Official Smash Ultimate Discussion

[Zinith]

Ah just shows that everything is different for everyone. I grew up playing the SNES Mario titles like Yoshi's Island and had both an N64 and a PlayStation afterwards, with lots of legendary nostalgic memories from both, but Final Fantasy 7 was my favorite story I ever experienced. Still replay it whenever I can to this day. It stuck with me more than almost any other game, to the point where I have a Buster Sword (and Master Sword and Monado) tattooed on my back. Different strokes for different folks. I was ecstatic at his Smash 4 announcement.

We may have more in common than you might think (you have a Master Sword and Monado tattoo, and Zelda and Xenoblade are my favorite franchises for example)

 

[Ultinarok]

Cloud mains out for blood and tainted victory

I bet you pull off a sword tattoo better than Brock Lesnar

Be prepared then

Yeah the tattoo turned out really good, but it took 4 hours to do and cost me $400 bucks so it better have turned out good. Thinking of expanding it with a Levin Sword to represent my love for FE Awakening and a Honedge to represent my long relationship with Pokemon.

 

[Dracyoshi]

All the dlc had very reasonable prices, especially the 3rd parties

Whaddaya mean man, DLC was at a very fair price. (Still gotta get Bayonetta and Corrin so i can practice against them...)

Base game: 58 fighters for $60 + the rest game and base ability to play it.
$1.03 per fighter + Super Smash Bros. 4 itself

The DLC prices:
$5 per fighter if you buy the All-In-One fighters bundle, no bonuses.
$34.93 total. More than half of the price of the base game just for 7 fighters vs 58 in the base game.

How is that a good value? It's a rip-off. And it's even worse that there's the P2W element which DLC fighters bring to the table; if one of them accidentally turns out OP due to poor balancing then it's potentially advantageous to purchase and play those characters. That's exactly what happened with Bayonetta. Although this was far from intentional on Nintendo's end, unintentional P2W is still P2W and I'm not going to support it. Plus, Cotton just admitted to wanting to purchase Bayonetta and Corrin to practice against them.. yet again, that's paying to get an advantage. Whether you have to earn that advantage or not, you wouldn't be able to have it at all without paying...

I don't know how people justify this... It's easily my biggest issue with DLC in the fighting genre as a whole. This practice causes outrage in games from other genres, why's it different here?

 

[Opossum]

By characters, do you mean characters that people recognize easily like Mario and Pikachu?

By characters, at this point I mean "something more than just boxart."

 

[Ultinarok]

Base game: 58 fighters for $60 + the rest game and base ability to play it.
$1.03 per fighter + the rest of the game, stages, music, gamemodes, etc

The DLC prices:
$5 per fighter if you buy the All-In-One fighters bundle, no bonuses.
$34.93 total. More than half of the price of the base game just for 7 fighters vs 58 in the base game.

How is that a good value? It's a rip-off. And it's even worse that there's the P2W element which DLC fighters bring to the table; if one of them accidentally turns out OP due to poor balancing then it's potentially advantageous to purchase and play those characters. That's exactly what happened with Bayonetta. Although this was far from intentional on Nintendo's end, unintentional P2W is still P2W and I'm not going to support it. Plus, you just admitted to wanting to purchase Bayonetta and Corrin to practice against them.. yet again, that's paying to get an advantage. Paying to win. P2W...

I don't know how people justify this... It's easily my biggest issue with DLC in the fighting genre as a whole. This practice causes outrage in games from other genres, why's it different here?

Because it was done with good intentions. He only brought on DLC because fans clamored for more characters and were willing to pay for them. Sakurai never maliciously held back content, disc locked anyone, forced pre-order bonuses, excluded content from anyone who didn't buy a premium version, didn't add any microtransactions....he just saw fan feedback and responded. The price was a bit inflated, but it was ok, because we got so much for our initial $60 compared to the vast majority of triple A games that it didn't seem unreasonable. The fact that they ended up being kinda OP was, as you said, an accident.

 

[BluePikmin11]

By characters, at this point I mean "something more than just boxart."

By boxart you mean logos and icons like Diskun and Napoleon on a Hanafuda deck?

 

[DaybreakHorizon]

Finally got all of them!

List form:
Inkling
Ridley
Decidueye
King K. Rool
Ashley
[Bandana] Waddle Dee
Simon Belmont
Rayman
"DLCBK" (I assume Banjo&Kazooie as DLC?)

