[Official SSB4 Discussion] --- Nintendo announces 2 new Smash games!

[SmashChu]

Lot of stuff here I want to mention

This, Chronobound continues to ignore the (likely) possibility that Sakurai isn't involved in Smash 4 for some reason.

Can't wait to rub it in his face once its shown at E3.

Sakurai said (or was it Iwata) that if Sakurai was not involved, they would have just done Melee with online. Nintendo doesn't want to mess with Smash Bros without Sakurai.

Not to mention he's worked on the last three. Not unreasonable.

I think the reason everyone is becoming so angry with me is because my predictions means at the very least we will be waiting a year for Smash 4, and possibly two years at most.

I think part of it too is that Smashboard hates Sakurai for not making Melee 2.0 and making a game like Brawl instead.

I am kind of torn about Sakurai directing Smash 4. Sakurai did a great job with 64, Melee, and Brawl, but I am not sure whether he can do another "great" Smash. It was "easy" to improve on Melee considering that online was a massively important addition and there were plenty of important Nintendo characters not yet playable. With Smash 4, "more characters, more stages, more trophies, more items" won't cut it, and if it does it will be the last time he could pull "more, more, more" as a means of improvement off. However, in the end I would still prefer for Sakurai to return directing. Better the devil you know than the unknown, I guess. I think Sakurai recognizes that "more" is not enough for a prospective Smash 4.

More is not bad. Smash Brothers was built on the same core for the last three games and no one has had a problem. Brawl has sold the best of the three and has a high amount of play time (being beaten for the title of most played Wii game by Monster Hunter Tri).

If it aint broke.......

@Chrono
Sakurai not wanting to do "more more more" again (because let's face it, did that with Brawl outside of gameplay where it was simplified) is the main reason why I think we're gonna see a significant, if not a revamp, change in the way Smash is played. The fact that most cannot tell the difference between Melee and Brawl on a surface level should say that.

Like I said above, more is fine as people just want what Smash brings. Interviews after Brawl release suggest Sakurai knows this.

And the more I think about it, I think it is possible, given Sakurai's sentiments in recent interviews, that he'll at least not be returning as director.

Kind of a misconception. At the end of Brawl, Sakurai said he would not mind doing another. He later mentioned that Melee was hell and back from him (which might be why he didn't want to do it again).

Sources have said 2012, not late 2012.

Nintendo has said not before June 2012. That would include late 2012 and knowing console launches it probably is late 2012.

Also, Nintendo only mentioned Cafe after bad 3DS sales came in. 2011 is likely just to get people paying attention to that and ignore the fact that the 3DS gets beaten weekly by the 6 year old PSP.

Also there's a big difference between E3 2005 and this E3. Nintendo is actually showing games, and having them playable on the show floor for this E3 as opposed to in E3 2005 where we just got vague details about the new system.

How do you know there wont be more vauge detail here? We know nothing of what will be shown. All the playable stuff could be tech demos at best. Doesn't mean Smash will be there playable because other games are playable either.

Really, the only argument against a new Smash being shown is that Sakurai may be working on it and he may be too busy with Kid Icarus.

I haven't heard any good arguments for it. Just rumor and conjecture.

 

[Big-Cat]

I think part of it too is that Smashboard hates Sakurai for not making Melee 2.0 and making a game like Brawl instead.

I don't think anyone wanted Melee 2.0 per se. Rather, they wanted a sequel to Melee that wasn't a watered down game. From Smash 64 to Melee, it was clear that most of the concepts in SSB were expanded on/refined for Melee while new stuff was added.

More is not bad. Smash Brothers was built on the same core for the last three games and no one has had a problem. Brawl has sold the best of the three and has a high amount of play time (being beaten for the title of most played Wii game by Monster Hunter Tri).

Here's the problem though.

1. I think there some complaints in some reviews that Brawl wasn't different enough in the gameplay department.
2. Brawl has sold the most because it's on a console that has not only sold way more than the Gamecube, but is also the best selling console this generation. Not only that, but proportionally speaking, Melee sold more on the Gamecube (don't know how much the bundle contributed though) than Brawl has on the Wii.

Also, Nintendo only mentioned Cafe after bad 3DS sales came in. 2011 is likely just to get people paying attention to that and ignore the fact that the 3DS gets beaten weekly by the 6 year old PSP.

