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!
It appears that you are using ad block :'(
Hey, we get it. However this website is run by and for the community... and it needs ads in order to keep running.
Please disable your adblock on Smashboards, or go premium to hide all advertisements and this notice. Alternatively, this ad may have just failed to load. Woops!
Yeah but Disney delegates to Square on basically being the caretaker of the IP. It's more or less like Disney is the publisher and Square is the dev.
Sakurai said dealing with both Disney and Square was difficult, he had to get approval from both, and each had their own guidelines. Nomura claimed that he was way pickier about Sora's inclusion than Disney was.
Legally he might just be Disney, but from a practical perspective he's both, and I don't think Disney would've moved forward on including Sora without at least Square's blessing, if not their involvement.
As for why it works in Smash Bros.? Well, it works because it's Smash Bros.
There's rarely an explanation for why everyone is gathered in Smash and when there is, it's usually toys or figurines, so we suspend disbelief and we don't really question why everyone is grouped together in the context of Subspace or World of Light... but since the movies are true to their source material, the writers would actually NEED to find a way to make all the pieces fit in a NCU context, which would require so many retcons that some franchises would risk losing their identity in the process.
Moreover, the heart of Smash Bros has always been non-story oriented matches, not narratives. The latter is a nice bonus when tried, and it can add to the overall experience, but realistically its not the thing that sells the game the mass audience. Subspace Emissary was the biggest attempt at making an actual coherent story out of all these disparate franchises, yet a lot of the criticism towards was based around how unsatisfying the gameplay was outside actual matches and boss fights.
SSB is one of the greatest crossovers of all time, but a lot of that is rooted in a gameplay emphasis and allowing players to apply that crossover element (stages, characters, items) in the way that they want, which is something you can't really do in a non-interactive media like film or television.
Moreover, the heart of Smash Bros has always been non-story oriented matches, not narratives. The latter is a nice bonus when tried, and it can add to the overall experience, but realistically its not the thing that sells the game the mass audience. Subspace Emissary was the biggest attempt at making an actual coherent story out of all these disparate franchises, yet a lot of the criticism towards was based around how unsatisfying the gameplay was outside actual matches and boss fights.
SSB is one of the greatest crossovers of all time, but a lot of that is rooted in a gameplay emphasis and allowing players to apply that crossover element (stages, characters, items) in the way that they want, which is something you can't really do in a non-interactive media like film or television.
Yeah, Smash has always struck me as a way of "solving" an argument two kids have at recess rather than trying to have a grander narrative.
Sometimes, that's all you really need to justify a crossover's existence. And that's why Smash somehow works even though we usually get no explanation.
Something I've been mulling over recently is the idea of replacing Smash Tour in Wii U with an Adventure Mode akin to Melee's Adventure Mode (more linear levels based on the franchises represented) and 3DS's Classic Mode (branching paths offering different kinds of levels), with elements of Smash Run thrown in for good measure.
There's rarely an explanation for why everyone is gathered in Smash and when there is, it's usually toys or figurines, so we suspend disbelief and we don't really question why everyone is grouped together in the context of Subspace or World of Light... but since the movies are true to their source material, the writers would actually NEED to find a way to make all the pieces fit in a NCU context, which would require so many retcons that some franchises would risk losing their identity in the process.
Yeah, Smash has always struck me as a way of "solving" an argument two kids have at recess rather than trying to have a grander narrative.
Sometimes, that's all you really need to justify a crossover's existence. And that's why Smash somehow works even though we usually get no explanation.
At the 64/Melee, maybe but that feeling has been lost over time especially in the era of Death Battle and Smash Bracket that scratch that itch much more efficiently and successfully.
Which it is why having more crossover aspects like character interaction would help make it stand out. It doesn't have to be grand narrative, at least not all time and not like MCU but still. Something.
Earliest example I can think of was the infamous Seven Squares. I don’t even remember the full details behind it, just that some of the options were the obvious Sephiroth, Geno (got a Mii costume), Erdrick (alt of Hero who had the DQ11 hero as the default), Crono (red herring who did not show up in any form), I think Sora was there too? It’s been so long
no Neku or 2B… guess it wasn’t meant 2B I’ll see myself out for that one. real talk I wouldn’t have minded a Chrono Trigger spirit event… we got several spirit events of S-E games not mentioned in the list
Some believe that a Nintendo Cinematic Universe is not possible and this is because the Mario franchise for example seems quite cartoonish, while The Legend of Zelda has a more serious premise. But judging by the Adventure Modes of the Super Smash Bros series and especially The Subspace Emissary of Super Smash Bros. Brawl and the World of Light of Super Smash Bros. Ultimate, I'd say it's not impossible since we saw Mario, Link, Kirby, Pikachu, Samus, Captain Falcon etc. to meet each other. So for me it is possible.
