Pretty in pink or true in blue, Krystal for Sm4sh!

[Deleted member]

Would you guys mind if Krystal was Fox's alt ? I mean, she would be playable...sorta. It would be a waste of potential, but at least she'd be in.

As long as she has her own voice, I'd be all right with it despite all the wasted potential.

 

[IanTheGamer]

As long as she has her own voice, I'd be all right with it despite all the wasted potential.

She won't be wasted, she has too much potential for Sakurai to ignore

 

[Deleted member]

She won't be wasted, she has too much potential for Sakurai to ignore

We see the potential...but the ultimate question is...does Sakurai see it? The man is unpredictable, y'know.

 

[TheRandomCities4]

For me, it depends on whether or not Sakurai would pay homage to her origins (Dinosaur Planet/Star Fox Adventures). If not, she'd probably end up being a semi/quasi clone or an alt of Fox.

 

[~Krystal~]

Usually, fast characters tend to be good in SSB, and Krystal wouldn't feel right if she was slow as molasses. So yeah, she could be a good character, especially with her range. Though it's far too early to say anything considering she is but a mere possibility at the moment.

Would you guys mind if Krystal was Fox's alt ? I mean, she would be playable...sorta. It would be a waste of potential, but at least she'd be in.

I've been on record saying I would accept her as a Fox alt. It's a hell of a lot better than zip or AT status. Don't get me wrong, though. I don't want to see it come to that.

 

[Deleted member]

On the plus side if she is indeed a Fox ALT, then there will be mods where her moveset will be change to actually suit her (For some reason, I imagine they'll use the same engine format Brawl had...don't know why)

 

[Masonomace]

I feel the reason that not a lot of star fox content has been shown is because there isn't any.. I feel we have been left for dead....

While I feel for you on this, WE GOT A SECTOR-Z-ESQUE STAGE! I'M SO FLIPPIN' HYPED FOR THIS, MY FAV SMASH 64 STAGE OF ALL TIME! If I had to stop here I'd say I'm content with StarFox series representation. . .by stages only.

I'm okay with the Krystal alternate gender costume swap, but only for the very few positive reasons said above by other users. Making Krystal an alt of Fox is mostly a bad move, but hey it's like ~Krystal~ said, it's at least better than AT ? Trophy status.

 

[MagnesD3]

While I feel for you on this, WE GOT A SECTOR-Z-ESQUE STAGE! I'M SO FLIPPIN' HYPED FOR THIS, MY FAV SMASH 64 STAGE OF ALL TIME! If I had to stop here I'd say I'm content with StarFox series representation. . .by stages only.

I'm okay with the Krystal alternate gender costume swap, but only for the very few positive reasons said above by other users. Making Krystal an alt of Fox is mostly a bad move, but hey it's like ~Krystal~ said, it's at least better than AT ? Trophy status.

If we lose wolf what does it matter...

 

[Masonomace]

If we lose wolf what does it matter...

Do you think Playtime's over?
What's the matter scared?

Don't be scared, Starfox's characters once set in stone for one Smash Brothers isntallment, never left since. Wolf has a good chance of returning, & IF Wolf is cut, & IF Krystal is playable, play on with your spirit through her.

If anyone should be removed from Smash Brothers, it's falco.

 

[AnoA]

Sakurai can simply re-use the brawl models and tweak them here and there. I fear not for Falco's and Wolf's chances. As for Krystal, supposing most models were already done, making hers shouldn't be that much trouble.

 

[ghastmine]

Well excluding weekends (nothing happens on them) how much more potd/days left till japanesse launch do we have?

 

[MagnesD3]

I need

Do you think Playtime's over?
What's the matter scared?

Don't be scared, Starfox's characters once set in stone for one Smash Brothers isntallment, never left since. Wolf has a good chance of returning, & IF Wolf is cut, & IF Krystal is playable, play on with your spirit through her.

If anyone should be removed from Smash Brothers, it's falco.

I need my villain. TEAM STAR WOLF HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

 

[~Krystal~]

Well excluding weekends (nothing happens on them) how much more potd/days left till japanesse launch do we have?

Evidently, 15 more days. The game launches on the 13th of September in Japan.

 

[IanTheGamer]

Does Sakurai do POTD's on weekends?

 

[Jason the Yoshi]

Does Sakurai do POTD's on weekends?

Sadly no, he does not

 

[XStarWarriorX]

Spoiler

It'll be really sad if a moveset like this is ignored, the moveset is there sakurai, use it.

The wait for release is killing me hopefully she'll be confirmed. If not and we get the characters solely from the "you know what, we cant talk about it here" then its gonna be disappointing all around.

 

[TheDarkKnightNoivern]

Usually, fast characters tend to be good in SSB, and Krystal wouldn't feel right if she was slow as molasses. So yeah, she could be a good character, especially with her range. Though it's far too early to say anything considering she is but a mere possibility at the moment.

Would you guys mind if Krystal was Fox's alt ? I mean, she would be playable...sorta. It would be a waste of potential, but at least she'd be in.

I see her speed lying somewhere between Fox and Wolf, same with her power but being lighter, more agile and having more range than either of them

If she were to be she would likely be given her own slot and made a clone anyway, just like lucina

 

[MagnesD3]

Krystal as an alt would be an insult imo.

 

[IanTheGamer]

Krystal as an alt would be an insult imo.

Yeah, it would, but I doubt he will do that, Sakurai is actually quite a genius when it comes to designing characters, I'm sure he does research on moveset before he puts newcomers in Smash, (Lucina was an accident), and that works in Krystal's favor, in addition to her being a female character

 

[Princess Toady]

Still... Better than nothing in my opinion, especially if alts have their own voices and stuff...

 

[ImOnlyHereToTalkStarFox]

Sigh ...Like cities said what we get on the 3ds release doesn't have to be the final roster. On top of that there is a possibility of dlc. PLUS the ya know what isn't proven.

Keep believing in Krystal.

 

[IanTheGamer]

If Sakurai didn't see Krystal's potential, why did he tease her in Brawl, maybe he wanted to add her but didn't have enough time

 

[ImOnlyHereToTalkStarFox]

If Sakurai didn't see Krystal's potential, why did he tease her in Brawl, maybe he wanted to add her but didn't have enough time

I agree Krystal has something going for her don't let the bias of the smashboards cloud your mind. That tease shouldn't go ignored no matter what these people say. I believe sakurai knows that we want Krystal In Smash Bros. Krystal may not have the popularity of for say ridley, but she makes up for it with being the most popular female pre brawl (according to the polls that were shown) which got her into that Easter egg which I hope to believe will get her inclusion into ssb4....hey better then some of these wanted newcomers.

 

[IanTheGamer]

I agree Krystal has something going for her don't let the bias of the smashboards cloud your mind. That tease shouldn't go ignored no matter what these people say. I believe sakurai knows that we want Krystal In Smash Bros. Krystal may not have the popularity of for say ridley, but she makes up for it with being the most popular female pre brawl (according to the polls that were shown) which got her into that Easter egg which I hope to believe will get her inclusion into ssb4....hey better then some of these wanted newcomers.

It's really no different then the Pit tease in Melee, which means Sakurai is probably aware of her, and have you guys heard of the phrase "History has a way of repeating itself", well that could be the case for Krystal in SSB4

 

[TheRandomCities4]

By Jove, I think I've finally got it!

(Disclaimers are at the bottom of this post)

I believe I just found (and remembered) an actual piece of evidence that further suggests the possibility of this new theory taking place. No less, it's something Sakurai said. It's also something, ironically, most of us (those who've seen it) discredited as a slip up, or just something completely insignificant.

Do any of you remember when Sakurai said he treats Smash on the 3DS and Smash on the Wii U like Smash 4 and Smash 5 respectively?

http://kotaku.com/an-in-depth-chat-with-the-genius-behind-super-smash-bro-530744390

I'll wait a moment to see if you can see where I'm going with this---and why it's potentially very important to the new theory...

Here's the theory for those who haven't seen it yet, by the way:

Wait a minute...

I feel another theory coming on! This one is significant---not only for Krystal, either. In fact, with this theory we will effectively have a 3-4 month buffer for further speculation even after the 3DS version releases---because it has a possibility which cannot be denied. It's actually more possible than the idea of another playtester withholding their information...

Thematically, this theory is business-influenced. Keep this in mind.

Even if this new leak is true...

Hear me out; there is still hope yet!

All of these recent leaks---and all of this recent information (including Ken's knowledge and the info I came across)---pertain solely to the 3DS version, correct? This makes sense, as the 3DS version is releasing first, and soon. However, we're assuming that the 3DS information---character-wise, especially---is intrinsically bound with the Wii U version. This is because we were only ever accustomed to one game releasing at a time---not 2.

Hence, what if there are different unlockable characters for each version?

Now wait, I know what you might say: "but Sakurai said both versions will have the same roster!"

Allow me to harken back to an older theory I came up with---specifically, something I said within it. This was the theory regarding the dual reveal with Krystal and Ridley. I mentioned, under the conditions that presented themselves at the time, that Retro Studios could have denied working on the Star Fox/Metroid crossover videogame. However, they still would have been truthfully denying that rumor if they were working on a Smash Brothers newcomer cutscene, because it wouldn't be a videogame. Now, I don't believe that theory will happen, but let's get back to the theory at hand.

The same thing can apply here. Allow me to explain:

Back in the April Smash Direct, Sakurai mentioned that "both versions will have the same roster." This was to be expected. However, he said something else that has only just now piqued my curiosity (beware, I'm paraphrasing here---but I'm 100% confident he said something in the exact context).

Sakurai: There will be cross-platform features between the 3DS and the Wii U. I will go into detail about these later.

Thing is, he has yet to explain these cross-platform features between both versions of Sm4sh. This could be considered obvious, since the nature of the Wii U version is currently unknown---in almost its entirety. They don't want the Wii U version's content to be known because they're currently pushing to sell the 3DS version. This is something we've previously established. This is obvious enough through their marketing, and their modality in releasing information (all of the game modes, among other things).

Point in case, what if one of the cross-platform features allow you to transfer version-designated unlockable characters between the 3DS and Wii U?

If this were the case, certain unlockable characters could be initially unlocked on one version---only to be transferred to the other version in quasi-DLC likeness. This would effectively allow both versions to have the same roster.

Thus, Sakurai wouldn't be lying or going back upon his word.

Yes, this sounds kind of like an evil business move by Nintendo---but it wouldn't be any more evil than reserving these characters for the DLC (like I said in an older theory, but now I don't think that's the case).

Again, I'll say it: Nintendo is a business. Not only do they have to think about our interests, but theirs as well.

Speaking of DLC, if the characters from the leak as DLC are what we get, this theory could still work. The DLC could be reserved for characters they didn't have enough developmental time to include in the initial roster---which is also why having veterans as the bulk of the DLC makes sense. If this is the case, I don't think these characters will cost anything (don't take my word on that specifically, though). These DLC characters could be revealed between the release of both versions---starting after the 3DS version's release and leading up to the Wii U one.

