Official Smash Ultimate Discussion

[Opossum]

Steve is literally NOT either of those things.

Steve absolutely is iconic.

 

[PsychoJosh]

Steve absolutely is iconic.

He is most certainly not. He is a blank slate character.

I could argue that this Funko Pop is iconic. But it really isn't, it's nothing more than a forgettable template. The iconic aspect of Minecraft is its simple world-building gameplay, not any of its characters.

 

[Cutie Gwen]

He is most certainly not. He is a blank slate character.

That means jack, you know that right? Look at Mario, he's also quite lacking in the personality department. Iconic means recognizable. Aren't you also the guy who argued Bayonetta is iconic despite a literal miracle happening to give her franchise a second game?

 

[Opossum]

He is most certainly not. He is a blank slate character.

That doesn't stop something from being iconic. Miis are iconic and are completely blank slates.

Steve is honestly Link-level iconic. Yeah, many might not know either of their names, but they know that he's "that guy from Minecraft/The Legend of Zelda."

 

[Krysco]

With the whole 'important franchise =/= important protagonist' there's Pokemon which has only had a Trainer once and it wasn't the most recent game and he wasn't even given the canonical name of the gen 1 protagonist. Sure, his name can be changed but then the same applies to Link, Villager, Ness, Lucas, Robin and Corrin. And speaking of Fire Emblem, Chrom is important to Awakening yet he didn't get in as a playable character, not even as an alt like Lucina did.

Steve was brought up and while he isn't 'important', he's a recognizable face. My recollection of Earthbound isn't that great but I believe Ness is similar in that regard, not being too important to the plot of his game but he's a recognizable face. I can't speak too much for Fallout 4 as I've hardly played that game but if it's anything like 3 then the protagonist of that game can be considered unimportant and he/she also doesn't have the recognizable face going for them since their face can be changed far more drastically than the likes of Villager or Robin. The recognizable face for Fallout goes to the Vault Boy instead. Any 'protagonist' from a horror game like FNAF or Slenderman also lacks importance since they're literally just the player.

 

[PsychoJosh]

That means jack, you know that right? Look at Mario, he's also quite lacking in the personality department.

Mario is not lacking in personality by any means, what are you even talking about? His personality has been established since the early 90s. He's a friendly, pasta-loving, happy italian plumber who likes going on adventures and playing sports. He is always portrayed as SUPER expressive, displaying a wide range of emotions, and his latest game demonstrates his personality more than any other game in his series. Do you even know what personality is? Steve's only display of personality is that he goes "oof" when he dies. You've seriously got a screw loose if you think Mario and Steve are at all comparable.

Iconic means recognizable. Aren't you also the guy who argued Bayonetta is iconic despite a literal miracle happening to give her franchise a second game?

Yes, Bayonetta is a character with a distinct appeal, gameplay style and charm to her, who is well known and unmistakable for anything else. That makes her iconic. There was nothing at all "miraculous" about her second game being made, Nintendo simply saw an opportunity to fund a sequel and they took it. Because they know she's an icon. You're still wrong about this, I don't know why you're bringing this up.

 

[Opossum]

Mario is not lacking in personality by any means, what are you even talking about? His personality has been established since the early 90s. He's a friendly, pasta-loving, happy italian plumber who likes going on adventures and playing sports. He is always portrayed as SUPER expressive, displaying a wide range of emotions, and his latest game demonstrates his personality more than any other game in his series. Do you even know what personality is? Steve's only display of personality is that he goes "oof" when he dies. You've seriously got a screw loose if you think Mario and Steve are at all comparable.



Yes, Bayonetta is a character with a distinct appeal, gameplay style and charm to her, who is well known and unmistakable for anything else. That makes her iconic. There was nothing at all "miraculous" about her second game being made, Nintendo simply saw an opportunity to fund a sequel and they took it. Because they know she's an icon. You're still wrong about this, I don't know why you're bringing this up.

The thing is, iconicness isn't a measure of personality, but of recognizability. And Steve is immediately recognizable.

 

[Deleted member]

He is most certainly not. He is a blank slate character.

Steve is easily iconic. His game has potentially 120-130 million people who played the game, the second highest to Tetris. Think of all of the little kids who love making icons of Steve and other skins, and they are millions. I am not a Minecraft player myself, but Steve is beginning to become more iconic than even some Nintendo characters and others. He may be a blank slate character, but there are other instances of being blank and iconic.