Well, there aren't enough games on the 3DS that people want to buy. The PSP, on the other hand, has six years worth of games available to buy with the PSP. Once games like Zelda and Kid Icarus come rolling in, expect higher sales.

 

[majora_787]

I don't think anyone wanted Melee 2.0 per se. Rather, they wanted a sequel to Melee that wasn't a watered down game. From Smash 64 to Melee, it was clear that most of the concepts in SSB were expanded on/refined for Melee while new stuff was added.


Here's the problem though.

1. I think there some complaints in some reviews that Brawl wasn't different enough in the gameplay department.
2. Brawl has sold the most because it's on a console that has not only sold way more than the Gamecube, but is also the best selling console this generation. Not only that, but proportionally speaking, Melee sold more on the Gamecube (don't know how much the bundle contributed though) than Brawl has on the Wii.

Well, there aren't enough games on the 3DS that people want to buy. The PSP, on the other hand, has six years worth of games available to buy with the PSP. Once games like Zelda and Kid Icarus come rolling in, expect higher sales.

0. Admit it, Kuma. There are some people in this community that would have been fine without Brawl, and think that anything other than Melee is unworthy of being called a Smash Bros. sequel. Maybe not a lot, but there were some.

1. And I think Nintendo will be fine with Smash without Sakurai. 1. They want to make money, so they'll make a sequel of a popular series that makes them money. Common sense formula.

2. Sakurai didn't want to make Brawl, and he doesn't want to make this. He DOESN'T WANT TO MAKE MORE SMASH BROS. People kind of blatantly ignore this. The game will most likely be passed to another trustworthy, high-profile developer... that, or they will somehow talk

Spoiler

READ: bribe

Sakurai into doing yet another game.

It isn't a rumor, it isn't speculation. How many times has he said he didn't want to before, and doesn't really want to now? Clearly not enough. =\

And honestly, idrc if all we get is "Smash 4 is in development" followed by Smash 4 entering development later that night. At least it's something, and that's the entire point.

 

[Big-Cat]

0. Admit it, Kuma. There are some people in this community that would have been fine without Brawl, and think that anything other than Melee is unworthy of being called a Smash Bros. sequel. Maybe not a lot, but there were some.

Was I being stubborn about this? If so, I didn't mean to imply that, considering we still have people that play Super Turbo and that game is approaching 20 years old. All I'm saying is that the accusations made that Melee players want/wanted Melee 2.0 is not understanding just what some players wanted. The complaints I see from Melee players is that a lot of the depth was removed in Brawl. If anything, they just wanted the next Smash to be deep, challenging, rewarding, and exciting.

I myself did not want a Smash game where it felt like there wasn't much of a reward in anything and that items were either broken for being too good or broken as in they suck.

 

[augustoflores]

http://wii.ign.com/articles/117/1171214p1.html

has everyone taken a look at this IGN article on Smash bros.?

 

[Starphoenix]

http://wii.ign.com/articles/117/1171214p1.html

has everyone taken a look at this IGN article on Smash bros.?

Such an awful article. How many times do I have to hear someone begging for that awful, overdramatic, overstated, character that is Cloud? He isn't even FROM the Nintendo era of Final Fantasy, let alone been on a Nintendo console! This just becomes unbearable sometimes... The only SquareEnix characters that have a shot are Chocobo/Black Mage and/or Slime/Hero.

 

[Big-Cat]

Just read and I agree with the majority of it. The article does raise an interesting question though. Do we change up the roster to the point that we change up who's in the game in the name of diversity?

That was one of the main things behind MvC3's roster (and Megaman's exclusion). Could we see a repeat with Smash. If so, who would be considered the "staples" of the Smash series?

 

[Starphoenix]

Just read and I agree with the majority of it. The article does raise an interesting question though. Do we change up the roster to the point that we change up who's in the game in the name of diversity?

That was one of the main things behind MvC3's roster (and Megaman's exclusion). Could we see a repeat with Smash. If so, who would be considered the "staples" of the Smash series?

Mario, Link, Kirby, Donkey Kong, Yoshi, Pikachu, Fox, Samus, Captain Falcon, Ness, Marth, Pit, Mr. Game and Watch, Olimar, and Luigi are the staples in my mind.