Now let's shift gears for a second and re-examine the franchises and their representations in this leak.

Hmm... Notice anything odd?

All of these franchises are receiving newcomers except for The Legend of Zelda, Kirby, Donkey Kong, Star Fox, and Metroid.

Actually, that's not what I found odd. This is:
Mario is receiving two unique newcomers.

Well, that fact alone isn't what makes it odd.

It's when you combine that fact with those other 5 franchises not receiving anything. That is the oddity---an oddity that can be explained with this theory!

Before I further pursue that route, I feel I need to briefly remind everyone of all the teases Sakurai has made. Think back to all of his teases---including the ones that were never specifically denoted one way or the other. What I'm trying to say here is that Sakurai is a troll---but he's also more than that. He's aware of us and our interests.

I also feel I need to remind everyone that every single franchise received a newcomer in Brawl. All of them. Heck, we even added a new franchise---Kid Icarus! Not only that, but Brawl had a singular team, and they had to work on the massive Subspace Emissary. Their team in general was smaller, too.

Smash 4 has multiple teams, composed of multiple developer groups, like Team Sora and Namco Bandai. Brawl didn't have that.

Let's shift gears again and examine the marketing for Smash 4. Smash, outside of being its own game, is about raising awareness for franchises, not characters per se. Keep this in mind as you read the following question:

Have you noticed a particular theme in Sm4sh's marketing? Well...

Does East vs. West ring a bell? It certainly should...

Look back to E3 2014. Do you remember that hilariously epic opener with Smash? If you do (which you should)...

Who was fighting in the cutscene?

Correct. It was Reggie and Iwata.

Do you know the title of their official positions?

Again, correct. Reggie is the President of Nintendo of America. Iwata is the President of Nintendo of Japan. East vs. West strikes again.

Let's look at this a different way. Look at the colors chosen for both Sm4sh versions. The 3DS is red, and the Wii U is blue.

Why do you think they chose these colors?

There was no real need. Was it a design choice? Or is it something on a much deeper value...? Perhaps these colors are meant to represent the East and West respectively. You should understand that these respective colors are more associated with their respective side, especially on a cultural level. You should also know that Japan adheres to culture strenuously. Using such representation over their marketing for Sm4sh isn't at all far-fetched.

Now remember back to when I said Smash is used to raise awareness for franchises. Look back at the newcomers revealed so far before the 3DS release. Look to the ones that are included in the leak---specifically Shulk and Chorus Men. Notice anything?

Firstly, no one can officially say that these characters were wanted more in the East or the West.

However, when we look at the newcomers from the perspective of franchises, things begin to clarify.

Pokemon, Mario, Kid Icarus, Fire Emblem, and Xenoblade have a heavier influence over the East than the other franchises that have yet to receive newcomers. All of these franchises (and supposedly Xenoblade) are receiving newcomers, while it seems the others aren't.

Note how I didn't say that these franchises were more requested by the East to have newcomers. Why? Requests don't matter.

Well, they do, in part. But not full.

It's about influence.

So, why is this whole East vs. West theme so important?

Easy. Can you see where I'm going?

Donkey Kong, Metroid, The Legend of Zelda, and Star Fox all have a heavier influence in the West than the East.

Theory in point:

What if newcomers from these franchises are held to be the Wii U version-designated unlockables?

Interesting...

What about Little Mac, though?

Good question. Fortunately, I have a theoretical rebuttal:

Little Mac was just a "taste" of what's to come, without spoiling the surprise.

It adds up so well. As a bonus, it makes too much sense business-wise...

And now, ladies and gentlemen, the pièce de résistance...

What major factor drives the sales for Smash?

Correct. Characters. Why is this important? Simple.

Look carefully at the gap between the sales dates of the 3DS and Wii U versions.

Why would the Wii U version have the exact same roster as the 3DS version---especially if it releases 3-4 months afterwards?

Bringing the theory into full circle, it highlights a business perspective: this would be horrible marketing. Sure, Nintendo is known for their strange marketing, but considering the TLC they've done with the East vs. West theme, this time looks to be different.

Anyways, the Wii U version wouldn't have enough incentive to match the sales of the 3DS version if it didn't have these version-designated unlockables. There are many more 3DS consoles out there than there are Wii U consoles. The Wii U version needs something spectacular to stand out as opposed to the 3DS version---and game modes alone won't cut it. I can guarantee that.

Final question:

What is Nintendo's goal for Sm4sh, marketing wise?

Simple. They want to execute plans that would accrue the most sales for all of their Sm4sh peripherals.

We're still alive, guys!



Phew! That was a long one.

I guess that means I'm back...

Back, to stay.

Still, if this theory comes out to be true, my reaction will be similar to this:

inb4 court case against Krystal

PS: If you haven't noticed, all of these 3DS leaks, if true, can easily serve to strengthen this theory. These leaks seem to be only a part of the bigger puzzle---the Sm4sh puzzle. The Wii-U designated unlockables would serve to finish the puzzle rather nicely!

So sit back, and relax until all is really said and done---at least until after we know everything about Sm4sh, including the Wii U version.

Interestingly enough, I can't believe it took me this long to come to this conclusion. It's like it required a combination of all my past theories, ironically enough. If this is true, Sakurai is more clever than we thought.

Not to mention it would be the biggest troll move ever:

"Oh that was the full roster... Nah, I'm just kidding. All these other characters are included on the Wii U version, but you guys won't know until much later. I want you guys to squirm for as long as possible" --Masahiro Sakurai, 2014

Can you see why this information may be important to the theory?

If not, allow me to elaborate:

Firstly, while keeping the new theory in mind, this is evidence that both of the games won't be the same. Now, in a general context, this could seem insignificant. We should already know that both games will have different features already, what with all the different game modes (feasibly) and different stages.

However, what kind of differences would warrant the 3DS and Wii U versions to be called "Smash 4 and Smash 5" by Sakurai? Would the differences be limited to only the game modes and stages? I frankly don't believe so. By saying this, Sakurai has effectively taken on two iterations of Smash at the same time.

I think the differences include the different hidden unlockable characters in both versions as well.

I'm going to sidestep here briefly to clarify something I feel I didn't in the theory. When I said that both versions could have different unlockable characters to be transferred from the Wii U version to the 3DS version (and vice-versa), I meant these would probably those few hidden unlockable characters---not the characters we will know before the 3DS launch. I think the characters known before the 3DS launch are going to be readily available in both versions. Whether some of these already known characters will be unlockable or not won't mean anything. I'm referring specifically to those characters that are hidden (or potentially made for the initial roster on one of the versions---the roster on one version before transferring the character data to and/or fro).

Back to the differences in both versions.

Imagine this perspective:

What if both games were to be released at the same time, instead? If this were the case, I would be inclined to believe that each version would share the exact same roster, as the time frame wouldn't suggest much of a difference in each version (that time frame would also suggest horrible marketing; which, the marketing is a key point in the new theory). However, as you and I know, this isn't the case.

The real time frame between both releases is between 2-3 months. This gives Sakurai enough time to detail much of the Wii U version before its launch---especially since the info will focus specifically on the Wii U version, since the 3DS version would already be released.

Yes, Sakurai did say that the time frame difference was because "debugging the Wii U version takes longer than the 3DS version". This could easily be a partial truth. But...

Guess what? It's already a partial truth. I can prove it.

Let's take a look back at the marketing of Sm4sh.

As we should know, releasing both versions at the same time would be horrible marketing. The best way to handle marketing both games at once would be to release information about each version consecutively. First, release information about the 3DS version to make it appear more attractive than the Wii U one, leaving the Wii U version in the dark. Nintendo's strategy is painfully obvious, as the 3DS version comes out before the Wii U one. What this strategy does, is that it could entice you into buying the 3DS version when it comes out---for a couple reasons:

1. We want to experience the new Smash as soon as possible. Since the version that currently appears the most attractive is releasing first, we may be influenced to purchase it.
2. This reason partly intertwines with the first. Those who decided not to buy the 3DS version may eventually give into the pressure---the pressure to Smash. Thus, they may purchase the 3DS version sometime between the 2-3 month gap separating the 3DS version release and Wii U version release.
3. You generally want to own both versions---in which case you've already decided the fate of your money, so it doesn't matter.

But wait, what about the Wii U version?

Oh, don't worry. Nintendo will make you want to buy that one too---just not now.

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is the crux of the new theory.

You see, Nintendo wants to make the most sales between all of their Sm4sh peripherals. In fact, any other sane business-oriented company in Nintendo's position would strive for the same goal---it's almost entirely for the money. Smash is a goldmine.

However...

There is an issue with our current knowledge/assumptions with how the Wii U version's content will be handled. Like I've said before, we're assuming that the Wii U roster is explicitly whatever the 3DS roster will be. How can we be so certain of this? We have no idea how the Wii U's content will be handled---Sakurai hasn't even added the Wii U version's homepage on the official site yet!

Besides, we were only ever accustomed to one Smash releasing per console generation---not 2. This is only given more credence by Sakurai's statement regarding both versions being Smash 4 and Smash 5 respectively.

Hypothetically, there is also an issue with Nintendo's marketing choices, if the rosters are explicitly the same in both versions:

If this is the case, the only things that would motivate people to buy the Wii U version over the 3DS version would be to have a version of Smash that would play on the bigger screen, have better graphics, and/or to have those different in-game features (unless they have some kind of other philosophy that drives them to buy it).

From this, we must ask this important question and answer it from a business perspective:

Would that be enough marketing security for Nintendo regarding the Wii U version's sales---especially considering that there are currently far more 3DS consoles out there in the world than Wii U consoles?

To us, it could seem that the answer would be yes.

However, if there are more 3DS consoles out there than Wii U consoles, the 3DS version is automatically considered more convenient for the consumer to purchase---at least in the general sense. Thus, the convenience of the 3DS version could triumph over those other reasons to buy the Wii U version, especially if they don't own a Wii U. I've already seen plenty of arguments on these forums about this issue. I'm sure these arguments have happened on plenty of other websites---and even offline---too.

Look, Nintendo doesn't just want the Wii U version to sell well---as all of their other Sm4sh peripherals. They want, extensively, the Wii U console itself to sell as well. Here's another question to consider:

Does the bigger screen, better graphics, and different stages/game modes warrant that Wii U console sale?

Actually, this question is almost impossible to answer, at least factually. It's a question about someone's perspectives. What do they prefer?

Can you see where I'm getting at? These are the questions that Nintendo must consider, since they're dealing with two different versions of Smash. Nintendo, as a business, must find a way to influence us into buying both versions---or at least to find the formula with the highest probable success rate regarding the sales of all Sm4sh peripherals.