The MCU is not exactly what I would call a fully cohesive world, especially at this point.
More seriously, though, I don't really agree that the absence of previous crossovers in the source material inherently makes it less sensible to create such a crossover. After all, the whole idea and much of the appeal of a crossover is to bring IPs that usually aren't together, or possibly even that might not seem to make sense being together at first glance, into one fictional world, universe, or story.
I do agree that the frequent presence of crossovers in the source material makes it easier to create a film crossover, since much of the heavy lifting in terms of making its world coherent has already been done. But that's a pretty simple conclusion to reach.
And I agree that there are many, many difficulties in creating a successful NCU. But it's not simply because the Nintendo IPs weren't originally designed with any in-world connection to each other in mind. Of course, not being designed with each other in mind could happen to result in difficulties making them fit together later, but not necessarily; plenty of IPs that weren't originally meant to be connected have crossed over before, anyway.
So again, I do agree that there are many potential troubles in initiating an NCU. But originally intended self-containment of the franchises is not in itself a disqualifier; the argument that this would cause a problem would have to be much more nuanced, and would have to involve actual particulars of the franchises involved that might seem incompatible.
Again, a Nintendo Cinematic Universe isn't the same as a Marvel Cinematic Universe. Marvel all exists in the same universe. Nintendo doesn't, outside the Mario umbrella. A Nintendo Cinematic Universe would be like a Disney Cinematic Universe.
It's the DC Cinematic Universe against Multiversus. It's gonna be hard to find a tone for a story that mixes Looney Tunes and Game of Thrones where one or both doesn't become very different than its source material. I mean it would basically become Happy Tree Friends, wouldn't it?
Games and movies are different. Some platform party fighter mixing together Nintendo's IP is very different than trying to tell a coherent story that can faithfully bridge the conflicting themes of the different universes.
I love Smash, but it is essentially a very high quality version of bashing action figures together. To actually tell a story that fits into each character's world, it would make mixing the worlds together either jarring tonally, aesthetically, and ratings-wise, or would require levelling each to a more or less unified style and look so when you bring them together, it's not incongruous.
Like, if you wanted to make a Metroid movie that was actually very faithful to Metroid's vibe, look and atmosphere, it would not gel well with something made that was faithful to Animal Crossing's vibe, look and atmosphere.
One thing the MCU doesn't have to worry about is artstyle, because it's live-action. Something animated would. And Smash unifies its artstyle to make the characters fit next to each other. Because the point of Smash is to bring them together.
And even the MCU itself causes some degree of uniformity to be enforced for the sake of consistency. Like, how if it wasn't connected, we could get things like an Edgar Wright Ant-Man or a Dr. Strange movie that actually goes full horror. Or Logan. Or even the Spider-Verse. Even with it still apparently being R-rated, I bet Deadpool 3 will feel markedly different than the first two.
You sacrifice uniqueness for cohesion even in an exist universe, let alone in different ones. Imagine how weird it would be to get a movie with Spider-Man, Darth Vader, Elsa, Homer Simpson and Mickey Mouse, where they actually tried to make a coherent narrative.
I'd rather each Nintendo world try to be the best world it can be than make tonal, visual and storytelling sacrifices for the sake of eventually meeting up.
You sacrifice uniqueness for cohesion even in an exist universe, let alone in different ones. Imagine how weird it would be to get a movie with Spider-Man, Darth Vader, Elsa, Homer Simpson and Mickey Mouse, where they actually tried to make a coherent narrative.
I'd rather each Nintendo world try to be the best world it can be than make tonal, visual and storytelling sacrifices for the sake of eventually meeting up.
This is a strong point, especially in regards to individual franchises. I think Zelda adaptions would be limited if they kept to one kind of style to keep cohesive with its own entries (a Wind Waker style movie should be distinct from a Twilight Princess one). let alone to make it fit with the likes of Mario.
There's one reason why I can't buy the idea of any FP2 character getting a deal fully made years beforehand:
Sakurai outright said the team didn't decide to greenlight a second wave of DLC until halfway through development of the first one.
Wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo sets up preliminary stuff sometimes in case they want to pull the trigger later, but it wouldn't make any sense for deals for Steve or Sephiroth or etc. to have been struck when Ultimate was still early in development. If such deals had happened that early, the characters would've shown up sooner than a second Fighters Pass that wasn't part of the original plan.
There's one reason why I can't buy the idea of any FP2 character getting a deal fully made years beforehand:
Sakurai outright said the team didn't decide to greenlight a second wave of DLC until halfway through development of the first one.
Wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo sets up preliminary stuff sometimes in case they want to pull the trigger later, but it wouldn't make any sense for deals for Steve or Sephiroth or etc. to have been struck when Ultimate was still early in development. If such deals had happened that early, the characters would've shown up sooner than a second Fighters Pass that wasn't part of the original plan.
My theory on it is that the few characters that might have had a deal being worked on (the only one we know is Steve) could've been individual DLCs had the second Pass not gotten a greenlight. Like Piranha Plant is and how Smash 4's DLC was before it became lost media.
My theory on it is that the few characters that might have had a deal being worked on (the only one we know is Steve) could've been individual DLCs had the second Pass not gotten a greenlight. Like Piranha Plant is and how Smash 4's DLC was before it became lost media.
My pet theory is that Steve was meant for the first fighter pass and his spot was taken up by the Dragon quest heroes because licensing the Dragon Quest music took forever and by the time they got said rights it was too late to add them to base game.
It's not a serious theory and the only thing i have for it is what we knew the heroes were going to be in because of some of the oldest leaks for Ultimate.
There's one reason why I can't buy the idea of any FP2 character getting a deal fully made years beforehand:
Sakurai outright said the team didn't decide to greenlight a second wave of DLC until halfway through development of the first one.
Wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo sets up preliminary stuff sometimes in case they want to pull the trigger later, but it wouldn't make any sense for deals for Steve or Sephiroth or etc. to have been struck when Ultimate was still early in development. If such deals had happened that early, the characters would've shown up sooner than a second Fighters Pass that wasn't part of the original plan.
Halfway through development of the first wave is around Banjo. But to partition the Miis into Square and Enix, and put the Enix ones with Hero, and save Geno and Chocobo means they already had pretty finalized plans for a Square character, since SE Miis only come with those characters.
Mixed with the fact that Cloud arrived with literally no new content, I believe the intent to provide it through a DLC pack was made pre-release. In retrospect, I don't think FF was ever not going to add any new content, as was believed. I think Square just insisted it be through DLC, as they prefer being DLC.
Now, I'm not saying Sephiroth was planned from 2015. I don't think that's true. My guess is Sephiroth arose as a compromise between Square wanting their content through DLC, and Nintendo/Sakurai wanting all vets on base. I think that fits in with Sakurai saying EiH almost didn't come together, and the suggestion that Cloud was a sticking point there.
I think the agreement arrived sometime before launch, later than finalizing the rest of base (echoes aside), but before/during DLC selection. I think that may be why FF has no AT, and Cloud has almost no spirit battles (which wouldn't conflict with not adding new FF7 content), because he wasn't fixed for base until later than the others.
It also means a FF7 pack had to be reserved for DLC pre-launch. Which means I think there was a plan to do more than the first pass pre-launch. Not necessarily a second pass, but more than just the first. That would line up with them having a rough Mii schedule that extends past the first wave devised quite early.
Also worth noting is that all the Mii waves had a relatively balanced amount of costumes (apart from the last, and Sora was added later), which speaks to how far in advance things were planned for rough parity between the first ten releases.
At some early stage it's alternatively possible the FF7 pack was planned for the first pass, but when they decided to do more, it was shifted down the line. This would've been pre-launch, before all the FP1 fighters were locked in.
Anyway, that's my guess. Square wanted DLC, Nintendo wanted base, which delayed finalizing Cloud's placement, and resulted in adding another FF7 character as a compromise. This plan existed before launch, which is why no additional FF7 content showed up, it being fully saved, at the behest of Square, for the pack. This means additional DLC was planned since before release, though not necessarily as far back as this deal being made. This lines up with the Mii release schedule indicating plans for a Square character quite early on.