And I disagree. I don't think it is necessary to switch around characters for the sake of change. Especially when there is barely anyone left to fill those spots. Just build upon whom is there, maybe change some of the "flavor of the month" characters. That is about it.

 

[lordvaati]

Such an awful article. How many times do I have to hear someone begging for that awful, overdramatic, overstated, character that is Cloud? He isn't even FROM the Nintendo era of Final Fantasy, let alone been on a Nintendo console! This just becomes unbearable sometimes... The only SquareEnix characters that have a shot are Chocobo/Black Mage and/or Slime/Hero.

technically he was on once (Chain Of Memories for GBA).

and Chrono would be a good character rep as well.

 

[augustoflores]

MetalHanzo drew that image in the article... i don't know if he was told to draw Megaman X and Cloud Strife by IGN or not.... d... did you just say Chocobo? GGHHHH!!!! did you just say SLIME!!??

 

[Starphoenix]

technically he was on once (Chain Of Memories for GBA).

and Chrono would be a good character rep as well.

Technically you are correct, but I don't think that is exactly in context with Sakurai's original rule...

As for Chrono, he isn't that good of a choice. Sure to those of us who have memories from times past enjoy him. Really though, he isn't relevant; considering the entire series itself is dead.

MetalHanzo drew that image in the article... i don't know if he was told to draw Megaman X and Cloud Strife by IGN or not.... d... did you just say Chocobo? GGHHHH!!!! did you just say SLIME!!??

Yes I did. And unlike all the Cloud fanboys I have evidence and logic that support those two. I'm tired of sounding like a broken record but I mean what I say.

 

[Big-Cat]

Mario, Link, Kirby, Donkey Kong, Yoshi, Pikachu, Fox, Samus, Captain Falcon, Ness, Marth, Pit, Mr. Game and Watch, Olimar, and Luigi are the staples in my mind.

And I disagree. I don't think it is necessary to switch around characters for the sake of change. Especially when there is barely anyone left to fill those spots. Just build upon whom is there, maybe change some of the "flavor of the month" characters. That is about it.

It's not just for the sake of change (if it's even that), it's about having a diverse, balanced roster. You could argue that characters like Wolf, Lucas, Ike, etc. don't add a whole lot to the roster in terms of different playstyles, or they could if they were given revamps.

And I'd include Jigglypuff to that list. She may not be "in", but she's been in every Smash so far.

 

[Kuraudo]

Technically you are correct, but I don't think that is what exactly the context of Sakurai's original rule...

As for Chrono, he isn't that good of a choice. Sure to those of us who have memories from times past enjoy him. Really though, he isn't relevant; considering the entire series itself is dead.



Yes I did. And unlike all the Cloud fanboys I have evidence and logic that support those two. I'm tired of sounding like a broken record but I mean what I say.

You have evidence and logic that support Slime and Chocobo. Really.

I'm not holding my breath for Cloud due to his chances, but I am sorry. Chocobos are a staple of Final Fantasy to be sure. But to represent Square-Enix if they had a character included in one of the biggest crossover fighters Nintendo's produced? No offense to the Chocobo or Slime, but those are Goomba & Koopa status characters as far as I'm concerned.

R.O.B. came as a surprise to me and I was naive enough to think that I'd lump him into the same mold as the two you mentioned because I was mad my other favorites didn't get in (Nintendo favorites, mind you), but he IS important. Anyway, not to get off topic...

I'm sorry. But this evidence of yours that they'd have a better shot (asides a smartass remark being that they've been in more Nintendo games then Cloud has) better be good. First time I come into this thread to see something potentially cool come up and you shoot down Cloud and replace him with, well, as I said, Goomba & Koopa status characters. In my mind, at least.

By all technicalities, Cloud Strife DOES count, regardless of his small boss battle & summon appearance in Chain of Memories. And so far as I recall, though Snake has appeared with Nintendo before, not once has the face of Big Boss (which is used for Snake in Brawl) or the appearance from Metal Gear Solid 2 ever made an appearance as a 3rd Party character. That's been Sony and Microsoft's privelege really to have that version of him.

