s identity isn’t constant and can easily evolve as the series continues.

I’m only singling out Master Chief because he’s a very popular request. I actually think he’d be pretty cool but he has almost no relevance to Nintendo. I’m cool with that but I’m also cool with non game characters.
 
Last edited:

fogbadge

Smash Obsessed
Joined
Jun 29, 2012
Messages
21,194
Location
Scotland
That’s where the argument about Smash’s identity is lost on me. So if Master Chief appears as a Minecraft skin on a Nintendo game, that’s somehow equivalent to a series with a long history with several high profile games on the console. I don’t have any problems with Chief in Smash but I’ve long accepted that Smash’s identity isn’t constant and can easily evolve as the series continues.

I’m only singling out Master Chief because he’s a very popular request. I actually think he’d be pretty cool but he has almost no relevance to Nintendo. I’m cool with that but I’m also cool with non game characters.
no, no one said that. I said that part of smash’s identity used to be about Nintendo but characters like cloud and joker put that to bed characters who aren’t associated with Nintendo even though they’re debut games are on Nintendo consoles along with many cameos. My point about identity is that if you change it to much then it stops being smash. Now the change from being about Nintendo to being about gaming it still feels like smash but if you change it anymore then it probably won’t. No one’s saying that Steve cosplaying as chief is the equivalent of a long history like mega man just that long histories aren’t as important as we thought
 

Gengar84

Smash Hero
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
5,597
no, no one said that. I said that part of smash’s identity used to be about Nintendo but characters like cloud and joker put that to bed characters who aren’t associated with Nintendo even though they’re debut games are on Nintendo consoles along with many cameos. My point about identity is that if you change it to much then it stops being smash. Now the change from being about Nintendo to being about gaming it still feels like smash but if you change it anymore then it probably won’t. No one’s saying that Steve cosplaying as chief is the equivalent of a long history like mega man just that long histories aren’t as important as we thought
Did you even read what I quoted in my response? Clearly, a lot of people think that the only thing that matters is that the character has appeared on a Nintendo console in some way and their actual history with the company is much less important. Many other people don’t even care about that and just debuting in any game at all is enough, even with no relation whatsoever to Nintendo. I’ve noticed this personally with the backlash RARE character suggestions seem to get compared to others like Master Chief or other hype characters with much less history with Nintendo.
 

fogbadge

Smash Obsessed
Joined
Jun 29, 2012
Messages
21,194
Location
Scotland
Did you even read what I quoted in my response? Clearly, a lot of people think that the only thing that matters is that the character has appeared on a Nintendo console in some way and their actual history with the company is much less important. Many other people don’t even care about that and just debuting in any game at all is enough, even with no relation whatsoever to Nintendo. I’ve noticed this personally with the backlash RARE character suggestions seem to get compared to others like Master Chief or other hype characters with much less history with Nintendo.
I don’t think you read my post cause that’s my point. People don’t care about connections to Nintendo, sakurai himself said it’s no longer about Nintendo. So of course most fans no longer care about whether or not they appeared on Nintendo consoles and the history with Nintendo was a fan idea not based on anything sakurai said. Smash was about Nintendo but that’s changed and I’d something changes to much then it’s no longer the same thing. Even with the big change it’s still smash but if it changes even further then it won’t be
 

Gengar84

Smash Hero
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
5,597
I don’t think you read my post cause that’s my point. People don’t care about connections to Nintendo, sakurai himself said it’s no longer about Nintendo. So of course most fans no longer care about whether or not they appeared on Nintendo consoles and the history with Nintendo was a fan idea not based on anything sakurai said. Smash was about Nintendo but that’s changed and I’d something changes to much then it’s no longer the same thing. Even with the big change it’s still smash but if it changes even further then it won’t be
I think understood your point, but correct me if I’m wrong. Maybe I wasn’t clear enough in my response. I know firsthand how people don’t seem to care as much these days about Nintendo history in Smash. Like I mentioned, I used to bring up RARE characters a lot and I got shut down by a few people here and basically everyone on GameFAQS. I’ve also brought up Bill Rizer and Crono/Magus multiple times but there isn’t much interest in those characters. I’ve come to terms with that and it’s fine. People are free to like what they want but the whole argument of Smash’s identity is just silly to me at this point. I actually do care about Nintendo history and there is little to no interest in the characters I bring up. It even got to the point that I upset a few users here by talking about RARE characters too often.