Do you know what this formula is? If you know what mainly sells Smash, you should know the formula. It's the characters.

Alright, back to Sakurai's partial truth telling about the gap between the release dates of the 3DS and Wii U versions of Sm4sh---where he said "it was for the debugging purposes"...

What if the partial truth wasn't only for that surface-layer marketing I exposed just above?

What if the marketing included these hidden unlockable characters that need to be transferred from one version to the other in order to have the full roster in either game?

Just imagine how that would affect the consumer's decision among purchasing certain Sm4sh peripherals. We would effectively have to get both versions in order to have the complete Sm4sh roster. Yes, this would seem like a b*** move from Nintendo---but the fact that this possibility exists cannot be denied! Therefore, we cannot look at the 3DS roster (when the 3DS version releases) and say "that's all folks!", especially considering there's so much info currently unknown about the Wii U version!

Alternatively...

I've actually found yet another possibility.

Imagine the above happening. It'd be all the same. The only difference would be DLC.

What if Nintendo allowed cross-platform DLC to avoid any consumer backlash regarding their choice for version-designated hidden unlockables?

Now, imagine you've purchased the 3DS version only. What if Nintendo allows 3DS version owners to download the hidden characters from the Wii U version without having to own the Wii U? Of course, it would cost money, but not nearly as much as the Wii U + the Wii U version of the game. The same thing could work vice-versa for the Wii U version owners.

This way, Nintendo would effectively be catering towards both markets---as well as consumer interest. If they are geniuses, this would be the path they choose. And to think, this is all possible!

Now that I think about it...

Would you care to hear what exactly caused me to come up with this theory in the first place? Well, it really stemmed from a spot of information regarding Brawl's leaks. Here's an OP from a thread entitled "The Truth About Leaks: Why Don't Leakers Have The Full Picture?":

Pay close attention to the bolded part.

Hey, there has been a bit of commotion lately about a new possible leak with Smash 4. In this leak, its stated that newcomers will consist of Shulk, Duck Hunt Dog, Bowser Jr., and Dark Pit (as well as the return of Dr. Mario).

However, the main reputable leaker (the source behind salromano/gematsu), has made no mention of the latter three.

What explains this discrepancy?

The truth of the matter is that at least during Brawl's developments, the builds that foreigners playtest, don't have the entire roster on them.

Let me explain.

During the pre-Brawl days there were three primary leakers:

NyaseNya, who claimed:
- Brawl would have 35 characters.
- No Mega Man or Ridley
- Brawl would be delayed.
- Be on a dual-layers disc.
- That Captain Falcon, Ness, and Mr. Game & Watch would return.
- That Olimar and Toon Link are newcomers (and even described a bit of Olimar's moveset)
- Was an infamous troll obsessed with the buttocks of Nintendo females (particularly Peach)

ChaosZero:
- Said Lucario, Wolf, and Sonic would be newcomers.
- Mewtwo would be cut.
- Ganondorf, Falco, Sheik, Captain Falcon returning.
- Described the Dragoon item.

ShadowXOR:
- Said Marth, Ness, and Captain Falcon would return.
- Said ROB was a newcomer.

Why didn't any of these three people know the entire roster?

Well, its because none of them (or their sources) had access to builds that contained the entire roster. As a matter of fact, one of the leakers (ShadowXOR) mentioned to me that there were several characters in his build that were on the Dojo yet not in the copy his source was playtesting.

Why Sakurai/Nintendo did this is anyone's guess, but it was probably a contribution behind why Brawl's balance was so awful.

As to how this revelation is relevant to today, is this.

Gematsu/salromano claims one of our newcomers will be Chorus Men.

Yet Ninka/vaanrose's source claims Chorus Men wasn't in it.

Gematsu also makes no mention of Duck Hunt Dog, Bowser Jr., or Dark Pit (who to be fair could have been a last minute addition).

Its possible that Sakurai may again be giving foreign debuggers/balancers copies of Smash 4 with incomplete rosters (possibly to stop someone from leaking the ENTIRE roster).

If this is the case, then its possible that characters like Chorus Men, Ice Climbers, Wolf, and Lucas may still actually be in Smash 4.

Moreover, other leakers (like the 4chan leak also mentioning Duck Hunt Dog, Chorus Men, Bowser Jr., Shulk, Dixie Kong, Mewtwo, Ridley) might also be correct, despite not knowing about Dark Pit and Dr. Mario.

Personally, I am skeptical.

For one, I am not convinced yet on Ninka/vaanrose's source. There needs to be something major from their leak to be confirmed (namely the confirmation of one of their newcomers outside of Shulk, or the ability of Shulk's moveset confirmed, or the confirmation that Olimar has Alpha alternates).

The second thing, is that I don't feel confident Sakurai is reprising his pre-Brawl strategy of handing incomplete rosters for balance to foreign branches of Nintendo this time around. He is actively striving for balance this time, and as far as I am aware of there were no characters on the Ninka/vaanrose build that has been confirmed that has been absent.

We have only 1.5 months left so all that is left is a waiting game.

In the worst case scenario our remaining newcomers are:
- Shulk
- Chorus Men.

or

- Shulk
- Bowser Jr.
- Duck Hunt Dog
- Dark Pit
- Dr. Mario

in a slighly better scenario

we get all newcomers from Gematsu and Ninka/vaanrose (which we simply gain Chorus Men as a newcomer, though possibly Wolf and Ice Climbers don't get cut). Both sources say Lucas is gone.

In the best case scenario (in which the 4chan leaker is also reputable), we also get Dixie Kong, Ridley, and Mewtwo.

In times like this its imperative to keep our expectations low.

I hope my information at least sheds some new light on the leaks going on, and that it at least offers some clarity on the situation at hand.

Smash 4 will soon be released so hopefully this debate will soon come to an end.

That's right. There were multiple, different builds released to the different playtesters for Brawl. Meaning:

Something similar---in regards to leaks---has happened before.

For Sm4sh, the Ninka/Vaanrose leaks (to which the newer 3-piece 3DS roster leak heavily agrees with) appear to stem from different playtester builds. It seems Sakurai is up to his old shenanigans again.

However, this led me to wonder about other potential gaps in the roster. If you read my original new theory post, you'd understand what I'm saying here. I'm referring to the lack of newcomers from Star Fox, Donkey Kong, Legend of Zelda, and Kirby.

If you read my original new theory post, you'd also understand that I was focusing on franchises, and not specific characters---for the franchises divvied by newcomer inclusion could have varied with each version of Sm4sh. If this is the case, then we could see playtester leaks appear that show newcomers from franchises that have a heavier influence on the West within the Wii U version. The opposite goes for the 3DS version---and these playtester leaks certainly seem to agree with this.

If you read my original new theory post, you would also understand the premise I set up for Sm4sh's general marketing: the East vs. West idea---marketing each different version more towards each culture. This also explains the color choice for each version of Sm4sh. Culturally, the East is more associated with Red, while the West is more associated with Blue. As you should know, and as I've mentioned in my original new theory post, Japan adheres to culture ideas strenuously. Thus, having them center their marketing strategy for Sm4sh around the East vs. West mentality is certainly not far-fetched.

Not only that, but dividing Sm4sh up and marketing it in a East vs. West sense would be absolutely genius! This way, instead of trying to market one version of Smash to the entire globe, they can focus on giving content specific to each version that would appeal with their respective marketing intent. Yet, at the same time, allowing the smashers options to use both versions' content simultaneously in each specific version, based on the cross-platform connections. That's pretty freaking genius, huh?

But wait,

I'm not done yet!

Does anyone remember this potential pattern/theory?

I've noticed a pattern, As far as the Newcomers we've seen who are from an already represented franchise in smash, they've had a stage from their franchise be partially revealed when it was initially shown in the Pic of the day, then it would be followed up with a more in depth look at their stage in a later Pic of the Day.[collapse=Rosalina]
[collapse=PotD September 9, 2013]This is our first look at the Super Mario Galaxy stage. Not much to see but Kirby and the background.

[/collapse]
[collapse=PotD November 14, 2013]a more in depth look at the Super Mario Galaxy stage

[/collapse]Rolalina was revealed in the December Nintendo Direct.

[/collapse]
[collapse=Greninja]
[collapse=PotD March 11, 2014]This is our first look at Lumiose city. We don't even see any platforms.

[/collapse]
[collapse=PotD March 28, 2014] Now we see the the platforms and conclude that this must be a moving stage.

[/collapse]Greninja is revealed in the April direct.

[/collapse]
[collapse=Palutena][collapse=PotD January 29, 2014]Here we first see the background of the Kid Icarus stage on the Wii U

[/collapse]
[collapse=PotD April 30, 2014]Now we see the statue again, but with a platform.

[/collapse]Palutena is revealed during E3

[/collapse]
[collapse=Robin][collapse=PotD June 6, 2014]the first appearance of the Fire emblem stage on the Wii U.

[/collapse]I suppose you could say that we got a better look at the Fire Emblem stage during the E3 demo of the game.

[/collapse]
[collapse=Krystal][collapse=PotD July 21, 2014]It's hard to make out whether the Great Fox is the stage or if there will be a platform in front of it.

[/collapse]We are waiting for another more in depth reveal of the Starfox stage followed up by a Starfox newcomer.[/collapse]

Well, we're nearing the release of the 3DS version, right? What does this mean, again?

It means we are close to receiving information about the Wii U version...

Think of it this way:

Which franchises have yet to get much content?

Besides Zelda, pretty much all of the franchises that are lacking newcomers. This includes Star Fox, Kirby, and Donkey Kong. Metroid is in another boat because of all of the potential and non-clarified Ridley teases.

Well, guess what? Donkey Kong and Kirby have yet to get Wii U stages! Star Fox's Wii U stage is barely known!

So... When would be the perfect time to reveal these stages/reveal more info about these stages?

That's right, when Sakurai begins to solely reveal info about the Wii U version---which is after the 3DS version releases.

Whether or not these franchises will have a reveal to solidify the idea before the Wii U version releases is up in the air. Right now, that doesn't necessarily matter, for my new theory remains possible with or without reveals.

However, the possibility of these stage reveals teasing a franchise newcomer as a version-designated unlockable for the Wii U version always exists!

Can't you see just how uncannily all these things can add up together?!

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



*phew!*

This is it. I've laid all of my cards on the table. I'm unable to foresee any other possibility---beyond the possibility of these theories not coming true.

I apologize for the amount of Phoenix Wright content in this post. It gets me in the mood, and it keeps me sane while constructing these 5-6 hour long posts.

I also wish to apologize with this theory/post not having to directly relate to Krystal---but it is inclusive.

With that said, I wish to ask any mod who reads this:

Would you suggest me making a thread about this theory under the General Character Discussion forums? After all, it does have to deal with most other franchises not included in the newest leaks. First, I'd have to come up with a name for the theory, of course.

