Official Smash Ultimate Discussion

[Pacack]

While I'm a little late to the discussion, I wanted to explain my view on video game icons as someone who's not quite 20.

SSS:
SS:
S:Steve(yes, really), Master Chief
A+:, Meowth, Mew(?)
A: Sora, Crash Bandicoot, Lara Croft
A-:
B+: Spyro
B:, Phoenix Wright
C:, Scorpion, Rayman, Bomberman
D: , Banjo-Kazooie
E: , Dante

Again, this is just my perspective.

Note the changes above.

 

[Deleted member]

I’m a sonic fanboy but I think Pikachu and Pokémon in general eclipses sonic just because pokemon hadn’t had large disasters like 06, boom and other middling games.

Dang, I did not realize that.
Pacack keep Sonic in SS.

I wouldn't really say Sonic and Pikachu are equal either.

Just because he isn't on par with the two doesn't mean he isn't among the most popular, though. Because he absolutely is one of gaming's biggest names.

You were right too.

Still, Sonic is fine in SS. Not SSS though.

 

[MoonlitIllusion]

Fair. Fixed that.

She doesn't need to be the main character to get that much recognition from the spinoffs.


This one can certainly be chalked up to difference of perspective. Lara is only that big in the UK, not elsewhere. Younger people in the US do not know her, but do know Cloud. Then, you have Japan and the rest of the East to consider.


While I understand what you're getting at here, I think that modern audiences will prove to recognize Sora more than Lara. Just wait until KH3 drops and we'll see if I'm right.

I respectfully think you're underestimating the Pokemon cross-media franchise. It's the most profitable in the world for a reason.


I have made some changes to my list based on criticisms, though.

That isn't true at all, Lara is still a well known figure in the west in general, if she wasn't her last 2 games wouldn't have sold as well as they would. Lara is still an iconic character, if you ask a stranger on the street if they know who lara croft is chances are they'll say yes, the same can't really be said for cloud despite him being very well known in the gaming community, Lara is known outside of that as well. You're average non-gamer probably doesn't know who cloud is, they'll probably know final fantasy but not cloud tbh.

Kingdom hearts is more so known for the disney and final fantasy connection, not so much sora himself, and still Tomb Raider's sales eclipse Kingdom Hearts.

 

[Pacack]

Note: I can see an argument for putting Lara Croft in A with Sora and Crash. In fact, I'll probably do that.

 

[NonSpecificGuy]

Friendly reminder that E3 is just under a month away...

Can’t come soon enough.

 

[Nekoo]

Kingdom hearts is more so known for the disney and final fantasy connection, not so much sora himself, and still Tomb Raider's sales eclipse Kingdom Hearts.

So the series is know for it's own unique concept?
And a series who started in 2001 with 12 games, with 8 Unique, 1 Mobile game and 3 Re-release who used 7 support counting Re-release sold less than a series who's here since 1996 with 18 games on 17 support?
Colors me surprised dude.

 

[MoonlitIllusion]

Here's how I'm reading this "I Feel like people geneally overestimate the crossover of Final Fantasy and Disney and a series who sold 24 million worldwide while the announcement of a New World in a Disney themed event trumped The announcement of the Incredible 2 and a new Star Wars Battlefront 2 trailer (before it's release and ****storm)"

It's disney. Everything Disney is big just by brand power dude. You can't say otherwise...
Even if Sora HIMSELF isn't know by names, people recognize the Disney dude on the boxart- It's the same as people calling Lara Croft "Tomb Raider".
Disney themselve are recognizing how Big KH is now by including it in their own Disney events.Which wasn't the case until like KHIII
Also remember the age of the Kingdom Hearts AMV on youtube? Every AMV using the Sanctuary music that YOUTUBE THEMSELVES copyrighted it?

24 million worldwide while the tomb raider reboot and it's sequel sold 18 million worldwide. Disney is massive but that doesn't mean every person who casually likes disney knows Kingdom Hearts and Sora. Sora is a decently known character but I'm very much confident that Lara Croft is more well known among non-gamers and the general public, ask a non-gamer who sora is and they'll probably just give you a confused face, the same can't be said for Lara.