Sorry if this seemed like a personal lash and I'm not trying to insult you or anything, but the Chocobo & Slime thing really got me scratching my head, is all. And to emphasize, I am not holding my breath on the idea of Cloud being in the next game if we're getting one. Just saiyan.

[EDIT]

And yes, Snake Eater is coming to the 3DS now, but Snake in his MGS2 appearance with Big Boss' face wasn't around with Nintendo at the time of Brawl's announcement.

 

[Big-Cat]

Please come by more often, Kuraudo. We could use someone who doesn't look like they made an account to make a fanboy wishlist.

 

[Starphoenix]

It's not just for the sake of change (if it's even that), it's about having a diverse, balanced roster. You could argue that characters like Wolf, Lucas, Ike, etc. don't add a whole lot to the roster in terms of different playstyles, or they could if they were given revamps.

And I'd include Jigglypuff to that list. She may not be "in", but she's been in every Smash so far.

Kuma, I really do respect you and all. But sometimes you really need to stop looking at the Smash Bros. series through the Capcom lenses. lol

Yes, some of the characters could have been given better differentiation between the characters they were modeled after. Truly though they are quite different, at least in Wolf and Ike's cases' (how Ike even is thrown into this bunch is beyond me). Only Falco, Gannondorf, and Lucas have issues with being a little uninspired. For Falco, all that is needed is a couple unique specials of his own. Gannondorf needs some magic attacks incorporated into his character, have his Warlock Punch changed to the magic ball attack that has appeared in about every game. Lucas isn't really that bad... Just change PK Fire to PK Ground or Love or something.

Considering Jigglypuff came very close to being removed, I'm not going to list her as a staple...

You have evidence and logic that support Slime and Chocobo. Really.

I'm not holding my breath for Cloud due to his chances, but I am sorry. Chocobos are a staple of Final Fantasy to be sure. But to represent Square-Enix if they had a character included in one of the biggest crossover fighters Nintendo's produced? No offense to the Chocobo or Slime, but those are Goomba & Koopa status characters as far as I'm concerned.

R.O.B. came as a surprise to me and I was naive enough to think that I'd lump him into the same mold as the two you mentioned because I was mad my other favorites didn't get in (Nintendo favorites, mind you), but he IS important. Anyway, not to get off topic...

I'm sorry. But this evidence of yours that they'd have a better shot (asides a smartass remark being that they've been in more Nintendo games then Cloud has) better be good. First time I come into this thread to see something potentially cool come up and you shoot down Cloud and replace him with, well, as I said, Goomba & Koopa status characters. In my mind, at least.

By all technicalities, Cloud Strife DOES count, regardless of his small boss battle & summon appearance in Chain of Memories. And so far as I recall, though Snake has appeared with Nintendo before, not once has the face of Big Boss (which is used for Snake in Brawl) or the appearance from Metal Gear Solid 2 ever made an appearance as a 3rd Party character. That's been Sony and Microsoft's privelege really to have that version of him.

Sorry if this seemed like a personal lash and I'm not trying to insult you or anything, but the Chocobo & Slime thing really got me scratching my head, is all. And to emphasize, I am not holding my breath on the idea of Cloud being in the next game if we're getting one. Just saiyan.

[EDIT]

And yes, Snake Eater is coming to the 3DS now, but Snake in his MGS2 appearance with Big Boss' face wasn't around with Nintendo at the time of Brawl's announcement.

For starters, outside of Sonic and Megaman, Chocobo has been the highest requested third party character. Being number one during the Melee polls (if you need the link I'll be more than happy to provide you with it). The idea you and many people do not seem to understand is the fact that these characters are mascots. You know, kind of like Pikachu? They aren't simply random enemies like you wish to trivialize them to. They are popular so far as to having their own spin-off series and games.

As for Snake there is a difference between him and Cloud. Snake was a personal favor, even than Kojima had to jump through hoops just to get him in. One of those being the release of the Twin Snakes for the GC. So his situation is different. Cloud is a character that has very little to do with Nintendo and most of the choices that have the best chances are those with a strong history with Nintendo. Early Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest have that.