I merely used this thread to establish the base of this theory, and to hear basic feedback. That, and it does have to deal with Krystal, in part.

Hope you all enjoy.

EDIT: Under all of this, and considering the Wii U version coming after the 3DS version, it seems Sakurai might just pull the biggest troll move ever. This move would first devastate us Western smashers after the 3DS roster officially comes to light after its release (what with it not featuring the franchise newcomers that have heavy influence over here in the West). Then, Sakurai comes out with the ultimate surprise:

The Wii U version has these franchise newcomers. Honestly, without leaks, this would be absolutely unexpected.

 

[Masonomace]

I can't. . .even. . .NANI?!
Will edit this post after I read all of that wall of text

SO FIRST OFF, I read that URL source & read this from that:

Sakurai: We're now going into versions four and five within the series—this is only something that's now possible.
Kotaku: When you say four and five, do you mean the 3DS and Wii U versions? Those are separate?
Sakurai: Yeah, exactly.

This helps prove your theory to not just be a fabricated speculation. He literally says it RIGHT THERE.
Fully reading your multiple striking theories in one final scenario ending I cannot fathom how much dollars you have made & the billions of sense typing your hours & hours long post here. This is honestly something a LOT of people should read & I approve a mod of bumping your post to be an OP for the GCDT.

I Will also go on to say that hidden characters that could not be obtained in the final rosters of SSB4 & SSB5 but vice-cersa certain characters that are hidden, or cannot be obtained in either unless bought via DLC. This is most definitely not the first time a fighting game that crosses platforms have slightly different character inclusions, who remembers Soul Calibur II with the Tekken character on PS2 & GameCube's Link? This is a free-to-play / think ball game & we're all the players spectating of what's to come of this early sell-out now, & anticipation of WiiU leaking from Sakurai slowly & surely making us pressured to buy it more as you said @ TheRandomCities4

~THANKS FOR POSTING~​

 

[ghastmine]

By Jove, I think I've finally got it!

(Disclaimers are at the bottom of this post)

I believe I just found (and remembered) an actual piece of evidence that further suggests the possibility of this new theory taking place. No less, it's something Sakurai said. It's also something, ironically, most of us (those who've seen it) discredited as a slip up, or just something completely insignificant.

Do any of you remember when Sakurai said he treats Smash on the 3DS and Smash on the Wii U like Smash 4 and Smash 5 respectively?

http://kotaku.com/an-in-depth-chat-with-the-genius-behind-super-smash-bro-530744390

I'll wait a moment to see if you can see where I'm going with this---and why it's potentially very important to the new theory...

Here's the theory for those who haven't seen it yet, by the way:



Can you see why this information may be important to the theory?

If not, allow me to elaborate:

Firstly, while keeping the new theory in mind, this is evidence that both of the games won't be the same. Now, in a general context, this could seem insignificant. We should already know that both games will have different features already, what with all the different game modes (feasibly) and different stages.

However, what kind of differences would warrant the 3DS and Wii U versions to be called "Smash 4 and Smash 5" by Sakurai? Would the differences be limited to only the game modes and stages? I frankly don't believe so. By saying this, Sakurai has effectively taken on two iterations of Smash at the same time.

I think the differences include the different hidden unlockable characters in both versions as well.

I'm going to sidestep here briefly to clarify something I feel I didn't in the theory. When I said that both versions could have different unlockable characters to be transferred from the Wii U version to the 3DS version (and vice-versa), I meant these would probably those few hidden unlockable characters---not the characters we will know before the 3DS launch. I think the characters known before the 3DS launch are going to be readily available in both versions. Whether some of these already known characters will be unlockable or not won't mean anything. I'm referring specifically to those characters that are hidden (or potentially made for the initial roster on one of the versions---the roster on one version before transferring the character data to and/or fro).

Back to the differences in both versions.

Imagine this perspective:

What if both games were to be released at the same time, instead? If this were the case, I would be inclined to believe that each version would share the exact same roster, as the time frame wouldn't suggest much of a difference in each version (that time frame would also suggest horrible marketing; which, the marketing is a key point in the new theory). However, as you and I know, this isn't the case.

The real time frame between both releases is between 2-3 months. This gives Sakurai enough time to detail much of the Wii U version before its launch---especially since the info will focus specifically on the Wii U version, since the 3DS version would already be released.

Yes, Sakurai did say that the time frame difference was because "debugging the Wii U version takes longer than the 3DS version". This could easily be a partial truth. But...

Guess what? It's already a partial truth. I can prove it.

Let's take a look back at the marketing of Sm4sh.

As we should know, releasing both versions at the same time would be horrible marketing. The best way to handle marketing both games at once would be to release information about each version consecutively. First, release information about the 3DS version to make it appear more attractive than the Wii U one, leaving the Wii U version in the dark. Nintendo's strategy is painfully obvious, as the 3DS version comes out before the Wii U one. What this strategy does, is that it could entice you into buying the 3DS version when it comes out---for a couple reasons:

1. We want to experience the new Smash as soon as possible. Since the version that currently appears the most attractive is releasing first, we may be influenced to purchase it.
2. This reason partly intertwines with the first. Those who decided not to buy the 3DS version may eventually give into the pressure---the pressure to Smash. Thus, they may purchase the 3DS version sometime between the 2-3 month gap separating the 3DS version release and Wii U version release.
3. You generally want to own both versions---in which case you've already decided the fate of your money, so it doesn't matter.

But wait, what about the Wii U version?

Oh, don't worry. Nintendo will make you want to buy that one too---just not now.

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is the crux of the new theory.

You see, Nintendo wants to make the most sales between all of their Sm4sh peripherals. In fact, any other sane business-oriented company in Nintendo's position would strive for the same goal---it's almost entirely for the money. Smash is a goldmine.

However...

There is an issue with our current knowledge/assumptions with how the Wii U version's content will be handled. Like I've said before, we're assuming that the Wii U roster is explicitly whatever the 3DS roster will be. How can we be so certain of this? We have no idea how the Wii U's content will be handled---Sakurai hasn't even added the Wii U version's homepage on the official site yet!

Besides, we were only ever accustomed to one Smash releasing per console generation---not 2. This is only given more credence by Sakurai's statement regarding both versions being Smash 4 and Smash 5 respectively.

Hypothetically, there is also an issue with Nintendo's marketing choices, if the rosters are explicitly the same in both versions:

If this is the case, the only things that would motivate people to buy the Wii U version over the 3DS version would be to have a version of Smash that would play on the bigger screen, have better graphics, and/or to have those different in-game features (unless they have some kind of other philosophy that drives them to buy it).

From this, we must ask this important question and answer it from a business perspective:

Would that be enough marketing security for Nintendo regarding the Wii U version's sales---especially considering that there are currently far more 3DS consoles out there in the world than Wii U consoles?

To us, it could seem that the answer would be yes.

However, if there are more 3DS consoles out there than Wii U consoles, the 3DS version is automatically considered more convenient for the consumer to purchase---at least in the general sense. Thus, the convenience of the 3DS version could triumph over those other reasons to buy the Wii U version, especially if they don't own a Wii U. I've already seen plenty of arguments on these forums about this issue. I'm sure these arguments have happened on plenty of other websites---and even offline---too.

Look, Nintendo doesn't just want the Wii U version to sell well---as all of their other Sm4sh peripherals. They want, extensively, the Wii U console itself to sell as well. Here's another question to consider:

Does the bigger screen, better graphics, and different stages/game modes warrant that Wii U console sale?

Actually, this question is almost impossible to answer, at least factually. It's a question about someone's perspectives. What do they prefer?

Can you see where I'm getting at? These are the questions that Nintendo must consider, since they're dealing with two different versions of Smash. Nintendo, as a business, must find a way to influence us into buying both versions---or at least to find the formula with the highest probable success rate regarding the sales of all Sm4sh peripherals.

Do you know what this formula is? If you know what mainly sells Smash, you should know the formula. It's the characters.

Alright, back to Sakurai's partial truth telling about the gap between the release dates of the 3DS and Wii U versions of Sm4sh---where he said "it was for the debugging purposes"...

What if the partial truth wasn't only for that surface-layer marketing I exposed just above?

What if the marketing included these hidden unlockable characters that need to be transferred from one version to the other in order to have the full roster in either game?

Just imagine how that would affect the consumer's decision among purchasing certain Sm4sh peripherals. We would effectively have to get both versions in order to have the complete Sm4sh roster. Yes, this would seem like a b*** move from Nintendo---but the fact that this possibility exists cannot be denied! Therefore, we cannot look at the 3DS roster (when the 3DS version releases) and say "that's all folks!", especially considering there's so much info currently unknown about the Wii U version!

Alternatively...

I've actually found yet another possibility.

Imagine the above happening. It'd be all the same. The only difference would be DLC.

What if Nintendo allowed cross-platform DLC to avoid any consumer backlash regarding their choice for version-designated hidden unlockables?

Now, imagine you've purchased the 3DS version only. What if Nintendo allows 3DS version owners to download the hidden characters from the Wii U version without having to own the Wii U? Of course, it would cost money, but not nearly as much as the Wii U + the Wii U version of the game. The same thing could work vice-versa for the Wii U version owners.

This way, Nintendo would effectively be catering towards both markets---as well as consumer interest. If they are geniuses, this would be the path they choose. And to think, this is all possible!

Now that I think about it...

Would you care to hear what exactly caused me to come up with this theory in the first place? Well, it really stemmed from a spot of information regarding Brawl's leaks. Here's an OP from a thread entitled "The Truth About Leaks: Why Don't Leakers Have The Full Picture?":

Pay close attention to the bolded part.

That's right. There were multiple, different builds released to the different playtesters for Brawl. Meaning:

Something similar---in regards to leaks---has happened before.

For Sm4sh, the Ninka/Vaanrose leaks (to which the newer 3-piece 3DS roster leak heavily agrees with) appear to stem from different playtester builds. It seems Sakurai is up to his old shenanigans again.

However, this led me to wonder about other potential gaps in the roster. If you read my original new theory post, you'd understand what I'm saying here. I'm referring to the lack of newcomers from Star Fox, Donkey Kong, Legend of Zelda, and Kirby.

If you read my original new theory post, you'd also understand that I was focusing on franchises, and not specific characters---for the franchises divvied by newcomer inclusion could have varied with each version of Sm4sh. If this is the case, then we could see playtester leaks appear that show newcomers from franchises that have a heavier influence on the West within the Wii U version. The opposite goes for the 3DS version---and these playtester leaks certainly seem to agree with this.

If you read my original new theory post, you would also understand the premise I set up for Sm4sh's general marketing: the East vs. West idea---marketing each different version more towards each culture. This also explains the color choice for each version of Sm4sh. Culturally, the East is more associated with Red, while the West is more associated with Blue. As you should know, and as I've mentioned in my original new theory post, Japan adheres to culture ideas strenuously. Thus, having them center their marketing strategy for Sm4sh around the East vs. West mentality is certainly not far-fetched.