 

[Pacack]

That isn't true at all, Lara is still a well known figure in the west in general, if she wasn't her last 2 games wouldn't have sold as well as they would. Lara is still an iconic character, if you ask a stranger on the street if they know who lara croft is chances are they'll say yes, the same can't really be said for cloud despite him being very well known in the gaming community, Lara is known outside of that as well. You're average non-gamer probably doesn't know who cloud is, they'll probably know final fantasy but not cloud tbh.

Kingdom hearts is more so known for the disney and final fantasy connection, not so much sora himself, and still Tomb Raider's sales eclipse Kingdom Hearts.

Again, while I respect your perspective, I believe you are overestimating Lara and underestimating Cloud because you're not looking at things from a global perspective.

Very, very few people in Japan, for example, could tell you who Lara is.

I have, regardless put Lara on the same tier as Sora, though. They're at comparable points.

 

[Murlough]

I don't really get what a "who is more popular (or more iconic) than who" tier list is supposed to accomplish. Its all subjective at its core.

Who cares if Sonic is in tier AA as opposed to SS or Z or whatever? It doesn't have any meaning except for those select few who are invested in the specific characters which leads to great bias anyway.

How does anyone even measure "iconicness?" Popularity? Recognizability? Most purchased games of their respective series? From what I've read so far the measurement has shifted a couple times.

Does anybody think Sakurai would follow an "iconic game character" tier list? From what I've read thus far it seems like something he wouldn't really put a lot of thought in.

 

[osby]

Again, while I respect your perspective, I believe you are overestimating Lara and underestimating Cloud because you're not looking at things from a global perspective.

Very, very few people in Japan, for example, could tell you who Lara is.

I have, regardless put Lara on the same tier as Sora, though. They're at comparable points.

Globally speaking it's hard to say anything except my own country (unless I have to look at the sales numbers) but I think Lara Croft outweights Cloud hard in a lot of countries where JRPGs practically have no market.

But in the end, it's a bit fruitless argument, if we are talking about Smash speculation. People simply wanted to see Cloud in Smash. Regardless of how popular or influential as a character Lara Croft is, she simply wasn't requested for Smash. As far as we know.

 

[Nu~]

While I'm a little late to the discussion, I wanted to explain my view on video game icons as someone who's not quite 20.

SSS:
SS:
S:Steve(yes, really), Master Chief
A+:, Meowth, Mew(?)
A: Sora, Crash Bandicoot, Lara Croft
A-:
B+: Spyro
B:, Phoenix Wright
C:, Scorpion, Rayman, Bomberman
D: , Banjo-Kazooie
E: , Dante

Again, this is just my perspective.

I feel like the entirety of B and B+ tiers should flip. I’m just not seeing Spyro’s...”iconicness(?)” being higher than any of the chars in B tier.

And Ryu seems to be a bit underrated here. The man is an icon of fighting games and the arcade era. Certainly not on the level of “arcade god” like Pac-Man or Space Invaders, but more like an arcade titan.

 

[Lyndis_]

Pikachu is definitely above Mario in recognizability IMO, no contest.

Yes, they're absolutely both at the tippity top of the recognizability you could possibly get for video games.. however, Pikachu has been the poster Mon in the most well known anime ever worldwide for over 20 years, the most well known TCG, and overall the highest grossing franchise ever.

There is no video game character more well known than Pikachu.

I don't really get what a "who is more popular (or more iconic) than who" tier list is supposed to accomplish. Its all subjective at its core.

Who cares if Sonic is in tier AA as opposed to SS or Z or whatever? It doesn't have any meaning except for those select few who are invested in the specific characters which leads to great bias anyway.

How does anyone even measure "iconicness?" Popularity? Recognizability? Most purchased games of their respective series? From what I've read so far the measurement has shifted a couple times.

Does anybody think Sakurai would follow an "iconic game character" tier list? From what I've read thus far it seems like something he wouldn't really put a lot of thought in.

99% certain the intent was just for fun, like all speculation here would be. We really don't know anything about this game or what characters will be picked based on.