Do you even know what personality is? Steve's only display of personality is that he goes "oof" when he dies. You've seriously got a screw loose if you think Mario and Steve are at all comparable.

That is because he is supposed to not have character. The point of Minecraft is not about a story mode ( there is a version of that, but Steve is not in it ), it is just about surviving and creating and building. Steve does not need personality at all, and how does not having a personality make someone iconic. I think you have a screw loose for saying Steve is not iconic.

The thing is, iconicness isn't a measure of personality, but of recognizability. And Steve is immediately recognizable.

This quote here is 100% accurate. Exactly right.

 

[Cutie Gwen]

Mario is not lacking in personality by any means, what are you even talking about? His personality has been established since the early 90s. He's a friendly, pasta-loving, happy italian plumber who likes going on adventures and playing sports. He is always portrayed as SUPER expressive, displaying a wide range of emotions, and his latest game demonstrates his personality more than any other game in his series. Do you even know what personality is? Steve's only display of personality is that he goes "oof" when he dies. You've seriously got a screw loose if you think Mario and Steve are at all comparable.



Yes, Bayonetta is a character with a distinct appeal, gameplay style and charm to her, who is well known and unmistakable for anything else. That makes her iconic. There was nothing at all "miraculous" about her second game being made, Nintendo simply saw an opportunity to fund a sequel and they took it. Because they know she's an icon. You're still wrong about this, I don't know why you're bringing this up.

Mario's still rather flat because he isn't complex. Ask any random person on the street what his personality, he's a good guy is all they average person could say. They are comparable in which they are from highly successful video games and beloved characters by many. Yes, Steve doesn't have much of a personality, if at all, but the LITERAL DEFINITION of 'iconic' has NOTHING to do with that.
The average person couldn't say "Oh I know her!" before she was put in Smash. That's how we know she isn't iconic, because otherwise her franchise wouldn't have barely escaped being cancelled. Nintendo wanted third party support and was interested in a game for mature audiences. If Bayonetta was such an icon, BAYONETTA 2 WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN A WII U EXCLUSIVE. It's called facts, you could even call it capitalism if you want to as again, Nintendo had to step in at the last minute to make sure the game would even get made

 

[PsychoJosh]

The thing is, iconicness isn't a measure of personality, but of recognizability. And Steve is immediately recognizable.

So is Bayonetta. You can't mistake her for anyone else.

Mario's still rather flat because he isn't complex. Ask any random person on the street what his personality, he's a good guy is all they average person could say. They are comparable in which they are from highly successful video games and beloved characters by many. Yes, Steve doesn't have much of a personality, if at all, but the LITERAL DEFINITION of 'iconic' has NOTHING to do with that.
The average person couldn't say "Oh I know her!" before she was put in Smash. That's how we know she isn't iconic, because otherwise her franchise wouldn't have barely escaped being cancelled. Nintendo wanted third party support and was interested in a game for mature audiences. If Bayonetta was such an icon, BAYONETTA 2 WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN A WII U EXCLUSIVE. It's called facts, you could even call it capitalism if you want to as again, Nintendo had to step in at the last minute to make sure the game would even get made

I'll concede the Steve thing, because I want to talk about Bayonetta instead.

How do you know no one would recognize her? Have you gone out and actually done a poll among a significant number of people? Because without that data, this seems like a completely ludicrous argument to make. People don't have to own her game to hear about her or know who she is. Even if we go by the idea that "only people who have bought her game know who she is" (which is ridiculous), that's still a pool of millions of people, therefore she is an iconic game character. I don't think you truly realize how many people that actually is. The actual number of people who know about her is likely much higher. Her games perform well, it's just that they don't do "as well" as games like Zelda or Minecraft because they are niche hardcore action titles with intense violence and a great degree of difficulty, giving them the image of a hardcore gamer's game.

Platinum needed financial assistance to make a sequel to her first game because they are a relatively smaller studio. They've ALWAYS needed to partner with somebody to work on their original IPs, like Sega, and Sega simply wasn't up to it at the time. That's why they got Nintendo's help instead. That's literally it. It's not a "miracle", and it also doesn't make her any less iconic. Platinum needing financial assistance to work on their own IPs and Bayonetta not being an icon because of that are two completely unrelated arguments. It's like saying, if Nintendo somehow didn't have the money to make another Mario game, then Mario isn't iconic. It's utterly absurd, and makes your argument completely falls apart at the seams. Using this logic you might as well say that it's a "miracle" that the first Bayonetta happened, because if Sega didn't fund and publish the game, it never would have got made. Games don't get made if they don't have any money for development! What a revelation.