Not only that, but dividing Sm4sh up and marketing it in a East vs. West sense would be absolutely genius! This way, instead of trying to market one version of Smash to the entire globe, they can focus on giving content specific to each version that would appeal with their respective marketing intent. Yet, at the same time, allowing the smashers options to use both versions' content simultaneously in each specific version, based on the cross-platform connections. That's pretty freaking genius, huh?

But wait,

I'm not done yet!

Does anyone remember this potential pattern/theory?



Well, we're nearing the release of the 3DS version, right? What does this mean, again?

It means we are close to receiving information about the Wii U version...

Think of it this way:

Which franchises have yet to get much content?

Besides Zelda, pretty much all of the franchises that are lacking newcomers. This includes Star Fox, Kirby, and Donkey Kong. Metroid is in another boat because of all of the potential and non-clarified Ridley teases.

Well, guess what? Donkey Kong and Kirby have yet to get Wii U stages! Star Fox's Wii U stage is barely known!

So... When would be the perfect time to reveal these stages/reveal more info about these stages?

That's right, when Sakurai begins to solely reveal info about the Wii U version---which is after the 3DS version releases.

Whether or not these franchises will have a reveal to solidify the idea before the Wii U version releases is up in the air. Right now, that doesn't necessarily matter, for my new theory remains possible with or without reveals.

However, the possibility of these stage reveals teasing a franchise newcomer as a version-designated unlockable for the Wii U version always exists!

Can't you see just how uncannily all these things can add up together?!

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



*phew!*

This is it. I've laid all of my cards on the table. I'm unable to foresee any other possibility---beyond the possibility of these theories not coming true.

I apologize for the amount of Phoenix Wright content in this post. It gets me in the mood, and it keeps me sane while constructing these 5-6 hour long posts.

I also wish to apologize with this theory/post not having to directly relate to Krystal---but it is inclusive.

With that said, I wish to ask any mod who reads this:

Would you suggest me making a thread about this theory under the General Character Discussion forums? After all, it does have to deal with most other franchises not included in the newest leaks. First, I'd have to come up with a name for the theory, of course.

I merely used this thread to establish the base of this theory, and to hear basic feedback. That, and it does have to deal with Krystal, in part.

Hope you all enjoy.

EDIT: Under all of this, and considering the Wii U version coming after the 3DS version, it seems Sakurai might just pull the biggest troll move ever. This move would first devastate us Western smashers after the 3DS roster officially comes to light after its release (what with it not featuring the franchise newcomers that have heavy influence over here in the West). Then, Sakurai comes out with the ultimate surprise:

The Wii U version has these franchise newcomers. Honestly, without leaks, this would be absolutely unexpected.

while yes cities you are right sakurai did say both rosters would be the same (dlc is another story) so im kinda skeptical but we shall not mention our ridley x krystal crossover trailer theory

 

[ChainsOfDusk]

Hello, guess I decided to make my account after reading up TheRandomCities theory. Hilariously enough this something my friends and I had been speculating for awhile, because otherwise business wise it just didn't add up (honestly, the wii u launch should have come first if there was little to no differences, forcing players wanting to play smash to buy the wii u, THEN release the 3DS version months afterwards).

I'll support both the theory and Krystal as a newcomer to smash 4. I've only got a handful of wanted newcomers left after the gradual deconfirmations, but I'm happy to see one of my favorites still has a fair chance to make it in at this point!

 

[ImOnlyHereToTalkStarFox]

By Jove, I think I've finally got it!

(Disclaimers are at the bottom of this post)

I believe I just found (and remembered) an actual piece of evidence that further suggests the possibility of this new theory taking place. No less, it's something Sakurai said. It's also something, ironically, most of us (those who've seen it) discredited as a slip up, or just something completely insignificant.

Do any of you remember when Sakurai said he treats Smash on the 3DS and Smash on the Wii U like Smash 4 and Smash 5 respectively?

http://kotaku.com/an-in-depth-chat-with-the-genius-behind-super-smash-bro-530744390

I'll wait a moment to see if you can see where I'm going with this---and why it's potentially very important to the new theory...

Here's the theory for those who haven't seen it yet, by the way:



Can you see why this information may be important to the theory?

If not, allow me to elaborate:

Firstly, while keeping the new theory in mind, this is evidence that both of the games won't be the same. Now, in a general context, this could seem insignificant. We should already know that both games will have different features already, what with all the different game modes (feasibly) and different stages.

However, what kind of differences would warrant the 3DS and Wii U versions to be called "Smash 4 and Smash 5" by Sakurai? Would the differences be limited to only the game modes and stages? I frankly don't believe so. By saying this, Sakurai has effectively taken on two iterations of Smash at the same time.

I think the differences include the different hidden unlockable characters in both versions as well.

I'm going to sidestep here briefly to clarify something I feel I didn't in the theory. When I said that both versions could have different unlockable characters to be transferred from the Wii U version to the 3DS version (and vice-versa), I meant these would probably those few hidden unlockable characters---not the characters we will know before the 3DS launch. I think the characters known before the 3DS launch are going to be readily available in both versions. Whether some of these already known characters will be unlockable or not won't mean anything. I'm referring specifically to those characters that are hidden (or potentially made for the initial roster on one of the versions---the roster on one version before transferring the character data to and/or fro).

Back to the differences in both versions.

Imagine this perspective:

What if both games were to be released at the same time, instead? If this were the case, I would be inclined to believe that each version would share the exact same roster, as the time frame wouldn't suggest much of a difference in each version (that time frame would also suggest horrible marketing; which, the marketing is a key point in the new theory). However, as you and I know, this isn't the case.

The real time frame between both releases is between 2-3 months. This gives Sakurai enough time to detail much of the Wii U version before its launch---especially since the info will focus specifically on the Wii U version, since the 3DS version would already be released.

Yes, Sakurai did say that the time frame difference was because "debugging the Wii U version takes longer than the 3DS version". This could easily be a partial truth. But...

Guess what? It's already a partial truth. I can prove it.

Let's take a look back at the marketing of Sm4sh.

As we should know, releasing both versions at the same time would be horrible marketing. The best way to handle marketing both games at once would be to release information about each version consecutively. First, release information about the 3DS version to make it appear more attractive than the Wii U one, leaving the Wii U version in the dark. Nintendo's strategy is painfully obvious, as the 3DS version comes out before the Wii U one. What this strategy does, is that it could entice you into buying the 3DS version when it comes out---for a couple reasons:

1. We want to experience the new Smash as soon as possible. Since the version that currently appears the most attractive is releasing first, we may be influenced to purchase it.
2. This reason partly intertwines with the first. Those who decided not to buy the 3DS version may eventually give into the pressure---the pressure to Smash. Thus, they may purchase the 3DS version sometime between the 2-3 month gap separating the 3DS version release and Wii U version release.
3. You generally want to own both versions---in which case you've already decided the fate of your money, so it doesn't matter.

But wait, what about the Wii U version?

Oh, don't worry. Nintendo will make you want to buy that one too---just not now.

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is the crux of the new theory.

You see, Nintendo wants to make the most sales between all of their Sm4sh peripherals. In fact, any other sane business-oriented company in Nintendo's position would strive for the same goal---it's almost entirely for the money. Smash is a goldmine.

However...

There is an issue with our current knowledge/assumptions with how the Wii U version's content will be handled. Like I've said before, we're assuming that the Wii U roster is explicitly whatever the 3DS roster will be. How can we be so certain of this? We have no idea how the Wii U's content will be handled---Sakurai hasn't even added the Wii U version's homepage on the official site yet!

Besides, we were only ever accustomed to one Smash releasing per console generation---not 2. This is only given more credence by Sakurai's statement regarding both versions being Smash 4 and Smash 5 respectively.

Hypothetically, there is also an issue with Nintendo's marketing choices, if the rosters are explicitly the same in both versions:

If this is the case, the only things that would motivate people to buy the Wii U version over the 3DS version would be to have a version of Smash that would play on the bigger screen, have better graphics, and/or to have those different in-game features (unless they have some kind of other philosophy that drives them to buy it).

From this, we must ask this important question and answer it from a business perspective:

Would that be enough marketing security for Nintendo regarding the Wii U version's sales---especially considering that there are currently far more 3DS consoles out there in the world than Wii U consoles?

To us, it could seem that the answer would be yes.

However, if there are more 3DS consoles out there than Wii U consoles, the 3DS version is automatically considered more convenient for the consumer to purchase---at least in the general sense. Thus, the convenience of the 3DS version could triumph over those other reasons to buy the Wii U version, especially if they don't own a Wii U. I've already seen plenty of arguments on these forums about this issue. I'm sure these arguments have happened on plenty of other websites---and even offline---too.

Look, Nintendo doesn't just want the Wii U version to sell well---as all of their other Sm4sh peripherals. They want, extensively, the Wii U console itself to sell as well. Here's another question to consider:

Does the bigger screen, better graphics, and different stages/game modes warrant that Wii U console sale?

Actually, this question is almost impossible to answer, at least factually. It's a question about someone's perspectives. What do they prefer?

Can you see where I'm getting at? These are the questions that Nintendo must consider, since they're dealing with two different versions of Smash. Nintendo, as a business, must find a way to influence us into buying both versions---or at least to find the formula with the highest probable success rate regarding the sales of all Sm4sh peripherals.

Do you know what this formula is? If you know what mainly sells Smash, you should know the formula. It's the characters.

Alright, back to Sakurai's partial truth telling about the gap between the release dates of the 3DS and Wii U versions of Sm4sh---where he said "it was for the debugging purposes"...

What if the partial truth wasn't only for that surface-layer marketing I exposed just above?

What if the marketing included these hidden unlockable characters that need to be transferred from one version to the other in order to have the full roster in either game?

Just imagine how that would affect the consumer's decision among purchasing certain Sm4sh peripherals. We would effectively have to get both versions in order to have the complete Sm4sh roster. Yes, this would seem like a b*** move from Nintendo---but the fact that this possibility exists cannot be denied! Therefore, we cannot look at the 3DS roster (when the 3DS version releases) and say "that's all folks!", especially considering there's so much info currently unknown about the Wii U version!

Alternatively...

I've actually found yet another possibility.

Imagine the above happening. It'd be all the same. The only difference would be DLC.

What if Nintendo allowed cross-platform DLC to avoid any consumer backlash regarding their choice for version-designated hidden unlockables?

Now, imagine you've purchased the 3DS version only. What if Nintendo allows 3DS version owners to download the hidden characters from the Wii U version without having to own the Wii U? Of course, it would cost money, but not nearly as much as the Wii U + the Wii U version of the game. The same thing could work vice-versa for the Wii U version owners.