 

[Starphoenix]

Sorry, dbl post

 

[Kuraudo]

Sure thing. Wouldn't mind seeing what this list is and the validity of it. It's just peculiar to swallow in the prospect of a Chocobo representing the entirety of Square-Enix. Whereas Konami was Snake, and SEGA was Sonic. Their biggest stars. I'm seeing things realistically here with THAT scale of importance. But I wouldn't mind seeing this list.

 

[DarkShadow20]

With all of these IGN articles about SSB, it makes me think they know something about SSB4.

 

[lordvaati]

not gonna add fuel to the fire or anything, but:

Chocobo wsn't even a playable character in Mario Hoops(shocking as it was).

that's all Im gonna say now.

 

[ChronoBound]

With all of these IGN articles about SSB, it makes me think they know something about SSB4.

Even I am getting suspicious. I just thought of something. Kid Icarus Uprising was originally intended to be a launch window 3DS title. Now its looking that it will not be released until August at the earliest. Development for this game started in early 2009, and was probably the first (or one of the first) 3DS titles to enter development. He is looking now to have spent more time developing Kid Icarus Uprising than he did for Super Smash Bros. Brawl.

There is the possibility that development for Kid Icarus Uprising slowed down due to Sakurai and his team putting something together for another project, which is to say Smash 4. This is not likely, but IGN "sometimes" gets the scoop on some things early. Perhaps there is something behind IGN's Smash Bros. hype. It would be surreal to be seeing some new playable characters for the Smash Bros. series for the first time in years, especially when I have mentally prepared myself for the game not to be unveiled until next year. My only disappointment with it being unveiled in the next two weeks is that I did not prepare any of my analyses. Oh well.

As to the IGN article, the author is an idiot merely on the grounds of thinking characters like Wario and Mr. Game & Watch should be on the chopping block.

 

[Thunder_slash]

If we think it, 3rd party characters will be important characters in their series. If we apply this to Square Enix games, there are 2 main chances for including characters in smash:

1- Sora (Kingdom Hearts): If we count the 3DS version, we have 3 videogames of this series on nintendo consoles.
2- Either Cecil or Ceodore (Final Fantasy IV series): both games, FFIV and The After Years, are pretty good, and this is also the FF main series with most influence in Nintendo consoles (not counting FF Chronicles).

 

[•Col•]

If we think it, 3rd party characters will be important characters in their series. If we apply this to Square Enix games, there are 2 main chances for including characters in smash:

1- Sora (Kingdom Hearts): If we count the 3DS version, we have 3 videogames of this series on nintendo consoles.
2- Either Cecil or Ceodore (Final Fantasy IV series): both games, FFIV and The After Years, are pretty good, and this is also the FF main series with most influence in Nintendo consoles (not counting FF Chronicles).

Sora is owned by Disney.... *cough*

Black Mage is probably the most likely candidate if they go the mascot route. If they go with an actual character, I'm thinking it'd be one of the generic Warriors of Light type of deal.

 

[LemonManX]

http://wii.ign.com/articles/117/1171214p1.html

has everyone taken a look at this IGN article on Smash bros.?

As average as that article was overall, I was pretty happy to see another supporter for a Ridley appearance. Make it happen this time, Sakurai.

Apart from that, the idea of mixing up the roster and keeping staple characters is interesting. But is tricky, I mean some people far prefer Lucas to Ness? Who do you keep? Risk pissing off one fanbase over the other? Etc. Sakurai will be probably be stepping carefully for SSB4... one thing is for sure, if it is teased at E3 I will absolutely explode from excitement.

As far as new third-party additions, it might be too early to tell. I think there is a chance that Snake and Sonic might come back, but it's too early to tell. For new ones I would love to see Chibiterasu from Okamiden surface as a playable character <3

EDIT: I'll also continue to dream of a Roy re-colour with special fiery touches being added to Marth so I can continue to play as the man himself that I've been living through texture hacks to use in Brawl.

 

[SmashChu]

I don't think anyone wanted Melee 2.0 per se. Rather, they wanted a sequel to Melee that wasn't a watered down game. From Smash 64 to Melee, it was clear that most of the concepts in SSB were expanded on/refined for Melee while new stuff was added.

How was Brawl watered down? It added more characters, stages, items had a ton of music, new modes including a huge adventure mode. Not to mention online. How is it watered down.

Here's the problem though.