 

[Cutie Gwen]

So is Bayonetta. You can't mistake her for anyone else.



I'll concede the Steve thing, because I want to talk about Bayonetta instead.

How do you know no one would recognize her? Have you gone out and actually asked people? This seems like a completely ludicrous argument to make. Even if we go by the idea that "only people who have bought her game know who she is" (which is ridiculous), that's still a pool of millions of people, therefore she is an iconic game character. I don't think you truly realize how many people that actually is. The actual number of people who know about her is likely much higher. Her games perform well, it's just that they don't do "as well" as games like Zelda or Minecraft because they are niche hardcore action titles with intense violence and a great degree of difficulty, giving them the image of a hardcore gamer's game.

Platinum needed financial assistance to make a sequel to her first game because they are a relatively smaller studio. They've ALWAYS needed to partner with somebody to work on their original IPs, like Sega, and Sega simply wasn't up to it at the time. That's why they got Nintendo's help instead. That's literally it. It's not a "miracle", and it also doesn't make her any less iconic. Platinum needing financial assistance to work on their own IPs and Bayonetta not being an icon because of that are two completely unrelated arguments. It's like saying, if Nintendo somehow didn't have the money to make another Mario game, then Mario isn't iconic. It's utterly absurd, and makes your argument completely falls apart at the seams. Using this logic you might as well say that it's a "miracle" that the first Bayonetta happened, because if Sega didn't fund and publish the game, it never would have got made. Games don't get made if they don't have any money for development! What a revelation.

I know that based on how the first game didn't sell well despite critical acclaim. I know that because literally nobody in my large group of friends knew who Bayonetta was before she was in Smash. That is NOT how it works, as again, people couldn't randomly recognize her as "Oh I know her, she's the lady who gets naked and fights demons right?". By that logic, EVERYONE who's at least heard of DBZ knows who Tarble is. Can you tell me who Tarble is without looking him up? No you can't. Also the fact you ADMIT she's niche shoots your entire argument in the foot.

Platinum asked SEGA to fund Bayonetta 2. They said no. They asked Sony. They said no. They asked Microsoft. They said no. You can guess where I'm going with this. If she's such an iconic character, why would anyone say no? Also a long lasting franchise that's over 30 years old isn't comparable to a franchise which at the time, had literally one game. There are so many franchises that ended up dying due to not selling well. Remember Blinx? The cat who was an Xbox exclusive? Or maybe Toejam and Earl? Your idea that niche things can be iconic because 1000 people would have known it means EVERYTHING is iconic. I'm iconic, My bike's front tire is iconic, etc.

Also, the argument was never "If Bayonetta 1 didn't get made then it wouldn't be iconic", it was "Bayonetta 2 almost didn't get made due to lack of demand, so it isn't iconic"

Also, SEGA owns Bayonetta, NOT Platinum. Just like how Namco made Smash 4 but doesn't own it.

 

[Cosmic77]

So is Bayonetta. You can't mistake her for anyone else.



I'll concede the Steve thing, because I want to talk about Bayonetta instead.

How do you know no one would recognize her? Have you gone out and actually done a poll among a significant number of people? Because without that data, this seems like a completely ludicrous argument to make. People don't have to own her game to hear about her or know who she is. Even if we go by the idea that "only people who have bought her game know who she is" (which is ridiculous), that's still a pool of millions of people, therefore she is an iconic game character. I don't think you truly realize how many people that actually is. The actual number of people who know about her is likely much higher. Her games perform well, it's just that they don't do "as well" as games like Zelda or Minecraft because they are niche hardcore action titles with intense violence and a great degree of difficulty, giving them the image of a hardcore gamer's game.