It could also explain the lack of the FF AT and Cloud spirit battles, better explains the complete absence of new FF content in base (because not being able to land anything in three years of base development is a little preposterous) yet why they were able to get SMRPG content for base (as a different IP that wasn't going to get a character, with no back-end on just spirits), and why Sephiroth is the only second original third party, Square being the only one to force that compromise.
And as shown by looking at that Nintendo Dream interview in retrospect, Sakurai does mislead about already-planned future developments of Smash if they're not ready to be revealed yet. Around 4's Wii U launch he also said they weren't working on any paid DLC (Mewtwo being free at the time), which was, at best, very misleading, and at worst, clearly bull****.
As for Steve, people make too much of the five year thing. Talks beginning five years before he became a character isn't that noteworthy. It just means one party approached the other about the possibility of inclusion.
It doesn't at all indicate when those talks moved past the talking stage, when all the parties actually got on board, when development began, how long the character was actually planned, what the holdups were, or from whom they arose.
Talks for Sonic and Snake both began before Melee came out. They didn't materialize for seven years, from talks beginning to release. If Sakurai/Nintendo truly did try for Sora during the ballot and failed, then talks for him started six years before he showed up. If Rayman eventually becomes playable, those talks would've started over a decade earlier, when Ubisoft clearly approached Nintendo regarding Smash 4.
It's not five solid years of development, as some people have likened it to. If it took five years, it means at several points progress stopped, and didn't pick back up for a while. In theory, it's possible Steve was never seriously planned until they were compiling the second pass. There's not enough info.
I seem to recall Sakurai saying in one of the presentations that had Pass 2 not happened the way it did, the plan might instead have been to just add 1 or 2 extra characters. I would assume Seph would have been one of those if this is true
One thing that makes this more interesting is that Hero was also intended to be a base game character, but got moved to DLC to circumvent Sugiyama's ludicrous demands.
Halfway through development of the first wave is around Banjo. But to partition the Miis into Square and Enix, and put the Enix ones with Hero, and save Geno and Chocobo means they already had pretty finalized plans for a Square character, since SE Miis only come with those characters.
Mixed with the fact that Cloud arrived with literally no new content, I believe the intent to provide it through a DLC pack was made pre-release. In retrospect, I don't think FF was ever not going to add any new content, as was believed. I think Square just insisted it be through DLC, as they prefer being DLC.
Now, I'm not saying Sephiroth was planned from 2015. I don't think that's true. My guess is Sephiroth arose as a compromise between Square wanting their content through DLC, and Nintendo/Sakurai wanting all vets on base. I think that fits in with Sakurai saying EiH almost didn't come together, and the suggestion that Cloud was a sticking point there.
I think the agreement arrived sometime before launch, later than finalizing the rest of base (echoes aside), but before/during DLC selection. I think that may be why FF has no AT, and Cloud has almost no spirit battles (which wouldn't conflict with not adding new FF7 content), because he wasn't fixed for base until later than the others.
It also means a DLC pack had to be reserved for DLC pre-launch. Which means I think there was a plan to do more than the first pass pre-launch. Not necessarily a second pass, but more than just the first. That would line up with them having a rough Mii schedule that extends past the first wave devised quite early.
Also worth noting is that all the Mii waves had a relatively balanced amount of costumes (apart from the last, and Sora was added later), which speaks to how far in advance things were planned for rough parity between the first ten releases.
At some early stage it's alternatively possible the FF7 pack was planned for the first pass, but when they decided to do more, it was shifted down the line. This would've been pre-launch, before all the FP1 fighters were locked in.
Anyway, that's my guess. Square wanted DLC, Nintendo wanted base, which delayed finalizing Cloud's placement, and resulted in adding another FF7 character as a compromise. This plan existed before launch, which is why no additional FF7 content showed up, it being fully saved, at the behest of Square, for the pack. This means additional DLC was planned since before release, though not necessarily as far back as this deal being made. This lines up with the Mii release schedule indicating plans for a Square character quite early on.
It could also explain the lack of the FF AT and Cloud spirit battles, better explains the complete absence of new FF content in base (because not being able to land anything in three years of base development is a little preposterous) yet why they were able to get SMRPG content for base (as a different IP that wasn't going to get a character, with no back-end on just spirits), and why Sephiroth is the only second original third party, Square being the only one to force that compromise.
And as shown by looking at that Nintendo Dream interview in retrospect, Sakurai does mislead about already-planned future developments of Smash if they're not ready to be revealed yet. Around 4's Wii U launch he also said they weren't working on any paid DLC (Mewtwo being free at the time), which was, at best, very misleading, and at worst, clearly bull****.