This way, Nintendo would effectively be catering towards both markets---as well as consumer interest. If they are geniuses, this would be the path they choose. And to think, this is all possible!

Now that I think about it...

Would you care to hear what exactly caused me to come up with this theory in the first place? Well, it really stemmed from a spot of information regarding Brawl's leaks. Here's an OP from a thread entitled "The Truth About Leaks: Why Don't Leakers Have The Full Picture?":

Pay close attention to the bolded part.

That's right. There were multiple, different builds released to the different playtesters for Brawl. Meaning:

Something similar---in regards to leaks---has happened before.

For Sm4sh, the Ninka/Vaanrose leaks (to which the newer 3-piece 3DS roster leak heavily agrees with) appear to stem from different playtester builds. It seems Sakurai is up to his old shenanigans again.

However, this led me to wonder about other potential gaps in the roster. If you read my original new theory post, you'd understand what I'm saying here. I'm referring to the lack of newcomers from Star Fox, Donkey Kong, Legend of Zelda, and Kirby.

If you read my original new theory post, you'd also understand that I was focusing on franchises, and not specific characters---for the franchises divvied by newcomer inclusion could have varied with each version of Sm4sh. If this is the case, then we could see playtester leaks appear that show newcomers from franchises that have a heavier influence on the West within the Wii U version. The opposite goes for the 3DS version---and these playtester leaks certainly seem to agree with this.

If you read my original new theory post, you would also understand the premise I set up for Sm4sh's general marketing: the East vs. West idea---marketing each different version more towards each culture. This also explains the color choice for each version of Sm4sh. Culturally, the East is more associated with Red, while the West is more associated with Blue. As you should know, and as I've mentioned in my original new theory post, Japan adheres to culture ideas strenuously. Thus, having them center their marketing strategy for Sm4sh around the East vs. West mentality is certainly not far-fetched.

Not only that, but dividing Sm4sh up and marketing it in a East vs. West sense would be absolutely genius! This way, instead of trying to market one version of Smash to the entire globe, they can focus on giving content specific to each version that would appeal with their respective marketing intent. Yet, at the same time, allowing the smashers options to use both versions' content simultaneously in each specific version, based on the cross-platform connections. That's pretty freaking genius, huh?

But wait,

I'm not done yet!

Does anyone remember this potential pattern/theory?



Well, we're nearing the release of the 3DS version, right? What does this mean, again?

It means we are close to receiving information about the Wii U version...

Think of it this way:

Which franchises have yet to get much content?

Besides Zelda, pretty much all of the franchises that are lacking newcomers. This includes Star Fox, Kirby, and Donkey Kong. Metroid is in another boat because of all of the potential and non-clarified Ridley teases.

Well, guess what? Donkey Kong and Kirby have yet to get Wii U stages! Star Fox's Wii U stage is barely known!

So... When would be the perfect time to reveal these stages/reveal more info about these stages?

That's right, when Sakurai begins to solely reveal info about the Wii U version---which is after the 3DS version releases.

Whether or not these franchises will have a reveal to solidify the idea before the Wii U version releases is up in the air. Right now, that doesn't necessarily matter, for my new theory remains possible with or without reveals.

However, the possibility of these stage reveals teasing a franchise newcomer as a version-designated unlockable for the Wii U version always exists!

Can't you see just how uncannily all these things can add up together?!

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



*phew!*

This is it. I've laid all of my cards on the table. I'm unable to foresee any other possibility---beyond the possibility of these theories not coming true.

I apologize for the amount of Phoenix Wright content in this post. It gets me in the mood, and it keeps me sane while constructing these 5-6 hour long posts.

I also wish to apologize with this theory/post not having to directly relate to Krystal---but it is inclusive.

With that said, I wish to ask any mod who reads this:

Would you suggest me making a thread about this theory under the General Character Discussion forums? After all, it does have to deal with most other franchises not included in the newest leaks. First, I'd have to come up with a name for the theory, of course.

I merely used this thread to establish the base of this theory, and to hear basic feedback. That, and it does have to deal with Krystal, in part.

Hope you all enjoy.

EDIT: Under all of this, and considering the Wii U version coming after the 3DS version, it seems Sakurai might just pull the biggest troll move ever. This move would first devastate us Western smashers after the 3DS roster officially comes to light after its release (what with it not featuring the franchise newcomers that have heavy influence over here in the West). Then, Sakurai comes out with the ultimate surprise:

The Wii U version has these franchise newcomers. Honestly, without leaks, this would be absolutely unexpected.

(Never to much Phoenix wright.) That theory needs to be seen by the entire smash community. I love this theory and it makes sense.
Are you sure your not a leaker? Jk


On another note Welcome to the Cerinians Chains. : )

 

[TheRandomCities4]

Hello, guess I decided to make my account after reading up TheRandomCities theory. Hilariously enough this something my friends and I had been speculating for awhile, because otherwise business wise it just didn't add up (honestly, the wii u launch should have come first if there was little to no differences, forcing players wanting to play smash to buy the wii u, THEN release the 3DS version months afterwards).

I'll support both the theory and Krystal as a newcomer to smash 4. I've only got a handful of wanted newcomers left after the gradual deconfirmations, but I'm happy to see one of my favorites still has a fair chance to make it in at this point!

Isn't it funny how things work out sometimes? By the way, I did have a nagging sensation in the back of my head that "I couldn't be the only one thinking this, right?"

Also, welcome to the Cerinians, and welcome (officially) to Smash Boards.

 

[Deleted member]

~Holy wall of text, Batman~

I'd write this in a Phoenix Wright style post myself...but I have yet to play more of the titles (I imagine Edgeworth is that guy that disagrees with everything you say) but I'm gettin carried away *ahem*

Hello, guess I decided to make my account after reading up TheRandomCities theory. Hilariously enough this something my friends and I had been speculating for awhile, because otherwise business wise it just didn't add up (honestly, the wii u launch should have come first if there was little to no differences, forcing players wanting to play smash to buy the wii u, THEN release the 3DS version months afterwards).

I'll support both the theory and Krystal as a newcomer to smash 4. I've only got a handful of wanted newcomers left after the gradual deconfirmations, but I'm happy to see one of my favorites still has a fair chance to make it in at this point!

Welcome aboard! Hang on tight as we're still on Mr. Sakurai's Wild Ride

 

[Bunny8093]

@ TheRandomCities4 I-I... whoa... Yes I believe this definitely warrants it's own thread in some way. This is absolutely genius, and it's something that could seriously happen. I almost wonder if this is indeed the case you should take a business job at Nintendo for figuring this stuff out. If it's not the case I think you might be even smarter than Sakurai himself I kid you not. If you were with Nintendo... Whoa. I gotta read this to my friend later.

EDIT: I also totally agree with the Phoenix Wright Music and pictures. It fits very well. Speaking of which I need to play that game eventually...

EDIT 2: I also want to add one last thing then I'm off for now, it did in fact always bother me why the 3DS version was coming out first but I didn't think too much as to why. Now with this... we may have an answer.

 

[Mr.Seven]

By Jove, I think I've finally got it!

(Disclaimers are at the bottom of this post)

I believe I just found (and remembered) an actual piece of evidence that further suggests the possibility of this new theory taking place. No less, it's something Sakurai said. It's also something, ironically, most of us (those who've seen it) discredited as a slip up, or just something completely insignificant.

Do any of you remember when Sakurai said he treats Smash on the 3DS and Smash on the Wii U like Smash 4 and Smash 5 respectively?

http://kotaku.com/an-in-depth-chat-with-the-genius-behind-super-smash-bro-530744390

I'll wait a moment to see if you can see where I'm going with this---and why it's potentially very important to the new theory...

Here's the theory for those who haven't seen it yet, by the way:



Can you see why this information may be important to the theory?

If not, allow me to elaborate:

Firstly, while keeping the new theory in mind, this is evidence that both of the games won't be the same. Now, in a general context, this could seem insignificant. We should already know that both games will have different features already, what with all the different game modes (feasibly) and different stages.

However, what kind of differences would warrant the 3DS and Wii U versions to be called "Smash 4 and Smash 5" by Sakurai? Would the differences be limited to only the game modes and stages? I frankly don't believe so. By saying this, Sakurai has effectively taken on two iterations of Smash at the same time.

I think the differences include the different hidden unlockable characters in both versions as well.

I'm going to sidestep here briefly to clarify something I feel I didn't in the theory. When I said that both versions could have different unlockable characters to be transferred from the Wii U version to the 3DS version (and vice-versa), I meant these would probably those few hidden unlockable characters---not the characters we will know before the 3DS launch. I think the characters known before the 3DS launch are going to be readily available in both versions. Whether some of these already known characters will be unlockable or not won't mean anything. I'm referring specifically to those characters that are hidden (or potentially made for the initial roster on one of the versions---the roster on one version before transferring the character data to and/or fro).

Back to the differences in both versions.

Imagine this perspective:

What if both games were to be released at the same time, instead? If this were the case, I would be inclined to believe that each version would share the exact same roster, as the time frame wouldn't suggest much of a difference in each version (that time frame would also suggest horrible marketing; which, the marketing is a key point in the new theory). However, as you and I know, this isn't the case.

The real time frame between both releases is between 2-3 months. This gives Sakurai enough time to detail much of the Wii U version before its launch---especially since the info will focus specifically on the Wii U version, since the 3DS version would already be released.

Yes, Sakurai did say that the time frame difference was because "debugging the Wii U version takes longer than the 3DS version". This could easily be a partial truth. But...

Guess what? It's already a partial truth. I can prove it.

Let's take a look back at the marketing of Sm4sh.

As we should know, releasing both versions at the same time would be horrible marketing. The best way to handle marketing both games at once would be to release information about each version consecutively. First, release information about the 3DS version to make it appear more attractive than the Wii U one, leaving the Wii U version in the dark. Nintendo's strategy is painfully obvious, as the 3DS version comes out before the Wii U one. What this strategy does, is that it could entice you into buying the 3DS version when it comes out---for a couple reasons:

1. We want to experience the new Smash as soon as possible. Since the version that currently appears the most attractive is releasing first, we may be influenced to purchase it.
2. This reason partly intertwines with the first. Those who decided not to buy the 3DS version may eventually give into the pressure---the pressure to Smash. Thus, they may purchase the 3DS version sometime between the 2-3 month gap separating the 3DS version release and Wii U version release.
3. You generally want to own both versions---in which case you've already decided the fate of your money, so it doesn't matter.

But wait, what about the Wii U version?

Oh, don't worry. Nintendo will make you want to buy that one too---just not now.

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is the crux of the new theory.

You see, Nintendo wants to make the most sales between all of their Sm4sh peripherals. In fact, any other sane business-oriented company in Nintendo's position would strive for the same goal---it's almost entirely for the money. Smash is a goldmine.

However...