Image form:

Spoiler: Full codes:

01001001 01001110 01001011 01001100 01000111 - INKLG
01010010 01001001 01000100 01001100 01011001 - RIDLY
01001010 01001110 01000001 01010000 01010010 - JNAPR
01001011 01010010 01001111 01001111 01001100 - KROOL
01000001 01010011 01001000 01001100 01011001 - ASHLY
01001001 01010011 01000001 01000001 01000011 - ISAAC
01010111 01000001 01000100 01000101 01000101 - WADEE
01010010 01000001 01011001 01001101 01001110 - RAYMN
01010011 01001001 01001101 01001111 01001110 - SIMON
01000100 01001100 01000011 01000010 01001011 - DLCBK

If anyone's wondering, this is the leak we're talking about: http://boards.4chan.org/v/thread/424883081

This was fun.

Thank you so much. It's been logged.

 

[Knight Dude]

By characters, do you mean characters that people recognize easily like Mario and Pikachu?

By characters, he means not made up. Said characters don't need to be as well known as Mario or Kirby, it could be Dixie Kong or Geno or Elma or whoever else, as long as said character has a character, and a design.

I mean, I get that Mr. Game and Watch happened, but he at least originates from a variety of video games. games that have cartoony stick figures, that emote, even in Melee. I understand the Hanafuda cards were important to Nintendo's history, and feel free to support whoever/whatever you want. But it's a hard sell to people here. There's no personality in the "character" itself.

I mean, I couldn't give less than half a **** about Isabelle, but people are attached to the character for one reason or another. That's why people play crossovers like Smash, MVC, and so on.

 

[NintenZ]

Finally got all of them!

List form:
Inkling
Ridley
Decidueye
King K. Rool
Ashley
[Bandana] Waddle Dee
Simon Belmont
Rayman
"DLCBK" (I assume Banjo&Kazooie as DLC?)

Image form:

Spoiler: Full codes:

01001001 01001110 01001011 01001100 01000111 - INKLG
01010010 01001001 01000100 01001100 01011001 - RIDLY
01001010 01001110 01000001 01010000 01010010 - JNAPR
01001011 01010010 01001111 01001111 01001100 - KROOL
01000001 01010011 01001000 01001100 01011001 - ASHLY
01001001 01010011 01000001 01000001 01000011 - ISAAC
01010111 01000001 01000100 01000101 01000101 - WADEE
01010010 01000001 01011001 01001101 01001110 - RAYMN
01010011 01001001 01001101 01001111 01001110 - SIMON
01000100 01001100 01000011 01000010 01001011 - DLCBK

If anyone's wondering, this is the leak we're talking about: http://boards.4chan.org/v/thread/424883081

This was fun.

If this is fake then I have to give props for effort for translating everything into binary.

It’s the little things that count.

 

[KirbyWorshipper2465]

Base game: 58 fighters for $60 + the rest game and base ability to play it.
$1.03 per fighter + Super Smash Bros. 4 itself

The DLC prices:
$5 per fighter if you buy the All-In-One fighters bundle, no bonuses.
$34.93 total. More than half of the price of the base game just for 7 fighters vs 58 in the base game.

How is that a good value? It's a rip-off. And it's even worse that there's the P2W element which DLC fighters bring to the table; if one of them accidentally turns out OP due to poor balancing then it's potentially advantageous to purchase and play those characters. That's exactly what happened with Bayonetta. Although this was far from intentional on Nintendo's end, unintentional P2W is still P2W and I'm not going to support it. Plus, Cotton just admitted to wanting to purchase Bayonetta and Corrin to practice against them.. yet again, that's paying to get an advantage. Whether you have to earn that advantage or not, you wouldn't be able to have it at all without paying...

I don't know how people justify this... It's easily my biggest issue with DLC in the fighting genre as a whole. This practice causes outrage in games from other genres, why's it different here?

Because it was done with good intentions. He only brought on DLC because fans clamored for more characters and were willing to pay for them. Sakurai never maliciously held back content, disc locked anyone, forced pre-order bonuses, excluded content from anyone who didn't buy a premium version, didn't add any microtransactions....he just saw fan feedback and responded. The price was a bit inflated, but it was ok, because we got so much for our initial $60 compared to the vast majority of triple A games that it didn't seem unreasonable. The fact that they ended up being kinda OP was, as you said, an accident.

To me, I'd consider it unreasonable if Smash sold dozens of costumes as DLC. *stares at DOA5*

 

[Zinith]

I'd put Hanafuda under the "wild card" category...