Sakurai could completely change his mind on how he decides characters or flip his own rules on their head at any time and it wouldn't have been the first time.

 

[TumblrFamous]

You really think Pikachu is more well known than Mario?

Wow

 

[Imadethistoseealeak]

I don't really get what a "who is more popular (or more iconic) than who" tier list is supposed to accomplish. Its all subjective at its core.

Who cares if Sonic is in tier AA as opposed to SS or Z or whatever? It doesn't have any meaning except for those select few who are invested in the specific characters which leads to great bias anyway.

How does anyone even measure "iconicness?" Popularity? Recognizability? Most purchased games of their respective series? From what I've read so far the measurement has shifted a couple times.

Does anybody think Sakurai would follow an "iconic game character" tier list? From what I've read thus far it seems like something he wouldn't really put a lot of thought in.

I've said this like...5 times? On this specific thread. The game isn't being sold to people who don't care about videogames. So it doesn't matter if the grandma can name Pikachu but can't think of Charizard's name. Just the same it doesn't matter if a random person on the street knows Sora or Lara. People in the gaming community definitely know both and that's who Nintendo is marketing to. Smash for Switch is marketed to people who own a Switch and people on the fence about buying the Switch, not people who will never play videogames.

It's the same as clothing companies marketing to men or women depending on their line (although gender is an illusion).

I know we are bored, but Cloud, Sora, Lara etc are all worthy videogame characters. Which one is S tier or A tier will not be the reason they don't get into Smash. Or maybe I'm wrong. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

(I'm just tired of people's arguement for or against a character being whether or not some rando on the street will recognize them)

(Edit: on a side note I think bringing in specific sales numbers, such as for Kingdom Hearts or Tomb Raider is a better arguement as you can say Nintendo could look at it as selling that many more games. Obviously not a 1:1 but you get it)

 

[Captain Shwampy]

Ryu is way too low on these list

I see SF gets refrenced constantly on tv and see kids shouting out Hadoken.

SF and RE are more iconic capcom ips than Megaman at this point

 

[Deleted member]

I find the fact that people use a guest character's "iconicness" as a reason for why they are likely to be baseless.

Are all the guests that have been in Smash icons to a debatable degree? Sure.
Were they considered just because they were "iconic"? Not really.

Snake was because Kojima directly contacted Sakurai about the idea.
Sonic was one of the biggest requests if not the biggest request for Brawl.
Mega Man was another big Smash request.
Pac-Man was owned by Bandai-Namco, the development team behind Wii U/3DS. Yes, Pac-Man is among the MOST iconic gaming characters, but if it weren't for their involvement, it's doubtful Pac-Man would have been given serious consideration.
Ryu apparently had some degree of demand pre-ballot according to what Sakurai said about him, Lucas, and Roy.
Cloud was the most requested Final Fantasy character on the ballot, which had a lot of votes for characters in general.
Bayonetta needs no explanation.

So why exactly are people basing a guest's likeliness over another guest on which one is more "iconic"?
Or even saying characters like Lara Croft are "likely" just because they're an icon when they don't really have the fan demand that would get their foot in the door for consideration?

 

[Lyndis_]

You really think Pikachu is more well known than Mario?

Wow

Absolutely. They're very close and it's hard to quantify the difference between two household names when they're both household names, but Pikachu has a huge presence in literally every medium that Mario just doesn't.

There's no reason to think the poster character for the highest grossing franchise of all time (reminder, this is above Star Wars) and dominates the handheld market, TCG, anime, and manga would be less well known than a strictly video game character, even one known as 'the' video game character.

 

[osby]

I find the fact that people use a guest character's "iconicness" as a reason for why they are likely to be baseless.

Are all the guests that have been in Smash icons to a debatable degree? Sure.
Were they considered just because they were "iconic"? Not really.

Snake was because Kojima directly contacted Sakurai about the idea.
Sonic was one of the biggest requests if not the biggest request for Brawl.
Mega Man was another big Smash request.
Pac-Man was owned by Bandai-Namco, the development team behind Wii U/3DS. Yes, Pac-Man is among the MOST iconic gaming characters, but if it weren't for their involvement, it's doubtful Pac-Man would have been given serious consideration.
Ryu apparently had some degree of demand pre-ballot according to what Sakurai said about him, Lucas, and Roy.
Cloud was the most requested Final Fantasy character on the ballot, which had a lot of votes for characters in general.
Bayonetta needs no explanation.