There is an issue with our current knowledge/assumptions with how the Wii U version's content will be handled. Like I've said before, we're assuming that the Wii U roster is explicitly whatever the 3DS roster will be. How can we be so certain of this? We have no idea how the Wii U's content will be handled---Sakurai hasn't even added the Wii U version's homepage on the official site yet!

Besides, we were only ever accustomed to one Smash releasing per console generation---not 2. This is only given more credence by Sakurai's statement regarding both versions being Smash 4 and Smash 5 respectively.

Hypothetically, there is also an issue with Nintendo's marketing choices, if the rosters are explicitly the same in both versions:

If this is the case, the only things that would motivate people to buy the Wii U version over the 3DS version would be to have a version of Smash that would play on the bigger screen, have better graphics, and/or to have those different in-game features (unless they have some kind of other philosophy that drives them to buy it).

From this, we must ask this important question and answer it from a business perspective:

Would that be enough marketing security for Nintendo regarding the Wii U version's sales---especially considering that there are currently far more 3DS consoles out there in the world than Wii U consoles?

To us, it could seem that the answer would be yes.

However, if there are more 3DS consoles out there than Wii U consoles, the 3DS version is automatically considered more convenient for the consumer to purchase---at least in the general sense. Thus, the convenience of the 3DS version could triumph over those other reasons to buy the Wii U version, especially if they don't own a Wii U. I've already seen plenty of arguments on these forums about this issue. I'm sure these arguments have happened on plenty of other websites---and even offline---too.

Look, Nintendo doesn't just want the Wii U version to sell well---as all of their other Sm4sh peripherals. They want, extensively, the Wii U console itself to sell as well. Here's another question to consider:

Does the bigger screen, better graphics, and different stages/game modes warrant that Wii U console sale?

Actually, this question is almost impossible to answer, at least factually. It's a question about someone's perspectives. What do they prefer?

Can you see where I'm getting at? These are the questions that Nintendo must consider, since they're dealing with two different versions of Smash. Nintendo, as a business, must find a way to influence us into buying both versions---or at least to find the formula with the highest probable success rate regarding the sales of all Sm4sh peripherals.

Do you know what this formula is? If you know what mainly sells Smash, you should know the formula. It's the characters.

Alright, back to Sakurai's partial truth telling about the gap between the release dates of the 3DS and Wii U versions of Sm4sh---where he said "it was for the debugging purposes"...

What if the partial truth wasn't only for that surface-layer marketing I exposed just above?

What if the marketing included these hidden unlockable characters that need to be transferred from one version to the other in order to have the full roster in either game?

Just imagine how that would affect the consumer's decision among purchasing certain Sm4sh peripherals. We would effectively have to get both versions in order to have the complete Sm4sh roster. Yes, this would seem like a b*** move from Nintendo---but the fact that this possibility exists cannot be denied! Therefore, we cannot look at the 3DS roster (when the 3DS version releases) and say "that's all folks!", especially considering there's so much info currently unknown about the Wii U version!

Alternatively...

I've actually found yet another possibility.

Imagine the above happening. It'd be all the same. The only difference would be DLC.

What if Nintendo allowed cross-platform DLC to avoid any consumer backlash regarding their choice for version-designated hidden unlockables?

Now, imagine you've purchased the 3DS version only. What if Nintendo allows 3DS version owners to download the hidden characters from the Wii U version without having to own the Wii U? Of course, it would cost money, but not nearly as much as the Wii U + the Wii U version of the game. The same thing could work vice-versa for the Wii U version owners.

This way, Nintendo would effectively be catering towards both markets---as well as consumer interest. If they are geniuses, this would be the path they choose. And to think, this is all possible!

Now that I think about it...

Would you care to hear what exactly caused me to come up with this theory in the first place? Well, it really stemmed from a spot of information regarding Brawl's leaks. Here's an OP from a thread entitled "The Truth About Leaks: Why Don't Leakers Have The Full Picture?":

Pay close attention to the bolded part.

That's right. There were multiple, different builds released to the different playtesters for Brawl. Meaning:

Something similar---in regards to leaks---has happened before.

For Sm4sh, the Ninka/Vaanrose leaks (to which the newer 3-piece 3DS roster leak heavily agrees with) appear to stem from different playtester builds. It seems Sakurai is up to his old shenanigans again.

However, this led me to wonder about other potential gaps in the roster. If you read my original new theory post, you'd understand what I'm saying here. I'm referring to the lack of newcomers from Star Fox, Donkey Kong, Legend of Zelda, and Kirby.

If you read my original new theory post, you'd also understand that I was focusing on franchises, and not specific characters---for the franchises divvied by newcomer inclusion could have varied with each version of Sm4sh. If this is the case, then we could see playtester leaks appear that show newcomers from franchises that have a heavier influence on the West within the Wii U version. The opposite goes for the 3DS version---and these playtester leaks certainly seem to agree with this.

If you read my original new theory post, you would also understand the premise I set up for Sm4sh's general marketing: the East vs. West idea---marketing each different version more towards each culture. This also explains the color choice for each version of Sm4sh. Culturally, the East is more associated with Red, while the West is more associated with Blue. As you should know, and as I've mentioned in my original new theory post, Japan adheres to culture ideas strenuously. Thus, having them center their marketing strategy for Sm4sh around the East vs. West mentality is certainly not far-fetched.

Not only that, but dividing Sm4sh up and marketing it in a East vs. West sense would be absolutely genius! This way, instead of trying to market one version of Smash to the entire globe, they can focus on giving content specific to each version that would appeal with their respective marketing intent. Yet, at the same time, allowing the smashers options to use both versions' content simultaneously in each specific version, based on the cross-platform connections. That's pretty freaking genius, huh?

But wait,

I'm not done yet!

Does anyone remember this potential pattern/theory?



Well, we're nearing the release of the 3DS version, right? What does this mean, again?

It means we are close to receiving information about the Wii U version...

Think of it this way:

Which franchises have yet to get much content?

Besides Zelda, pretty much all of the franchises that are lacking newcomers. This includes Star Fox, Kirby, and Donkey Kong. Metroid is in another boat because of all of the potential and non-clarified Ridley teases.

Well, guess what? Donkey Kong and Kirby have yet to get Wii U stages! Star Fox's Wii U stage is barely known!

So... When would be the perfect time to reveal these stages/reveal more info about these stages?

That's right, when Sakurai begins to solely reveal info about the Wii U version---which is after the 3DS version releases.

Whether or not these franchises will have a reveal to solidify the idea before the Wii U version releases is up in the air. Right now, that doesn't necessarily matter, for my new theory remains possible with or without reveals.

However, the possibility of these stage reveals teasing a franchise newcomer as a version-designated unlockable for the Wii U version always exists!

Can't you see just how uncannily all these things can add up together?!

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



*phew!*

This is it. I've laid all of my cards on the table. I'm unable to foresee any other possibility---beyond the possibility of these theories not coming true.

I apologize for the amount of Phoenix Wright content in this post. It gets me in the mood, and it keeps me sane while constructing these 5-6 hour long posts.

I also wish to apologize with this theory/post not having to directly relate to Krystal---but it is inclusive.

With that said, I wish to ask any mod who reads this:

Would you suggest me making a thread about this theory under the General Character Discussion forums? After all, it does have to deal with most other franchises not included in the newest leaks. First, I'd have to come up with a name for the theory, of course.

I merely used this thread to establish the base of this theory, and to hear basic feedback. That, and it does have to deal with Krystal, in part.

Hope you all enjoy.

EDIT: Under all of this, and considering the Wii U version coming after the 3DS version, it seems Sakurai might just pull the biggest troll move ever. This move would first devastate us Western smashers after the 3DS roster officially comes to light after its release (what with it not featuring the franchise newcomers that have heavy influence over here in the West). Then, Sakurai comes out with the ultimate surprise:

The Wii U version has these franchise newcomers. Honestly, without leaks, this would be absolutely unexpected.

That's the best way to describe what I'm feeling right now. OMG, that's almost too brilliant for words. It would make SO MUCH SENSE!

 

[IanTheGamer]

By Jove, I think I've finally got it!

(Disclaimers are at the bottom of this post)

I believe I just found (and remembered) an actual piece of evidence that further suggests the possibility of this new theory taking place. No less, it's something Sakurai said. It's also something, ironically, most of us (those who've seen it) discredited as a slip up, or just something completely insignificant.

Do any of you remember when Sakurai said he treats Smash on the 3DS and Smash on the Wii U like Smash 4 and Smash 5 respectively?

http://kotaku.com/an-in-depth-chat-with-the-genius-behind-super-smash-bro-530744390

I'll wait a moment to see if you can see where I'm going with this---and why it's potentially very important to the new theory...

Here's the theory for those who haven't seen it yet, by the way:



Can you see why this information may be important to the theory?

If not, allow me to elaborate:

Firstly, while keeping the new theory in mind, this is evidence that both of the games won't be the same. Now, in a general context, this could seem insignificant. We should already know that both games will have different features already, what with all the different game modes (feasibly) and different stages.

However, what kind of differences would warrant the 3DS and Wii U versions to be called "Smash 4 and Smash 5" by Sakurai? Would the differences be limited to only the game modes and stages? I frankly don't believe so. By saying this, Sakurai has effectively taken on two iterations of Smash at the same time.

I think the differences include the different hidden unlockable characters in both versions as well.

I'm going to sidestep here briefly to clarify something I feel I didn't in the theory. When I said that both versions could have different unlockable characters to be transferred from the Wii U version to the 3DS version (and vice-versa), I meant these would probably those few hidden unlockable characters---not the characters we will know before the 3DS launch. I think the characters known before the 3DS launch are going to be readily available in both versions. Whether some of these already known characters will be unlockable or not won't mean anything. I'm referring specifically to those characters that are hidden (or potentially made for the initial roster on one of the versions---the roster on one version before transferring the character data to and/or fro).

Back to the differences in both versions.

Imagine this perspective:

What if both games were to be released at the same time, instead? If this were the case, I would be inclined to believe that each version would share the exact same roster, as the time frame wouldn't suggest much of a difference in each version (that time frame would also suggest horrible marketing; which, the marketing is a key point in the new theory). However, as you and I know, this isn't the case.

The real time frame between both releases is between 2-3 months. This gives Sakurai enough time to detail much of the Wii U version before its launch---especially since the info will focus specifically on the Wii U version, since the 3DS version would already be released.

Yes, Sakurai did say that the time frame difference was because "debugging the Wii U version takes longer than the 3DS version". This could easily be a partial truth. But...

Guess what? It's already a partial truth. I can prove it.

Let's take a look back at the marketing of Sm4sh.