1. I think there some complaints in some reviews that Brawl wasn't different enough in the gameplay department.
2. Brawl has sold the most because it's on a console that has not only sold way more than the Gamecube, but is also the best selling console this generation. Not only that, but proportionally speaking, Melee sold more on the Gamecube (don't know how much the bundle contributed though) than Brawl has on the Wii.

1)Reviews always say it needs to be different, but customers really don't care. Pokemon is a great example. It never changes besides adding more and it always does stellar.
2)First, you have to look at system sales and games sales independently. Wind Waker also did better proportionally than Twilight Princess, but more people still bought and played TP over Wind Waker. That is what is more important to look at.

Well, there aren't enough games on the 3DS that people want to buy. The PSP, on the other hand, has six years worth of games available to buy with the PSP. Once games like Zelda and Kid Icarus come rolling in, expect higher sales.

The 3DS launched with Nintendogs. At the very least, it should be getting old DS users, but it's not.

 

[ryuu seika]

It costs twice what the original DS did, or there abouts. Of course people aren't as prepared to buy it.
I plan to buy the thing myself but I'm not shelling out over two hundred quid when it hardly has any games I want yet.

 

[Big-Cat]

Same here. Not only that, but the battery life on the 3DS isn't exactly enticing. I've decided to just wait for the inevitable new model to come out.

Anyway, Smash wasn't watered down for what you mentioned. Rather, it was watered down from the gameplay standpoint. A lot of stuff such as eight way air dodging, reduced hitstun, dash dancing, etc. were all removed instead of either being simplified/easier to do.

And talk to the competitive Pokemon players. They will tell you that the games have changed between every generation.

 

[Thunder_slash]

Sora is owned by Disney.... *cough*

Even if he is a disney character, he has good chances of joining Smash.
Also, a good name for next smash would be "Crush".

 

[Shorts]

More is not bad. Smash Brothers was built on the same core for the last three games and no one has had a problem.

I think no one has a problem with smash bros at it's very essence, but a lot of people have a problem with it's execution in Brawl. It's sloppy, repetitive and nothing more than a party game. I don't have fun playing Brawl with other hardcore gamers.

Brawl has sold the best of the three and has a high amount of play time (being beaten for the title of most played Wii game by Monster Hunter Tri).

Only because the Wii in General has outsold the GC. Someone should do the math on how many Wii's were sold, and how many people actually bought smash vs. How many gamcubes were sold and how many people bought Melee.

About 33% of Gamecube owners bought Melee, and only 10% of Wii owners bought Brawl.

If it aint broke.......

But it is broke. When the hardcore fans of a game series are threatening to stop buying, it's pretty darn broke.

And the Pokemon comment is silly.

 

[DarkShadow20]

But it is broke. When the hardcore fans of a game series are threatening to stop buying, it's pretty darn broke.

I'm sure Nintendo cares about the small percentage of "hardcore fans" that won't buy another SSB game unless it's a carbon copy of Melee.

 

[•Col•]

Even if he is a disney character, he has good chances of joining Smash.
Also, a good name for next smash would be "Crush".

But..... He doesn't have good chances. Like at all. o_O In fact, he probably has some of the worst chances of any character (that has appeared on a Nintendo console, of course).

 

[Big-Cat]

I'm sure Nintendo cares about the small percentage of "hardcore fans" that won't buy another SSB game unless it's a carbon copy of Melee.

If I had nickel for every time I heard this.....

 

[ToiseOfChoice]

This is not likely, but IGN "sometimes" gets the scoop on some things early. Perhaps there is something behind IGN's Smash Bros. hype.

This isn't one of those times. Smash-related articles pull in a huge amount of hits and IGN is running off of the same "new console, new Smash" feeling that everyone else gets. Can't say I blame them, though.

When the hardcore fans of a game series are threatening to stop buying, it's pretty darn broke.

When 1% of your fanbase whines about how X wasn't enough like Y, you can safely ignore them.

People still complain that no Mario Kart will ever be like SMK/MK64/DD/whatever too.

Frankly, **** 'em.

 

[Big-Cat]

I think it's a safe bet to say it's more than that, Toise. I have some friends (since they're the only ones I bring up Brawl around) that have told me they disliked Brawl because it's slow and floaty and preferred Melee over to Brawl. These guys don't play any of the Smash games competitively, so it's not like only "hardcore" players dislike Brawl.