So why exactly are people basing a guest's likeliness over another guest on which one is more "iconic"?
Or even saying characters like Lara Croft are "likely" just because they're an icon when they don't really have the fan demand that would get their foot in the door for consideration?

Don't forget Pac-Man was considered in Brawl and Sonic in Melee.

 

[Captain Shwampy]

I find the fact that people use a guest character's "iconicness" as a reason for why they are likely to be baseless.

Are all the guests that have been in Smash icons to a debatable degree? Sure.
Were they considered just because they were "iconic"? Not really.

Pac-Man was owned by Bandai-Namco, the development team behind Wii U/3DS. Yes, Pac-Man is among the MOST iconic gaming characters, but if it weren't for their involvement, it's doubtful Pac-Man would have been given serious consideration.

Miyamoto was actually requesting for Pac Man since Brawl

 

[Murlough]

Pikachu is definitely above Mario in recognizability IMO, no contest.

Yes, they're absolutely both at the tippity top of the recognizability you could possibly get for video games.. however, Pikachu has been the poster Mon in the most well known anime ever worldwide for over 20 years, the most well known TCG, and overall the highest grossing franchise ever.

There is no video game character more well known than Pikachu.


99% certain the intent was just for fun, like all speculation here would be. We really don't know anything about this game or what characters will be picked based on.

Sakurai could completely change his mind on how he decides characters or flip his own rules on their head at any time and it wouldn't have been the first time.

I get it but this kind of discussion breeds comments like

You really think Pikachu is more well known than Mario?

Wow

Which I kinda agree with don't get me wrong, but if you think about it further than "Well, Mario is basically Mr. Video Game," and think about it in terms of measuring the difference between who knows of Pikachu and who knows of Mario it just gets.....a silly, wierd vibe to it.

Like its impossible to guess really if more people know Pikachu or Mario or Cloud or whoever. Its just guesswork and bias. It's simultanously funny and cringey. I just feel like I have to say something.

Also, not calling anyone out and I'm not judging anybody. I just think this kind of discussion is funny when people seem to actually take it seriously.

I actually had half a mind to make a food tier list using hamburgers and hotdogs to parody the discussion but I didn't wanna run the risk of being reported for ****posting. ;-;

 

[Pacack]

I don't really get what a "who is more popular (or more iconic) than who" tier list is supposed to accomplish. Its all subjective at its core.

Who cares if Sonic is in tier AA as opposed to SS or Z or whatever? It doesn't have any meaning except for those select few who are invested in the specific characters which leads to great bias anyway.

How does anyone even measure "iconicness?" Popularity? Recognizability? Most purchased games of their respective series? From what I've read so far the measurement has shifted a couple times.

Does anybody think Sakurai would follow an "iconic game character" tier list? From what I've read thus far it seems like something he wouldn't really put a lot of thought in.

The main reason I listed mine was because I wanted to spark discussion. Plus, it's interesting.

The more we consider characters from many perspectives, the better we can understand the full picture, I think. So, it's important to note that, of the characters who have appearances on Nintendo consoles, Steve, Sora, Crash, and Spyro are extremely well-known, and could therefore be considered. This doesn't mean that we shouldn't also consider Ubisoft's relationship with Nintendo when considering Rayman or whatever. I just think it's good to consider every aspect of a character when speculating about their inclusion in Smash.

 

[Deleted member]

Don't forget Pac-Man was considered in Brawl and Sonic in Melee.

Sonic wasn't really considered for Melee (at least not by Sakurai/the Smash development team), that was more or less Yuji Naka wanting to try to get him in, but like Kojima, approached too late.