Platinum needed financial assistance to make a sequel to her first game because they are a relatively smaller studio. They've ALWAYS needed to partner with somebody to work on their original IPs, like Sega, and Sega simply wasn't up to it at the time. That's why they got Nintendo's help instead. That's literally it. It's not a "miracle", and it also doesn't make her any less iconic. Platinum needing financial assistance to work on their own IPs and Bayonetta not being an icon because of that are two completely unrelated arguments. It's like saying, if Nintendo somehow didn't have the money to make another Mario game, then Mario isn't iconic. It's utterly absurd, and makes your argument completely falls apart at the seams. Using this logic you might as well say that it's a "miracle" that the first Bayonetta happened, because if Sega didn't fund and publish the game, it never would have got made. Games don't get made if they don't have any money for development! What a revelation.

A good way to measure iconicness is by showing characters to people who have little to no interest in playing video games (AKA the last people you would expect to know the character). Go to any retirement home or office building and show people pictures of Mario, Sonic, Link, and Pac-Man. I guarantee you that there will be several people who can recognize them. Now do you think the same thing would happen with Bayonetta?

 

[PsychoJosh]

I know that based on how the first game didn't sell well despite critical acclaim.

Well, that's just plain wrong, her first game sold at least two million across all platforms. So you don't know what you're talking about.

I know that because literally nobody in my large group of friends knew who Bayonetta was before she was in Smash.

Completely anecdotal. I have a group of friends where everyone knows who she is. Not a sound or compelling argument.

That is NOT how it works, as again, people couldn't randomly recognize her as "Oh I know her, she's the lady who gets naked and fights demons right?". By that logic, EVERYONE who's at least heard of DBZ knows who Tarble is. Can you tell me who Tarble is without looking him up? No you can't. Also the fact you ADMIT she's niche shoots your entire argument in the foot.

Yes, I do know who Tarble is, but that's besides the point. You're conflating two completely separate things. Bayonetta is not a half-baked quaternary character from a 30 year old anime series who got retconned into oblivion. She is the star of her own games who have carved out their own place as a well-known mainstay of the action game genre, and more people do know who she is, as evidenced by the sales of her games and her star/cameo appearances in other games and media. "People couldn't randomly recognize her"? Again, how do you know this? You only seem to be using isolated examples or anecdotal evidence to back this up. Somehow I doubt your "large group of friends" consists of every gamer in the world.

Platinum asked SEGA to fund Bayonetta 2. They said no. They asked Sony. They said no. They asked Microsoft. They said no. You can guess where I'm going with this. If she's such an iconic character, why would anyone say no?

This also isn't entirely accurate.

Sega WAS funding Bayonetta 2, it was part of the deal Platinum signed with them, they were partway through development when Sega asked it to be put to a halt due to financial reasons. In not-quite-AAA studios like Sega, finances fluctuate all the time, so they simply couldn't keep supporting development and put it to a halt. Again, in Hideki Kamiya's own words, Platinum mostly receives support from publishers by making games they suggest or request. This means that they're not able to carry on supporting their original games entirely on their own and always need help from publishers in order to make them. Microsoft and Sony could say no for ANY number of reasons, the same way they said no to making any more Conker/Banjo or Jak and Daxter sequels which they know would sell gangbusters. Despite what you think, business decisions like this aren't as simple as asking "is the character iconic or not" like two gamers having an argument on a message board. There are many factors that go into deciding these things, and if we go by your logic, the fact that Nintendo said "yes" defeats your own argument, because you're only looking at the two publishers that said no (Microsoft and Sony) and not looking at the two that said yes (Nintendo and Sega, even if Sega pulled out halfway through).

Also a long lasting franchise that's over 30 years old isn't comparable to a franchise which at the time, had literally one game. There are so many franchises that ended up dying due to not selling well. Remember Blinx? The cat who was an Xbox exclusive? Or maybe Toejam and Earl? Your idea that niche things can be iconic because 1000 people would have known it means EVERYTHING is iconic. I'm iconic, My bike's front tire is iconic, etc.

Ignoring the fact that you're still simply wrong about Bayonetta's sales and carrying on like you're right, the word "niche" to describe a title does not preclude it being iconic, which as your own criteria dictates, means "recognizable". There are many niche titles that are iconic in their own right. "Niche" just means their gameplay caters to a specific audience, it doesn't mean they are unrecognizable outside of that audience or that people outside of the audience can't enjoy it either.

And I find it funny that apparently to you, 1000 is the same as 2 milllion. Yeah, they're totally the same number. Says a lot about the rest of your arguments.

Also, the argument was never "If Bayonetta 1 didn't get made then it wouldn't be iconic", it was "Bayonetta 2 almost didn't get made due to lack of demand, so it isn't iconic"

Alright, so I can see you obviously didn't understand the hyperbolic example I was making.