Spoiler

And no, no pun was intended from that

 

[vaanrose]

Base game: 58 fighters for $60 + the rest game and base ability to play it.
$1.03 per fighter + Super Smash Bros. 4 itself

The DLC prices:
$5 per fighter if you buy the All-In-One fighters bundle, no bonuses.
$34.93 total. More than half of the price of the base game just for 7 fighters vs 58 in the base game.

How is that a good value? It's a rip-off. And it's even worse that there's the P2W element which DLC fighters bring to the table; if one of them accidentally turns out OP due to poor balancing then it's potentially advantageous to purchase and play those characters. That's exactly what happened with Bayonetta. Although this was far from intentional on Nintendo's end, unintentional P2W is still P2W and I'm not going to support it. Plus, Cotton just admitted to wanting to purchase Bayonetta and Corrin to practice against them.. yet again, that's paying to get an advantage. Whether you have to earn that advantage or not, you wouldn't be able to have it at all without paying...

I don't know how people justify this... It's easily my biggest issue with DLC in the fighting genre as a whole. This practice causes outrage in games from other genres, why's it different here?

Frankly, I'd pay even more. There's only so many man hours in a day, I'll pay what it costs to keep the dev cycle running.

 

[Opossum]

By boxart you mean logos and icons like Diskun and Napoleon on a Hanafuda deck?

Those sorts of things are exactly what I mean, though in Diskun's case at least it relates to video games. Napoleon is exactly the kind of non-character I'm talking about.

 

[Dracyoshi]

Because it was done with good intentions. He only brought on DLC because fans clamored for more characters and were willing to pay for them. Sakurai never maliciously held back content, disc locked anyone, forced pre-order bonuses, excluded content from anyone who didn't buy a premium version, didn't add any microtransactions....he just saw fan feedback and responded. The price was a bit inflated, but it was ok, because we got so much for our initial $60 compared to the vast majority of triple A games that it didn't seem unreasonable. The fact that they ended up being kinda OP was, as you said, an accident.

Yeah, it's an accident and it was done with good intentions. That doesn't change the end result... In the end, you could pay for an advantage. That's why paid fighters should be avoided. I have zero tolerance for P2W.
It's best to just monetize through other means, I'd much rather have cosmetic loot boxes to fund the development of new fighters instead of paid fighters. And/or if you could just earn DLC fighters through playtime with the optional choice of purchasing them to skip the grind then I'd be alright with it. These are what many modern games do to fund development of new fighters, champions or heroes.

 

[Knight Dude]

Base game: 58 fighters for $60 + the rest game and base ability to play it.
$1.03 per fighter + Super Smash Bros. 4 itself

The DLC prices:
$5 per fighter if you buy the All-In-One fighters bundle, no bonuses.
$34.93 total. More than half of the price of the base game just for 7 fighters vs 58 in the base game.

How is that a good value? It's a rip-off. And it's even worse that there's the P2W element which DLC fighters bring to the table; if one of them accidentally turns out OP due to poor balancing then it's potentially advantageous to purchase and play those characters. That's exactly what happened with Bayonetta. Although this was far from intentional on Nintendo's end, unintentional P2W is still P2W and I'm not going to support it. Plus, Cotton just admitted to wanting to purchase Bayonetta and Corrin to practice against them.. yet again, that's paying to get an advantage. Whether you have to earn that advantage or not, you wouldn't be able to have it at all without paying...

I don't know how people justify this... It's easily my biggest issue with DLC in the fighting genre as a whole. This practice causes outrage in games from other genres, why's it different here?

I can understand how you feel. At least in the pay-to-win aspect, it sucks if some extra buyable character is noticeably stronger than the rest. However in terms of price, 5 dollars is pretty fair. Characters are expensive, and DLC in and of itself takes it's own dev time, likely with a smaller team. Still, I'm not the type to buy EVERY character, just the ones I tend to like.

Also, **** lootboxes that you use real money for, paying for a CHANCE to get something is much more of a rip-off than anything else.

 

[Levy22]

The one BIG RED FLAG about this leak is that, while Decidueye is referred to as "Junaiper", Isaac is not referred to as "Robin"; if they were going off of the Japanese names like it looks like they are, that's what he'd be called.

Otherwise, I'd be happy with these roster additions, nearly 100%. The only one I'm not 100% on is Rayman, really; because I prefer Crash for "PS1 Mascot Platformer Character". *shrug*

That aside, thanks for doing all that puzzling.