Though that is still something to consider; Sega initially proposed the idea. (And then initially rejected the idea for Brawl before changing their minds later in development. :V)


But Pac-Man can't really count here, as it was Miyamoto who suggested the idea, and Sakurai outright rejected the idea due to not picturing how he could work.
It is still unlikely that he would have given Pac-Man a second thought if it weren't for Bandai-Namco's involvement in Smash 4.

 

[Pacack]

I find the fact that people use a guest character's "iconicness" as a reason for why they are likely to be baseless.

Are all the guests that have been in Smash icons to a debatable degree? Sure.
Were they considered just because they were "iconic"? Not really.

Snake was because Kojima directly contacted Sakurai about the idea.
Sonic was one of the biggest requests if not the biggest request for Brawl.
Mega Man was another big Smash request.
Pac-Man was owned by Bandai-Namco, the development team behind Wii U/3DS. Yes, Pac-Man is among the MOST iconic gaming characters, but if it weren't for their involvement, it's doubtful Pac-Man would have been given serious consideration.
Ryu apparently had some degree of demand pre-ballot according to what Sakurai said about him, Lucas, and Roy.
Cloud was the most requested Final Fantasy character on the ballot, which had a lot of votes for characters in general.
Bayonetta needs no explanation.

So why exactly are people basing a guest's likeliness over another guest on which one is more "iconic"?
Or even saying characters like Lara Croft are "likely" just because they're an icon when they don't really have the fan demand that would get their foot in the door for consideration?

I do want to note that my list was very specifically referring to character recognizability, and not liklihood of inclusion. It would be a very different list if it was likelihood.

 

[Opossum]

Honestly just due to the sheer subjectivity of the word iconic, there's a lot of ways to judge it.

The most objective way would probably be how many are known by average joes off the street, in which case...



That's it.

Maybe as well if you include "turtle from Mario," "Zelda," "Mario Princess," and "Mario dinosaur" as acceptable answers.

The vast majority of the rest of the roster are total unknowns to the average person, and even the Miis themselves are debatable.

 

[Lyndis_]

I think it's also worth noting both Mario and Pikachu are going to be growing even more very soon so the lines are probably going to blur even more for a while.

Mario is getting an animated movie and the main series Pokemon games are finally coming to console.

Pokemon further outgrowing Mario, Mario overtaking Pokemon, the movie flopping, etc; are all possibilities we have no way to predict.

Both Nintendo and Pokemon are supposed to be getting theme parks at Universal as well.

 

[J0eyboi]

The most iconic game character is Black Lotus

 

[Deleted member]

I do want to note that my list was very specifically referring to character recognizability, and not liklihood of inclusion. It would be a very different list if it was likelihood.

I know. It's just, I see this kind of discussion a lot in places so I needed to address it while the subject was about characters being icons.

"X is likely to be a guest because they are iconic"
"Y is more likely than Z because Y is more iconic"
etc.

 

[CroonerMike]

Oh god, this conversation. Better grab my popcorn.

 

[Lyndis_]

Just for fun, on the flip side... who is the least recognizable character you'd want in Smash?

Not necessarily unrealistic characters, just fairly underground / unknown ones. Takamaru is a good hypothetical example I think.

Mine would probably be Ray from the N64 Custom Robo.

 

[Senselessbreak]

Have fun boiyz

 

[Arcanir]

Just for fun, on the flip side... who is the least recognizable character you'd want in Smash?

Not necessarily unrealistic characters, just fairly underground / unknown ones. Takamaru is a good hypothetical example.

Mine would probably be Ray from Custom Robo.

Dillon.

Only has three niche games with one just recently coming out, but I'd love to play as that Armadillo if he ever got the chance.

 

[TheLastJinjo]

Just for fun, on the flip side... who is the least recognizable character you'd want in Smash?

Not necessarily unrealistic characters, just fairly underground / unknown ones. Takamaru is a good hypothetical example I think.

Mine would probably be Ray from the N64 Custom Robo.

Ayumi Tachibana. I wanna see a school girl from a text based game in Super Smash Bros.

 

[Bradli Wartooth]

Just for fun, on the flip side... who is the least recognizable character you'd want in Smash?

Not necessarily unrealistic characters, just fairly underground / unknown ones. Takamaru is a good hypothetical example I think.