Games like Bayonetta need money to be developed. Platinum cannot fund the creation of original games on their own because they're not that big, so they need to partner with other bigger companies to make their original games. Their partnership with Nintendo to complete Bayonetta 2 is exactly the same as their partnership with Sega to make Bayonetta 1. Neither situation constitutes a "miraculous" event in which two companies joined up against all odds to release a game.

Also, SEGA owns Bayonetta, NOT Platinum. Just like how Namco made Smash 4 but doesn't own it.

Twenty percent accurate as usual, Morty.

Platinum and Sega collaborated on the project together. Sega commissioned them for an original game franchise and they worked together to make it. It is essentially owned by both of them, and neither company makes a move with the franchise without the involvement of the other.

A good way to measure iconicness is by showing characters to people who have little to no interest in playing video games (AKA the last people you would expect to know the character). Go to any retirement home or office building and show people pictures of Mario, Sonic, Link, and Pac-Man. I guarantee you that there will be several people who can recognize them. Now do you think the same thing would happen with Bayonetta?

If that's the criteria we're going by, then I suppose 5/6ths of the Smash roster isn't iconic either. Basically everyone who isn't Mario or Sonic. There's even a video of how I assume it would go down.

tfw even pikachu isn't iconic

 

[Opossum]

Well, that's just plain wrong, her first game sold at least two million across all platforms. So you don't know what you're talking about.




Completely anecdotal. I have a group of friends where everyone knows who she is. Not a sound or compelling argument.



Yes, I do know who Tarble is, but that's besides the point. You're conflating two completely separate things. Bayonetta is not a half-baked quaternary character from a 30 year old anime series who got retconned into oblivion. She is the star of her own games who have carved out their own place as a well-known mainstay of the action game genre, and more people do know who she is, as evidenced by the sales of her games and her star/cameo appearances in other games and media. "People couldn't randomly recognize her"? Again, how do you know this? You only seem to be using isolated examples or anecdotal evidence to back this up. Somehow I doubt your "large group of friends" consists of every gamer in the world.



This also isn't entirely accurate.

Sega WAS funding Bayonetta 2, it was part of the deal Platinum signed with them, they were partway through development when Sega asked it to be put to a halt due to financial reasons. In not-quite-AAA studios like Sega, finances fluctuate all the time, so they simply couldn't keep supporting development and put it to a halt. Again, in Hideki Kamiya's own words, Platinum mostly receives support from publishers by making games they suggest or request. This means that they're not able to carry on supporting their original games entirely on their own and always need help from publishers in order to make them. Microsoft and Sony could say no for ANY number of reasons, the same way they said no to making any more Conker/Banjo or Jak and Daxter sequels which they know would sell gangbusters. Despite what you think, business decisions like this aren't as simple as asking "is the character iconic or not" like two gamers having an argument on a message board. There are many factors that go into deciding these things, and if we go by your logic, the fact that Nintendo said "yes" defeats your own argument, because you're only looking at the two publishers that said no (Microsoft and Sony) and not looking at the two that said yes (Nintendo and Sega, even if Sega pulled out halfway through).



Ignoring the fact that you're still simply wrong about Bayonetta's sales and carrying on like you're right, the word "niche" to describe a title does not preclude it being iconic, which as your own criteria dictates, means "recognizable". There are many niche titles that are iconic in their own right. "Niche" just means their gameplay caters to a specific audience, it doesn't mean they are unrecognizable outside of that audience or that people outside of the audience can't enjoy it either.

And I find it funny that apparently to you, 1000 is the same as 2 milllion. Yeah, they're totally the same number. Says a lot about the rest of your arguments.



Alright, so I can see you obviously didn't understand the hyperbolic example I was making.

Games like Bayonetta need money to be developed. Platinum cannot fund the creation of original games on their own because they're not that big, so they need to partner with other bigger companies to make their original games. Their partnership with Nintendo to complete Bayonetta 2 is exactly the same as their partnership with Sega to make Bayonetta 1. Neither situation constitutes a "miraculous" event in which two companies joined up against all odds to release a game.



Twenty percent accurate as usual, Morty.

Platinum and Sega collaborated on the project together. Sega commissioned them for an original game franchise and they worked together to make it. It is essentially owned by both of them, and neither company makes a move with the franchise without the involvement of the other.