That's actually a huge red flag indeed. Maybe it the leaker's "source" messed up, we wouldn't know.
I think Rayman makes a ton of sense but I'm mostly indifferent to him being in. I'd be hyped for Banjo & Kazooie though as they've always been my most wanted. That said, it's probably fake due to the JP/EN names
And no problem, I'm glad I could crack it!

 

[KMDP]

That's actually a huge red flag indeed. Maybe it the leaker's "source" messed up, we wouldn't know.
I think Rayman makes a ton of sense but I'm mostly indifferent to him being in. I'd be hyped for Banjo & Kazooie though as they've always been my most wanted. That said, it's probably fake due to the JP/EN names
And no problem, I'm glad I could crack it!

One thing I thought of was that they didn't want to bother figuring out how to legibly shorten "Decidueye" to five letters and just looked up it's Japanese name instead.

That's a massive reach into a straw grasp though.

EDIT: That or it's "Isaac, Binding Of" (No.)

 

[vaanrose]

Yeah, it's an accident and it was done with good intentions. That doesn't change the end result... In the end, you could pay for an advantage. That's why paid fighters should be avoided. I have zero tolerance for P2W.
It's best to just monetize through other means, I'd much rather have cosmetic loot boxes to fund the development of new fighters instead of paid fighters. And/or if you could just earn DLC fighters through playtime with the optional choice of purchasing them to skip the grind then I'd be alright with it. These are what many modern games do to fund development of new fighters, champions or heroes.

The thing about Pay-to-Win criticisms, and I don't entirely disagree with them, I think they need to do a much better job at balancing DLC than they have, but the flipside to the conversation is, if a DLC character is garbage, people will feel ripped off when they buy it. It's for that reason most competitive games with character DLC tend to err on the side of caution making them too powerful as opposed to not powerful enough.

 

[Dracyoshi]

Also, **** lootboxes that you use real money for, paying for a CHANCE to get something is much more of a rip-off than anything else.

Yeah they're a rip-off, I've never bought a loot box because the gamble is never worth it.
But the point is that it would fund the development of fighters through other means without leaving the opportunity open for P2W aspects to arise from unbalanced paid fighters. And cosmetics wouldn't provide a gameplay advantage, so purchasing them is 100% optional.
I'd actually much rather prefer just being able to outright buy cosmetics over loot boxes, but loot boxes would, unfortunately, do a better job at funding development. They earn more profit.

And I'd actually buy the cosmetics if you could say, directly purchase a new Yoshi or Ridley skin. I'd love to support fair DLC practices, development for new fighters and wear some bling.

 

[Zerp]

Although this was far from intentional on Nintendo's end, unintentional P2W is still P2W and I'm not going to support it.

I don't think it was intentional either, but can we really say for a fact that it wasn't? Her design is pretty low risk-high reward (Just look at Witch Twist, it's extremely safe for a move that has the potential to end stocks extremely early) which should have raised a bunch of red flags during testing if the balance team was any good at what they do. She did get nerfed twice though, once in 1.1.5 among other characters but more notably by herself in 1.1.6., the final balance patch, which happened to come out during a time where the current hot topic was "should we ban Bayonetta?", and if she was say, banned by the competitive community because they never released that patch, that'd just look bad for Nintendo. Nobody else was changed during that patch either, no buffs, no nerfs, just Bayonetta, it was almost like it was made just to solve a emergency. And then of course there's Cloud who's just over-tuned at everything. It's a tad suspicious that the general consensus on the tier list is that 2 of the DLC characters are the 2 best characters in the game. I'm not saying "Bayonetta and Cloud were intentionally made OP" but there's enough going on there to make me think that there's a chance it really might have been intentional.

 

[KirbyWorshipper2465]

Those sorts of things are exactly what I mean, though in Diskun's case at least it relates to video games. Napoleon is exactly the kind of non-character I'm talking about.

Not gonna lie, I wouldn't mind Diskun being in if it means his trophy is actually easier to get.

 

[justPUNT3R]

I NEED JIBANYAN IN ULTIMATE.
WE NEED YO-KAI WATCH REPRESENTATION.

 

[Dracyoshi]

The thing about Pay-to-Win criticisms, and I don't entirely disagree with them, I think they need to do a much better job at balancing DLC than they have, but the flipside to the conversation is, if a DLC character is garbage, people will feel ripped off when they buy it. It's for that reason most competitive games with character DLC tend to err on the side of caution making them too powerful as opposed to not powerful enough.

Yeah, I get that. It's just another reason why I don't like making fighters DLC; balance matters more than ever on them.