As we should know, releasing both versions at the same time would be horrible marketing. The best way to handle marketing both games at once would be to release information about each version consecutively. First, release information about the 3DS version to make it appear more attractive than the Wii U one, leaving the Wii U version in the dark. Nintendo's strategy is painfully obvious, as the 3DS version comes out before the Wii U one. What this strategy does, is that it could entice you into buying the 3DS version when it comes out---for a couple reasons:

1. We want to experience the new Smash as soon as possible. Since the version that currently appears the most attractive is releasing first, we may be influenced to purchase it.
2. This reason partly intertwines with the first. Those who decided not to buy the 3DS version may eventually give into the pressure---the pressure to Smash. Thus, they may purchase the 3DS version sometime between the 2-3 month gap separating the 3DS version release and Wii U version release.
3. You generally want to own both versions---in which case you've already decided the fate of your money, so it doesn't matter.

But wait, what about the Wii U version?

Oh, don't worry. Nintendo will make you want to buy that one too---just not now.

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is the crux of the new theory.

You see, Nintendo wants to make the most sales between all of their Sm4sh peripherals. In fact, any other sane business-oriented company in Nintendo's position would strive for the same goal---it's almost entirely for the money. Smash is a goldmine.

However...

There is an issue with our current knowledge/assumptions with how the Wii U version's content will be handled. Like I've said before, we're assuming that the Wii U roster is explicitly whatever the 3DS roster will be. How can we be so certain of this? We have no idea how the Wii U's content will be handled---Sakurai hasn't even added the Wii U version's homepage on the official site yet!

Besides, we were only ever accustomed to one Smash releasing per console generation---not 2. This is only given more credence by Sakurai's statement regarding both versions being Smash 4 and Smash 5 respectively.

Hypothetically, there is also an issue with Nintendo's marketing choices, if the rosters are explicitly the same in both versions:

If this is the case, the only things that would motivate people to buy the Wii U version over the 3DS version would be to have a version of Smash that would play on the bigger screen, have better graphics, and/or to have those different in-game features (unless they have some kind of other philosophy that drives them to buy it).

From this, we must ask this important question and answer it from a business perspective:

Would that be enough marketing security for Nintendo regarding the Wii U version's sales---especially considering that there are currently far more 3DS consoles out there in the world than Wii U consoles?

To us, it could seem that the answer would be yes.

However, if there are more 3DS consoles out there than Wii U consoles, the 3DS version is automatically considered more convenient for the consumer to purchase---at least in the general sense. Thus, the convenience of the 3DS version could triumph over those other reasons to buy the Wii U version, especially if they don't own a Wii U. I've already seen plenty of arguments on these forums about this issue. I'm sure these arguments have happened on plenty of other websites---and even offline---too.

Look, Nintendo doesn't just want the Wii U version to sell well---as all of their other Sm4sh peripherals. They want, extensively, the Wii U console itself to sell as well. Here's another question to consider:

Does the bigger screen, better graphics, and different stages/game modes warrant that Wii U console sale?

Actually, this question is almost impossible to answer, at least factually. It's a question about someone's perspectives. What do they prefer?

Can you see where I'm getting at? These are the questions that Nintendo must consider, since they're dealing with two different versions of Smash. Nintendo, as a business, must find a way to influence us into buying both versions---or at least to find the formula with the highest probable success rate regarding the sales of all Sm4sh peripherals.

Do you know what this formula is? If you know what mainly sells Smash, you should know the formula. It's the characters.

Alright, back to Sakurai's partial truth telling about the gap between the release dates of the 3DS and Wii U versions of Sm4sh---where he said "it was for the debugging purposes"...

What if the partial truth wasn't only for that surface-layer marketing I exposed just above?

What if the marketing included these hidden unlockable characters that need to be transferred from one version to the other in order to have the full roster in either game?

Just imagine how that would affect the consumer's decision among purchasing certain Sm4sh peripherals. We would effectively have to get both versions in order to have the complete Sm4sh roster. Yes, this would seem like a b*** move from Nintendo---but the fact that this possibility exists cannot be denied! Therefore, we cannot look at the 3DS roster (when the 3DS version releases) and say "that's all folks!", especially considering there's so much info currently unknown about the Wii U version!

Alternatively...

I've actually found yet another possibility.

Imagine the above happening. It'd be all the same. The only difference would be DLC.

What if Nintendo allowed cross-platform DLC to avoid any consumer backlash regarding their choice for version-designated hidden unlockables?

Now, imagine you've purchased the 3DS version only. What if Nintendo allows 3DS version owners to download the hidden characters from the Wii U version without having to own the Wii U? Of course, it would cost money, but not nearly as much as the Wii U + the Wii U version of the game. The same thing could work vice-versa for the Wii U version owners.

This way, Nintendo would effectively be catering towards both markets---as well as consumer interest. If they are geniuses, this would be the path they choose. And to think, this is all possible!

Now that I think about it...

Would you care to hear what exactly caused me to come up with this theory in the first place? Well, it really stemmed from a spot of information regarding Brawl's leaks. Here's an OP from a thread entitled "The Truth About Leaks: Why Don't Leakers Have The Full Picture?":

Pay close attention to the bolded part.

That's right. There were multiple, different builds released to the different playtesters for Brawl. Meaning:

Something similar---in regards to leaks---has happened before.

For Sm4sh, the Ninka/Vaanrose leaks (to which the newer 3-piece 3DS roster leak heavily agrees with) appear to stem from different playtester builds. It seems Sakurai is up to his old shenanigans again.

However, this led me to wonder about other potential gaps in the roster. If you read my original new theory post, you'd understand what I'm saying here. I'm referring to the lack of newcomers from Star Fox, Donkey Kong, Legend of Zelda, and Kirby.

If you read my original new theory post, you'd also understand that I was focusing on franchises, and not specific characters---for the franchises divvied by newcomer inclusion could have varied with each version of Sm4sh. If this is the case, then we could see playtester leaks appear that show newcomers from franchises that have a heavier influence on the West within the Wii U version. The opposite goes for the 3DS version---and these playtester leaks certainly seem to agree with this.

If you read my original new theory post, you would also understand the premise I set up for Sm4sh's general marketing: the East vs. West idea---marketing each different version more towards each culture. This also explains the color choice for each version of Sm4sh. Culturally, the East is more associated with Red, while the West is more associated with Blue. As you should know, and as I've mentioned in my original new theory post, Japan adheres to culture ideas strenuously. Thus, having them center their marketing strategy for Sm4sh around the East vs. West mentality is certainly not far-fetched.

Not only that, but dividing Sm4sh up and marketing it in a East vs. West sense would be absolutely genius! This way, instead of trying to market one version of Smash to the entire globe, they can focus on giving content specific to each version that would appeal with their respective marketing intent. Yet, at the same time, allowing the smashers options to use both versions' content simultaneously in each specific version, based on the cross-platform connections. That's pretty freaking genius, huh?

But wait,

I'm not done yet!

Does anyone remember this potential pattern/theory?



Well, we're nearing the release of the 3DS version, right? What does this mean, again?

It means we are close to receiving information about the Wii U version...

Think of it this way:

Which franchises have yet to get much content?

Besides Zelda, pretty much all of the franchises that are lacking newcomers. This includes Star Fox, Kirby, and Donkey Kong. Metroid is in another boat because of all of the potential and non-clarified Ridley teases.

Well, guess what? Donkey Kong and Kirby have yet to get Wii U stages! Star Fox's Wii U stage is barely known!

So... When would be the perfect time to reveal these stages/reveal more info about these stages?

That's right, when Sakurai begins to solely reveal info about the Wii U version---which is after the 3DS version releases.

Whether or not these franchises will have a reveal to solidify the idea before the Wii U version releases is up in the air. Right now, that doesn't necessarily matter, for my new theory remains possible with or without reveals.

However, the possibility of these stage reveals teasing a franchise newcomer as a version-designated unlockable for the Wii U version always exists!

Can't you see just how uncannily all these things can add up together?!

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



*phew!*

This is it. I've laid all of my cards on the table. I'm unable to foresee any other possibility---beyond the possibility of these theories not coming true.

I apologize for the amount of Phoenix Wright content in this post. It gets me in the mood, and it keeps me sane while constructing these 5-6 hour long posts.

I also wish to apologize with this theory/post not having to directly relate to Krystal---but it is inclusive.

With that said, I wish to ask any mod who reads this:

Would you suggest me making a thread about this theory under the General Character Discussion forums? After all, it does have to deal with most other franchises not included in the newest leaks. First, I'd have to come up with a name for the theory, of course.

I merely used this thread to establish the base of this theory, and to hear basic feedback. That, and it does have to deal with Krystal, in part.

Hope you all enjoy.

EDIT: Under all of this, and considering the Wii U version coming after the 3DS version, it seems Sakurai might just pull the biggest troll move ever. This move would first devastate us Western smashers after the 3DS roster officially comes to light after its release (what with it not featuring the franchise newcomers that have heavy influence over here in the West). Then, Sakurai comes out with the ultimate surprise:

The Wii U version has these franchise newcomers. Honestly, without leaks, this would be absolutely unexpected.

You need to share this theory with everyone on the site do you think that they could rename SSBU AND SSB3DS even with it coming out in a few weeks, (Like calling SSB 3DS, SSB3D or SSB Dimensions)

 

[Princess Toady]

Another awesome wall of text, and I must admit that I also thought that it didn't make sense marketing-wise, to propose the same characters in both versions because frankly, not a lot of people play these games for the solo modes, lawl. Once again, it was extraordinarily well-constructed, and I must applaud you on your dedication, it must have been a time-consuming effort to write this explanation, not to mention the fact that you lightened the whole paragraph and included Phoenix Wright references (which, by the way, are never intrusive and really appreciated.).

Your theory goes hand in hand with the previous one, and now I understand why you thought it was possible since you explained a missing aspect of your previous theory. As always, you made sure to include proofs and facts to your argument, and that's always a nice thing because that way we don't have to go back ourselves. I must admit that you gave me hope again !

Would your theory work with your knowledge of part of the roster ? I assume yes, but you never know. All things seem to add up, it's seems alsmot too good to be true, lol.

 

[ghastmine]

Guys I have a little theory if I'm right the American version of star fox command came out the 29th or 31st. I know anniversaries never have usually never revealed something however since where close to its release sakurai is likely gonna make exceptions.

 

[IanTheGamer]

Could Sakurai have trolled us with saying that there would be no story mode, when there could be one, remember Sakurai is a troll master

 

[Princess Toady]

Oh please, no more SSE. An adventure mode like Melee's would be best.

 

[Masonomace]

Melee's SSE was imo more "adventure" worthy of it's mode title. This time for anything Adventure related, I'd want Starfox series battles to be separately on different stages, take Lylat Cruise first, then when you win the round you guys jump on the WiiU Sector-Z stage for the final fight.

Fighting on Corneria twice in a row was bland, & was a grinding asap feeling

 

[Princess Toady]

Yeah. I agree.

But the second battle was better because the airwings were firing at you almost non-stop. I liked it.