When I realized how few people actually care about characters having any kind of history with Nintendo and only want characters for the hype factor regardless of their history, that’s when the entire argument of preserving Smash’s identity fell apart for me personally. Smash, for me, was always about celebrating Nintendo, not gaming as a whole. The gaming part only started with Smash 4. I’m actually happy to see fun third parties join the roster but when Nintendo related suggestions get overlooked in favor of completely unrelated characters with little to no history, I knew the franchise’s identity was no longer the same. That’s totally fine with me, I just no longer put any stock in that argument.

The fact that a character with no relation to Nintendo debuted in a video game or other type of media seems a bit arbitrary to me. Personally, if I wanted to preserve Smash’s identity, I’d focus more on Nintendo history, regardless of the character’s origins.

Who’s to say at what point that Smash is still Smash though? That’s entirely subjective. If Sakurai had introduced Goku back in Brawl instead of Snake and we had non game characters this whole time, I don’t think people would feel too differently than they do now. It’s just that many people have grown accustomed to what we have now and are resistant to any change. There are also people who still aren’t happy with the idea of third parties in Smash at all and feel that the series has lost its way, even on this very board.
 
Last edited:

fogbadge

Smash Obsessed
Joined
Jun 29, 2012
Messages
21,194
Location
Scotland
I think understood your point, but correct me if I’m wrong. Maybe I wasn’t clear enough in my response. I know firsthand how people don’t seem to care as much these days about Nintendo history in Smash. Like I mentioned, I used to bring up RARE characters a lot and I got shut down by a few people here and basically everyone on GameFAQS. I’ve also brought up Bill Rizer and Crono/Magus multiple times but there isn’t much interest in those characters. I’ve come to terms with that and it’s fine. People are free to like what they want but the whole argument of Smash’s identity is just silly to me at this point. I actually do care about Nintendo history and there is little to no interest in the characters I bring up. It even got to the point that I upset a few users here by talking about RARE characters too often.

When I realized how few people actually care about characters having any kind of history with Nintendo and only want characters for the hype factor regardless of their history, that’s when the entire argument of preserving Smash’s identity fell apart for me personally. Smash, for me, was always about celebrating Nintendo, not gaming as a whole. The gaming part only started with Smash 4. I’m actually happy to see fun third parties join the roster but when Nintendo related suggestions get overlooked in favor of completely unrelated characters with little to no history, I knew the franchise’s identity was no longer the same. That’s totally fine with me, I just no longer put any stock in that argument.

Who’s to say at what point that Smash is still Smash though? That’s entirely subjective. If Sakurai had introduced Goku back in Brawl instead of Snake and we had non game characters this whole time, I don’t think people would feel too differently than they do now. It’s just that many people have grown accustomed to what we have now and are resistant to any change. There are also people who still aren’t happy with the idea of third parties in Smash at all and feel that the series has lost its way, even on this very board.
ok. if you remember i said it was part of smash's identity not it's identity in it's entirety. see it's like the old philosophical idea that if you replace all the parts of something then it is no longer the same, the ship of theseus or if you prefer peter capaldi had a version about a broom. so likewise if change all the parts of game's identity then it's no longer the same game. so how many of smash's parts are left? a game about nintendo's all stars: gone, nintendo stuff is still in the majority but by sakurai's own admission the game is no longer about nintendo. a unique spin on the fighting genre: mostly gone, with platform fighters now a whole sub-genre and ultimate including things more in line with a traditional fighter i'm not sure you can say this anymore. set in aworld about toys/trophies coming to life to fight: still there but not confirmed until sora's trailer. playing as characters who aren't normally in fighters: still in the majority but no longer exclusively, and a number of the more popular 4th party characters have been in loads of fighters. a celebration of gaming: still here and always been here, even in the days when it was all about nintendo it was all about nintendo's games, no hanafuda trophy, no ultra arm item, no taxi stage.

in short many of the things that made smash smash have changed or can now be found in several other games and it's my view that the inclusion of 4th party characters would finish it off and then it would just like any other platform fighter. all games have things that make them what they are. even games with rotating casts and settings or are constantly changing the gameplay still have recurring story themes and ideas
 
Top Bottom