pap64
Smash Apprentice
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2018
- Messages
- 127
- NNID
- pappel64
- Switch FC
- 2966 0225 9209
For starters, I don't want to single anyone or start trouble, and mods, if you think this thread might instigate a strong argument feel free to lock. But there is something that has been bugging me since the Direct aired yesterday, especially those that wanted Isaac, Geno, Banjo et.all in the game, and that is this...
"Bah, your character of choice is not relevant compared to Ken and Incineroar, those are legacy characters that matter more!"
Not to create strawmen out of these people, but whenever someone expresses their disappointment that their character of choice was not revealed, people are quick to say "your character is not relevant", and to that I say...
When the first Smash Bros came out on the N64, very few remembered who Ness was or where he came from. Earthbound had indeed been released but was not a huge commercial success. Captain Falcon was more of a vehicle than a character. So you could argue that neither of them deserved to be in the roster because they were not relevant. And yet here we are; they are staples of the Smash franchise, and thanks to it Earthbound has become a cult classic that has inspired many developers, and the lore of F-Zero was pretty much shaped thanks to Smash.
Then we have Melee...No one outside the US knew who Marth and Roy were because their games had never been released elsewhere. And Mr. Game and Watch was so obscure they had to dig out the history books to remind people that he was one of Nintendo's first "character". Oh and the Ice Climbers? They've never had a game beyond the first one. Years later, Fire Emblem is a massive success for Nintendo, and people would be upset if Mr. Game and Watch or Ice Climbers were to be cut (regardless if they mained them or not).
Brawl was up next, and Pit is announced. While he was requested, he only had two games under his belt, and the reason he was requested was because many grew up on the original games and felt he would be a great choice. Years later, his whole franchise got rebooted and now has a personality of its own.
And now Smash 4 brought us Duck Hunt, a character that celebrates the NES Zapper games that we forgot at some point.
So TL:DR; Character relevance does not matter and is not a good counterargument regarding someone being upset over the characters and roster. While fan requests can play a role, a lot of it deals with what the SSB roster needs and what Sakurai and team want to do. King K. Rool has not been in a proper DK adventure game since DK 64, relegated only to spin-off appearances. So why can't Geno and Isaac be in the roster? Relevance is not the issue. You can argue that the character is hard to make into a full character. You can argue that there are a lot of licensing issues that prevent them from being in the game. You can even argue that they are not interesting. But using the "relevancy" card doesn't work on the grand scheme of things since SSB has given life to old franchises, and even if they didn't get new games because of it (like Cpt. Falcon after GX and Ice Climbers), they at least kept being remembered and inspired people to seek their games of origins.
"Bah, your character of choice is not relevant compared to Ken and Incineroar, those are legacy characters that matter more!"
Not to create strawmen out of these people, but whenever someone expresses their disappointment that their character of choice was not revealed, people are quick to say "your character is not relevant", and to that I say...
When the first Smash Bros came out on the N64, very few remembered who Ness was or where he came from. Earthbound had indeed been released but was not a huge commercial success. Captain Falcon was more of a vehicle than a character. So you could argue that neither of them deserved to be in the roster because they were not relevant. And yet here we are; they are staples of the Smash franchise, and thanks to it Earthbound has become a cult classic that has inspired many developers, and the lore of F-Zero was pretty much shaped thanks to Smash.
Then we have Melee...No one outside the US knew who Marth and Roy were because their games had never been released elsewhere. And Mr. Game and Watch was so obscure they had to dig out the history books to remind people that he was one of Nintendo's first "character". Oh and the Ice Climbers? They've never had a game beyond the first one. Years later, Fire Emblem is a massive success for Nintendo, and people would be upset if Mr. Game and Watch or Ice Climbers were to be cut (regardless if they mained them or not).
Brawl was up next, and Pit is announced. While he was requested, he only had two games under his belt, and the reason he was requested was because many grew up on the original games and felt he would be a great choice. Years later, his whole franchise got rebooted and now has a personality of its own.
And now Smash 4 brought us Duck Hunt, a character that celebrates the NES Zapper games that we forgot at some point.
So TL:DR; Character relevance does not matter and is not a good counterargument regarding someone being upset over the characters and roster. While fan requests can play a role, a lot of it deals with what the SSB roster needs and what Sakurai and team want to do. King K. Rool has not been in a proper DK adventure game since DK 64, relegated only to spin-off appearances. So why can't Geno and Isaac be in the roster? Relevance is not the issue. You can argue that the character is hard to make into a full character. You can argue that there are a lot of licensing issues that prevent them from being in the game. You can even argue that they are not interesting. But using the "relevancy" card doesn't work on the grand scheme of things since SSB has given life to old franchises, and even if they didn't get new games because of it (like Cpt. Falcon after GX and Ice Climbers), they at least kept being remembered and inspired people to seek their games of origins.
Last edited:
- Hasn't appeared in a game outside of Smash or Japan since 2006.