Ugh... But in the end... I'll probably just give in to whatever DLC Nintendo releases for Ultimate anyway. Ultimate looks great, and since it was released towards the beginning of its systems life cycle unlike Smash 4 it'll last much much longer. I'll be playing this game for years, so I might as well begrudgingly give in. Hate to do it, but I'll be missing out on too much. Especially if my most wanted fighters are DLC this time around. Stubborn boycotting will only get you so far!

 

[Putuk]

Of course you have a right to your opinion. But your opinion is very much the minority one. So my advice is: just don't play sword characters then. They're still the minority of all characters in smash, as brawler type characters are still more common. You may not have fun with them, but many many other people do. I don't anticipate any sword users this game minus a Xenoblade character (who may be using gun-swords or drivers) or Isaac (could use magic mainly), so I wouldn't get your undies in a knot too much. Chances are, we'll see more Dededes.

BTW, considering he uses a disjoint in most of his moves, part of Dededes moveset also plays like a swordie, so I'm not sure if it's the characters you hate, or if you just have beef with swords. But sword users only really differ from everyone else in that they trade frames for range. So what exactly makes them so much less fun? Do you even have an official reason for holding them in such low esteem? Do the frames matter that much? Too anime? A sword killed your dog?

Of course I'm being facetious, but I've never understood why certain people just hate characters with swords so much. Swords are an instrumental part of many Japanese games. Thus, many characters use them. Thus, many smash newcomers may end up with them too. Not a big deal.

I really dunno what to take from this, but I think the thing that pisses me off the most is that dogs are assumed to be animals I like, when they're some of my least favorite. Now if a swordfighter killed a lizard or an insect, I'd have much more of a motive to hate 'em.

Also ew Xenoblade characters.

 

[TMNTSSB4]

Yeah the tattoo turned out really good, but it took 4 hours to do and cost me $400 bucks so it better have turned out good. Thinking of expanding it with a Levin Sword to represent my love for FE Awakening and a Honedge to represent my long relationship with Pokemon.

You would be pimped out with a Levin Sword tattoo

Base game: 58 fighters for $60 + the rest game and base ability to play it.
$1.03 per fighter + Super Smash Bros. 4 itself

The DLC prices:
$5 per fighter if you buy the All-In-One fighters bundle, no bonuses.
$34.93 total. More than half of the price of the base game just for 7 fighters vs 58 in the base game.

How is that a good value? It's a rip-off. And it's even worse that there's the P2W element which DLC fighters bring to the table; if one of them accidentally turns out OP due to poor balancing then it's potentially advantageous to purchase and play those characters. That's exactly what happened with Bayonetta. Although this was far from intentional on Nintendo's end, unintentional P2W is still P2W and I'm not going to support it. Plus, Cotton just admitted to wanting to purchase Bayonetta and Corrin to practice against them.. yet again, that's paying to get an advantage. Whether you have to earn that advantage or not, you wouldn't be able to have it at all without paying...

I don't know how people justify this... It's easily my biggest issue with DLC in the fighting genre as a whole. This practice causes outrage in games from other genres, why's it different here?

Let’s see here, you got...Three characters that people wanted back in Smash () = a reasonable $3.99
Three 3rd Party characters that come with a stage and were wanted by many () = $5.99 (since like I mentioned, they came with a $1.99 stage while the characters themselves are $3.99)
The promotional character to hype up a game and has no stage () = $3.99

Then you got the retro stages being $1.99 each and the Mario Maker stage being $2.49, and finally $0.75 for Mii costumes each

Best thing about the dlc was how the characters and stages were something many wanted in the game (yeah there’s buffs/nerfs and characters that were needed/wanted, but better to save those for Ultimate)

Compared to other games where dlc is content either should’ve been in the game from the start and were left out on purpose or worse (like constantly releasing the same game instead of adding patches), Sakurai was extremely generous with dlc

 

[BluePikmin11]

By characters, he means not made up. Said characters don't need to be as well known as Mario or Kirby, it could be Dixie Kong or Geno or Elma or whoever else, as long as said character has a character, and a design.

I mean, I get that Mr. Game and Watch happened, but he at least originates from a variety of video games. games that have cartoony stick figures, that emote, even in Melee. I understand the Hanafuda cards were important to Nintendo's history, and feel free to support whoever/whatever you want. But it's a hard sell to people here. There's no personality in the "character" itself.

Those sorts of things are exactly what I mean, though in Diskun's case at least it relates to video games. Napoleon is exactly the kind of non-character I'm talking about.