As for Steve, people make too much of the five year thing. Talks beginning five years before he became a character isn't that noteworthy. It just means one party approached the other about the possibility of inclusion.
It doesn't at all indicate when those talks moved past the talking stage, when all the parties actually got on board, when development began, how long the character was actually planned, what the holdups were, or from whom they arose.
Talks for Sonic and Snake both began before Melee came out. They didn't materialize for seven years, from talks beginning to release. If Sakurai/Nintendo truly did try for Sora during the ballot and failed, then talks for him started six years before he showed up. If Rayman eventually becomes playable, those talks would've started over a decade earlier, when Ubisoft clearly approached Nintendo regarding Smash 4.
It's not five solid years of development, as some people have likened it to. If it took five years, it means at several points progress stopped, and didn't pick back up for a while. In theory, it's possible Steve was never seriously planned until they were compiling the second pass. There's not enough info.
Quoting myself like a jerk here, but in theory, this could also explain why the identity of the 'Square-Enix' DLC character widely claimed in pre-release leaks was so hard to identify: because it was two different characters. Well, not just two different characters, but two different characters where one of the two is four different characters.
Remember the other thing claimed around the same time as and often in tandem with the 'Square-Enix' DLC character was... Minecraft.
Keep in mind, these were all claimed by Vergeben, who would eventually not be so reliable, but at this point got pretty much everything else correct. Minecraft and not being able to conclusively identify the SE character were basically the two big things people held against him at this period.
And at this point, the FP1 characters were, ostensibly, locked in as well. I know there's a theory that Byleth kicked someone else into the second pass. But I think if this happened, it happened pre-release, before DLC was announced and CP1-5 locked in. Not mid-FP1, as people allege.
So I think it's highly likely the plan to include more DLC predated launch. Not necessarily FP2 as a whole, but just more DLC.
One thing that makes this more interesting is that Hero was also intended to be a base game character, but got moved to DLC to circumvent Sugiyama's ludicrous demands.
One thing that makes this more interesting is that Hero was also intended to be a base game character, but got moved to DLC to circumvent Sugiyama's ludicrous demands.
I don't think so. The preference for being DLC isn't a Final Fantasy thing, or necessarily a Sugiyama thing, it's a Square thing as a whole. Look at Noctis in Tekken, 2B in Soulcalibur... Smash other than Cloud... I think they're just more dogmatic about DLC than other devs.
So I don't think they ever would've agreed to Hero being in base. I think it was hard enough for Sakurai to get Cloud in there, and necessitated adding a whole other character.
Tbf, I think at this point most companies prefer being DLC since the back-end usually nets them better deals, but the others were just less rigid about it. Look at how all the third-party costumes were DLC, even the returning ones.
I don't think so. The preference for being DLC isn't a Final Fantasy thing, or necessarily a Sugiyama thing, it's a Square thing as a whole. Look at Noctis in Tekken, 2B in Soulcalibur... Smash other than Cloud... I think they're just more dogmatic about DLC than other devs.
So I don't think they ever would've agreed to Hero being in base. I think it was hard enough for Sakurai to get Cloud in there, and necessitated adding a whole other character.
Tbf, I think at this point most companies prefer being DLC since the back-end usually nets them better deals, but the others were just less rigid about it. Look at how all the third-party costumes were DLC, even the returning ones.
I understand that. I would hate to bring this character up again, but this makes me wonder if they would want Geno as DLC in the next Smash Bros. game only, if he even gets in that is. I wonder how easy it would be to get Geno in the base of next game compared to other characters from Square Enix, if at all? I am starting to think Square Enix characters have better luck in Smash as DLC in any Smash game rather than base game.
Don't know how much anybody cares, but I thought this was neat:
Nintendo's official reason for game dev investment:
"Shares are held for the purpose of maintaining and developing a stable business relationship with this company, which develops software for the Company’s platforms."
Square/Koei/Namco have been major Switch partners.
These guys have all been pretty big on Switch, so it makes sense Nintendo would wanna do some investing. Not sure about any fullblown buyouts (MAYBE if the ActiBlizz deal goes through and MAYBE if the rumors of Sony "retaliating" turn out to be true), but hey, partnerships are good to have in this day and age. Especially in the games industry.