 

[Spydr Enzo]

I've missed a lot, and so there are a few things that I have to mention...

1) There is a difference between an unveil or official announcement, and a simple mention of the game. Honestly, I think that the chances of us seeing an SSB4 unveil at E3 this year is highly unlikely. The most I am expecting in regards to Smash is a simple mention of a "new Smash being 'in development' for the new console," or something like that. Really, thats all I'm hoping for.

2) It is very possible that Sakurai could end up directing the development of the next Smash. I have heard him say he's not planning on any future titles, and I also feel like he really wants to take a break from the series. But remember, he never planned on developing Brawl until Iwata announced a Smash that will utilize the online capabilities of the Wii. Even then, if Sakurai had not accepted, Brawl would have been a Melee port with online. It seems to me like Smash, don't be surprised if we get a 3DS port or remake of SSB64 or maybe even Melee rather than a real SSB4. There is also definitely a chance that Nintendo will decide to hand Smash over to a new developer, but that isn't to say Sakurai won't play a part in it's development. Really, we have no way to tell what will happen here, so I find no reason to debate it outside of your own bias.

3) Kuma, I admire your ideas and your interest in the gameplay of the series, but I really don't think you understand that Smash is not supposed to be like Marvel vs. Capcom, or Soul Callibur, or BlazBlue or any other fighting game. Heck, there are tons of people who even hate the idea of Smash being called a fighting game. The point is, Smash doesn't need this or that just because other fighter have it, because Smash was never intended to be like other fighters. I've said this before, but this is Super Smash Bros., not Super Street Smash Fighter Bros.

4) ^^That being said, I am not saying that I think the gameplay of the series is 100% perfect as it is, because it is not. It was closer to perfect with Melee. Although I never play competitively, I enjoy the quick, chaotic gameplay, and learning new advanced techniques to beat my buddies, and all that great stuff. The slow, shallow, floaty gameplay of Brawl was a step-down from Melee, and I'm hoping things like a more balanced roster, faster gameplay, and advanced techniques return. A complete change in the formula is something I don't want to see, however. I like the simple formula, and so do millions of other fans. The gameplay formula is the reason so many people fell in love with the series in the first place, so why change it? Sure, add a couple variables in there, but don't ruin it. And as always, content matters more in a game like Super Smash Bros. than the actual fighting gameplay does, whether or not it can be considered a fighting game.

 

[ryuu seika]

Same here. Not only that, but the battery life on the 3DS isn't exactly enticing. I've decided to just wait for the inevitable new model to come out.

I hear the battery itself is better tan any model of DS so I suspect the battery life is fine for DS games. It's only the new 3DS stuff that has 3-5 hours max.
Still, it's hardly a good selling point.

 

[Shorts]

When 1% of your fanbase whines about how X wasn't enough like Y, you can safely ignore them.

People still complain that no Mario Kart will ever be like SMK/MK64/DD/whatever too.

Frankly, **** 'em.

I'm not whining that brawl isn't similar to melee, I'm whining brawl was basic and didn't appeal to me. It's definitely not 1% of people. My ten year old cousin prefers Brawl over Melee because "It's easier" a child is hardly a hardcore gamer. Not everyone who plays casually wants a game as simple as Wii Sports.

 

[ToiseOfChoice]

@Kuma: I miss when you had white font.

Not trying to say that 99% of Brawl fans are in love with the game or anything, just that it's ridiculous to think that the Melee-only crowd is anywhere nearly as important as the general Smash crowd or new blood.

 

[Shorts]

You're right they aren't. I'm not arguing thatr they are. I'm just saying that a good portion f the General Smash crowd who has been around for Melee and Brawl are in the same boat as me. I don't want Melee 2.0. But I really don't want Brawl 2.0. I would prefer a more complex brand new smash. I like Melee more than brawl, but it doesn't mean that Melee's formula is the only one I want to see for future smashes.

 

[Big-Cat]

I'm in the same boat as Shortie. I don't want Melee 2.0 and I definitely don't want Brawl 2.0, but what I do want is a deep, balanced Smash title.

 

[Kantrip]

I agree completely.