I do not think a character not originating from a video game lessens the value and appeal of potential Smash character ideas like Hanafuda. Villager and Wii Fit Trainer had no personality, yet Sakurai made them an appealing character to play as in Smash 4 with the tools the character utilized. Prior to Villager's reveal in Smash 4, most people did not find the idea of a playable Villager to be exciting (Even with the potential the character had with the tools they can utilize in AC like Pocket, Shovels, Watering Cans, etc.), only for the reception to turn around after the first Smash 4 trailer, with Villager gaining their own big fanbase and fan-interpretations (Like them being a cold blooded killer with an axe) after their reveal.

I think as long as the character or character idea provides a distinct set of tools that can be used for combat, that would be enough of an appealing idea for Sakurai to implement in Smash, of which implementation will find appeal for audiences when they see the execution of the idea in gameplay. Hanafuda and early Nintendo toys not being associated with video games would not stop Sakurai from forging an amalgamation type character idea like Mr. G&W again to figure out what kind of "surprise" character to include for Smash Ultimate, now that all of the characters historically important to Nintendo video games like Duck Hunt and R.O.B. are all represented as fighters. For me basically, I do not perceive non-video game, amalgamated, Nintendo characters as forced ideas as long as such ideas can spark and show intriguing gameplay potential and distinct characteristics that differentiate from other characters in Smash to be worth constructing a move-set out of.

 

[Swamp Sensei]

is that dogs are assumed to be animals I like, when they're some of my least favorite.

Well that's because good people like dogs.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

To the whole DLC discussion: I thought the prices were fair. It's ridiculous to assume that a fully designed character (with several months worth of work in modelling, developing a moveset, making a new Kirby hat, balancing to some degree even if the community thinks it was not well done) AND a stage AND music will only cost 1/60th of the original price of the game, especially since most of the 3rd party DLC involved licensing costs as well.

Basic economics states that if people will pay it, it's not too expensive. Maybe for certain people it is, but not for the majority.

I'm also guessing that there are stipulations in the contracts that the third party DLC is not allowed to be bad. After all, which company wants to allow Smash to put their character in Smash, only to have the community as a whole laugh at them for being worse than Ganondorf.

If competing in tourneys and the idea of P2W is an issue, tourneys could ban all DLC characters. If they're in, it's not P2W no matter how good the character is, it's pay-to-keep-up-with-the-times. I guess then it seems to be a part of an entry fee, but one that you don't have to pay...you'll just be behind the power curve. Besides, the argument of "I bought this character to practice against" is valid for even low-tier characters. Imagine if Bayonetta was Zelda-levels of bad - not many competitives would buy her, so nobody would have practiced against her, which would allow a person who did buy her and learn how to use her to sweep up even if she were low tier just because they're not used to fighting her. If you want proof of this, look into any sports where handedness matters like fencing. If there's one lefty on the team, then the whole team will grumble going up against him since his target area is on the wrong side. But if you want to piss him off, find a second lefty - he's the only one of the team who hasn't practiced against lefties before.

This is another question of the casual-vs-competitive divide. The casual crowd wants DLC support so their favorite can get in eventually.

And lootboxes are the worst idea in the history of bad ideas. If I want a certain cosmetic piece, just let me buy it. Don't make me open a bunch of mystery boxes and hope that it's in there. There are still so many costume parts in Injustice 2 I want to unlock, but the RNG isn't favoring me.

 

[Zinith]

Well that's because good people like dogs.

I've been a dog person all my life, but cats love me for some reason...

 

[Dracyoshi]

You would be pimped out with a Levin Sword tattoo

Let’s see here, you got...Three characters that people wanted back in Smash () = a reasonable $3.99
Three 3rd Party characters that come with a stage and were wanted by many () = $5.99 (since like I mentioned, they came with a $1.99 stage while the characters themselves are $3.99)
The promotional character to hype up a game and has no stage () = $3.99

Then you got the retro stages being $1.99 each and the Mario Maker stage being $2.49, and finally $0.75 for Mii costumes each

Best thing about the dlc was how the characters and stages were something many wanted in the game (yeah there’s buffs/nerfs and characters that were needed/wanted, but better to save those for Ultimate)

Compared to other games where dlc is content either should’ve been in the game from the start and were left out on purpose or worse (like constantly releasing the same game instead of adding patches), Sakurai was extremely generous with dlc

Oh! I never bothered to add up the DLC prices if you buy each fighter separately. Suprised to see that you save money from buying them all separately rather than through the bundle
Well, that's better at least. Still around $30, more than I'd like, but not quite as unfair. And you get some stages, unlike the bundle which gives no bonuses.