Mine would probably be Ray from the N64 Custom Robo.

Either a Custom Robo or Jack/Farmer from Harvest Moon. Both fall into super-niche situations, but both could bring so much to the game.

 

[Opossum]

Just for fun, on the flip side... who is the least recognizable character you'd want in Smash?

Not necessarily unrealistic characters, just fairly underground / unknown ones. Takamaru is a good hypothetical example I think.

Mine would probably be Ray from the N64 Custom Robo.

Pretty much the last three characters in my signature. None of them are characters I'd say are well known.

 

[Cosmic77]

Absolutely. They're very close and it's hard to quantify the difference between two household names when they're both household names, but Pikachu has a huge presence in literally every medium that Mario just doesn't.

There's no reason to think the poster character for the highest grossing franchise of all time (reminder, this is above Star Wars) and dominates the handheld market, TCG, anime, and manga would be less well known than a strictly video game character, even one known as 'the' video game character.

I get what you're saying, but just because Mario has less mediums than Pikachu doesn't necessarily mean he's less iconic. Just look at Pac-Man.

Also, two more things you have to consider is the character's age and the character's role. Mario is a lot older than Pikachu, so he's definitely going to be better known with the older demographics. Then there's the fact that Pikachu is very rarely the center focus of the games, manga, and anime movies he appears in. He's constantly sharing the spotlight with the other hundreds of Pokémon. Mario, on the other hand, almost always gets the starring role.

 

[Deleted member]

Have fun boiyz

The hell is this supposed to be? Someone's wishlist that has Captain Toad, Ridley, Decidueye, Crash, Chibi-Robo, and two others I can't tell the meaning of?

EDIT: Or is the "Wreck Wreck" and the outlet supposed to be part of the same thing?

 

[Llort A. Ton]

Regarding the "iconicness" of who is and isnt in Smash Bros-

If we were to include only the 3rd party characters so truly iconic that even the Schmoest of Joes could name them, then wed only have and . could get a pass as being recognized by average Joes as "Street Fighter guy" or even mistakenly "Mortal Kombat guy" . While we may see or as iconic, we play games on a regular basis.

Those "Watch my parents/grandparents/aunt and uncle/younger relative/cousin Billybob name all the Smash Bros fighters" videos are entertaining, but lets be real, they are a fair view on how recognizable characters are to non gamers. If we ask a majority of the everyday crowd who the other 3rd parties are, is either "Astroboy" or "Lego Robot Guy", is "Mission Impossible", is "Goku", and is "Not Safe For Children".

The only newcomers iconic enough for the general public to add would probably be Minecraft Steve, Scorpion and Master Chief, who would all be recognized as "The Minecraft/Halo/Mortal Kombat (or mistakenly Street Fighter) guy". I think by this point whether or not your iconic shouldn't be a damning factor, since it would be damning for pretty much every choice we have left !

Just for fun, on the flip side... who is the least recognizable character you'd want in Smash?

Not necessarily unrealistic characters, just fairly underground / unknown ones. Takamaru is a good hypothetical example I think.

Mine would probably be Ray from the N64 Custom Robo.

If were going way out there, the most obscure character that I'd think would be a cool addition is Adeline from Kirby. I'd say Turok, but he's an american Goku.

Have fun boiyz

Um... care to elaborate? I believe I see hints for Chibi Robo, Ridley, but I am lost for everything else!

 

[Kirby Dragons]

Just for fun, on the flip side... who is the least recognizable character you'd want in Smash?

Not necessarily unrealistic characters, just fairly underground / unknown ones. Takamaru is a good hypothetical example I think.

Daitoryo. I doubt anyone alive when he was created is still alive today.

 

[osby]

Just for fun, on the flip side... who is the least recognizable character you'd want in Smash?

Not necessarily unrealistic characters, just fairly underground / unknown ones. Takamaru is a good hypothetical example I think.

Mine would probably be Ray from the N64 Custom Robo.

Yuri from Fatal Frame, probably.

 

[Pacack]

Daitoryo. I doubt anyone alive when he was created is still alive today.

As creator of the Daitoryo support thread, I highly approve.