To the whole DLC discussion: I thought the prices were fair. It's ridiculous to assume that a fully designed character (with several months worth of work in modelling, developing a moveset, making a new Kirby hat, balancing to some degree even if the community thinks it was not well done) AND a stage AND music will only cost 1/60th of the original price of the game, especially since most of the 3rd party DLC involved licensing costs as well.

Basic economics states that if people will pay it, it's not too expensive. Maybe for certain people it is, but not for the majority.

I'm also guessing that there are stipulations in the contracts that the third party DLC is not allowed to be bad. After all, which company wants to allow Smash to put their character in Smash, only to have the community as a whole laugh at them for being worse than Ganondorf.

If competing in tourneys and the idea of P2W is an issue, tourneys could ban all DLC characters. If they're in, it's not P2W no matter how good the character is, it's pay-to-keep-up-with-the-times. I guess then it seems to be a part of an entry fee, but one that you don't have to pay...you'll just be behind the power curve. Besides, the argument of "I bought this character to practice against" is valid for even low-tier characters. Imagine if Bayonetta was Zelda-levels of bad - not many competitives would buy her, so nobody would have practiced against her, which would allow a person who did buy her and learn how to use her to sweep up even if she were low tier just because they're not used to fighting her. If you want proof of this, look into any sports where handedness matters like fencing. If there's one lefty on the team, then the whole team will grumble going up against him since his target area is on the wrong side. But if you want to piss him off, find a second lefty - he's the only one of the team who hasn't practiced against lefties before.

This is another question of the casual-vs-competitive divide. The casual crowd wants DLC support so their favorite can get in eventually.

And lootboxes are the worst idea in the history of bad ideas. If I want a certain cosmetic piece, just let me buy it. Don't make me open a bunch of mystery boxes and hope that it's in there. There are still so many costume parts in Injustice 2 I want to unlock, but the RNG isn't favoring me.

It's not true that tournaments would've banned DLC by now if it's really P2W. It's beneficial to provide all DLC for the people who've purchased it, practiced and labbed the characters out. It'd be an incredibly controversial move that would sink the tournament. And lastly, it's a very light form of P2W. As the tournament will be providing all DLC on their sets, the P2W aspect merely comes down to your amount of MU practice. Most people don't care enough about that to ban them.

"Pay to keep up with the times" is still pay to win, though. No matter how you word it.

And yes, that's correct that it's even a valid argument for low-tier characters! I wanted to mention that when making the post, but didn't want my post to turn into a full-on wall of text. As I've said when replying to vanroose, it's just another reason why I don't like fighters being DLC.

 

[DaybreakHorizon]

I NEED JIBANYAN IN ULTIMATE.
WE NEED YO-KAI WATCH REPRESENTATION.

I really dunno what to take from this, but I think the thing that pisses me off the most is that dogs are assumed to be animals I like, when they're some of my least favorite. Now if a swordfighter killed a lizard or an insect, I'd have much more of a motive to hate 'em.

Also ew Xenoblade characters.

Yokai Watch needs to get in line behind other, more iconic third parties, and swordfighters, while kind of cliché at this point, can still have good moveset potential factoring in different sword styles and other capabilities.

Remember, the sword as a weapon has been used for centuries. The Wikipedia page lists three major fighting styles with 14 sub styles, and that's just the tip of the iceberg. This also isn't factoring different types of swords, shields, dual wielding, alongside other weapons and abilities.

Also Xenoblade is one of Nintendo's major series at this point whether you like it or not.

 

[Zerp]

Just want to throw it out there that DLC being P2W and needing to practice against those characters isn't the only incentive for competitive players to buy it, if you bring your set-up to events you're going to need all the character DLC + Dreamland regardless of how unpopular a character is, otherwise it's going to be kind of unsuitable for the event, mains of any character should expect to be able to play as their character on all the set-ups unless they're banned for whatever reason.
Also, I assume most of us will always want more characters in general so there's another incentive.

To the whole DLC discussion: I thought the prices were fair. It's ridiculous to assume that a fully designed character (with several months worth of work in modelling, developing a moveset, making a new Kirby hat, balancing to some degree even if the community thinks it was not well done) AND a stage AND music will only cost 1/60th of the original price of the game, especially since most of the 3rd party DLC involved licensing costs as well.

Basic economics states that if people will pay it, it's not too expensive. Maybe for certain people it is, but not for the majority.

I'm also guessing that there are stipulations in the contracts that the third party DLC is not allowed to be bad. After all, which company wants to allow Smash to put their character in Smash, only to have the community as a whole laugh at them for being worse than Ganondorf.

If competing in tourneys and the idea of P2W is an issue, tourneys could ban all DLC characters. If they're in, it's not P2W no matter how good the character is, it's pay-to-keep-up-with-the-times. I guess then it seems to be a part of an entry fee, but one that you don't have to pay...you'll just be behind the power curve. Besides, the argument of "I bought this character to practice against" is valid for even low-tier characters. Imagine if Bayonetta was Zelda-levels of bad - not many competitives would buy her, so nobody would have practiced against her, which would allow a person who did buy her and learn how to use her to sweep up even if she were low tier just because they're not used to fighting her. If you want proof of this, look into any sports where handedness matters like fencing. If there's one lefty on the team, then the whole team will grumble going up against him since his target area is on the wrong side. But if you want to piss him off, find a second lefty - he's the only one of the team who hasn't practiced against lefties before.

This is another question of the casual-vs-competitive divide. The casual crowd wants DLC support so their favorite can get in eventually.

And lootboxes are the worst idea in the history of bad ideas. If I want a certain cosmetic piece, just let me buy it. Don't make me open a bunch of mystery boxes and hope that it's in there. There are still so many costume parts in Injustice 2 I want to unlock, but the RNG isn't favoring me.

I agree with basically everything you said, but I want to make it known not all of us who play competitively don't want DLC, I play the game competitively and I'm hoping we get more DLC characters like last time (although I do hope they're balanced better than last time, but it shouldn't be hard to top that lol), you can be competitive and still care about the speculative things like hoping your favorite gets in.

 

[TheLastJinjo]

I feel like DLC characters for this particular game should just be free updates like Overwatch or games like that.

The whole selling point of Super Smash Bros Ultimate is "Everyone is Here". It's the "Ultimate" edition.

If fighters have to be paid for after you've bought the game, then everyone is NOT here and it's NOT the ultimate edition of said game.

So I think either we're going to see free DLC, or we're not going to see DLC at all.

 

[UltimateWario]

I'm all for DLC characters, because I don't have to buy them if I don't like them. I don't really think there's anyone feasible for DLC that would make me want to pay $8. I DO think the DLC was pretty ridiculously priced, as someone who didn't buy Smash 4.

 

[TheLastJinjo]

And another thing, we as players should not get to decide who joins the battle and who doesn't. I find the idea that a player can download some fighters and not others based on some false sense that they should decide who's worthy of being in the game to be rather insulting. You should not be able to opt out of any downloadable fighters in Super Smash Bros. This is also important for competitive reasons.

 

[KMDP]

Yokai Watch needs to get in line behind other, more iconic third parties, and swordfighters, while kind of cliché at this point, can still have good moveset potential factoring in different sword styles and other capabilities.

Remember, the sword as a weapon has been used for centuries. The Wikipedia page lists three major fighting styles with 14 sub styles. This isn't factoring different types of swords, shields, dual wielding, alongside other weapons and abilities.

Also Xenoblade is one of Nintendo's major series at this point whether you like it or not.

Speaking of Yokai Watch, isn't it not doing so well sales wise right now? (Like, someone posted an image of YW merch in a bargain bin many pages back).

It seems like it was a bit of a fad? If that's true.

 

[Noipoi]

Speaking of Yokai Watch, isn't it not doing so well sales wise right now? (Like, someone posted an image of YW merch in a bargain bin many pages back).

It seems like it was a bit of a fad? If that's true.

So much for "Pokemon killer".

 

[Dracyoshi]

I don't think people would even be bringing up the issue of there being too many swordfighters if each swordfighter we've gotten so far had a more distinct moveset and design. It's just that they all almost have counters, long disjoints and lack variety within their specials. We really don't have much representation of different sword fighting styles yet. No dual wielders, no fencers, etc.

Don't say that there are too many swordfighters. There's not. Say that there are too many similar swordfighters.

 

[Idon]

long disjoints.

I'm going to have to ask how you implement a character wielding a sword, a long disjointed weapon, without having long disjoints.

 

[Opossum]

And another thing, we as players should not get to decide who joins the battle and who doesn't. I find the idea that a player can download some fighters and not others based on some false sense that they should decide who's worthy of being in the game to be rather insulting. You should not be able to opt out of any downloadable fighters in Super Smash Bros. This is also important for competitive reasons.

Yeah, how DARE people spend money how they want to!