If that's the criteria we're going by, then I suppose 5/6ths of the Smash roster isn't iconic either. Basically everyone who isn't Mario or Sonic. There's even a video of how I assume it would go down.

tfw even bowser isn't iconic

Just wanted to jump in on one part: Platinum owns literally none of Bayonetta. They've been on record saying as such. Not to mention they're not mentioned in the copyright section in Smash. Bayonetta as an IP is 100% Sega-owned.

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

Selling 2 million doesn't mean much by itself. It only matters if they expected it to sell far more than that. Bayonetta didn't exceed expectations by what the developers wanted, so it isn't considered a strong seller.

Basically, numbers alone are meaningless. What matters is what they expected it to sell and if it exceeded expectations or was way lower. It's quite possible for many games to sell poorly in the eyes of the developers even if the number is reasonably high for us to see(in this case, 2 million).

 

[PsychoJosh]

Selling 2 million doesn't mean much by itself. It only matters if they expected it to sell far more than that. Bayonetta didn't exceed expectations by what the developers wanted, so it isn't considered a strong seller.

Basically, numbers alone are meaningless. What matters is what they expected it to sell and if it exceeded expectations or was way lower. It's quite possible for many games to sell poorly in the eyes of the developers even if the number is reasonably high for us to see(in this case, 2 million).

2 million is about what they expected. When it only sold 1 million they thought it was short of their expectations, although they still thought it sold well.

 

[Ryu Myuutsu]

Selling 2 million doesn't mean much by itself. It only matters if they expected it to sell far more than that. Bayonetta didn't exceed expectations by what the developers wanted, so it isn't considered a strong seller.

Basically, numbers alone are meaningless. What matters is what they expected it to sell and if it exceeded expectations or was way lower. It's quite possible for many games to sell poorly in the eyes of the developers even if the number is reasonably high for us to see(in this case, 2 million).

I don't know, 2 million units is a very respectable number for a new IP. If we were talking about Mario and Zelda however, then sure, it wouldn't be that impressive.

 

[Guybrush20X6]

It's all about sales "expectations" not the raw numbers.

The Tomb Raider reboot was initually considered a failure despite selling millions and indie games send out "we love you beautiful people who give us money" tweets at 50,000 or less. Bayonetta was projected to sell more than it did and it only really survived thanks to Nintendo's investment in Sega/Platinum.

She won the public vote though. Hope that translates into better numbers for Bayo 3.

 

[Cosmic77]

If that's the criteria we're going by, then I suppose 5/6ths of the Smash roster isn't iconic either. Basically everyone who isn't Mario or Sonic. There's even a video of how I assume it would go down.

tfw even pikachu isn't iconic

I'm sure quite a few people could tell you who Peach, Bowser, Yoshi, DK, Wario, Zelda, Kirby, and Pikachu are.

There's a difference between being iconic to a certain demographic and being iconic in general. While Fox and Samus might seem pretty iconic to us, they probably won't be to other people. Looking at the Bayo franchise and how it's only had three games, I can't imagine how many people outside of those who follow video games very closely would be able to recognize her.

 

[PsychoJosh]

I'm sure quite a few people could tell you who Peach, Bowser, Yoshi, DK, Wario, Zelda, Kirby, and Pikachu are.

Yeah, and I'm sure there's "quite a few" people who could tell you who Bayonetta is.

It's all anecdotal, and misses the point of the word "iconic" to begin with, which means recognizable. There is no mistaking Bayonetta for anyone else, so she is recognizable. You can't really prove or disprove her icon status based on anecdotes about who does and doesn't know her.

 

[Pacack]

the word "iconic" to begin with, which means recognizable

I believe that the controversy with this conversation right now is a misunderstanding of what this word means.

Widely recognized and well-established.

In order for something to be iconic, it must be:

1. Widely recognized.
2. Well-established.

The sticky part of this is that "widely" depends on the context. (ie, widely recognized to whom? well established in what?) I believe that, generally, the understanding for third parties is that they must be widely recognized by the general public and/or well-established in popular gaming culture.

Whether Bayonetta is "iconic" or not is up for debate (I would argue so, but that's not the point). Whether Steve? is or not really isn't. The character is widely recognized by the general populace and is well-established in popular gaming culture by virtue of being the best-selling PC game of all time.

EDIT: Oh, yeah, and also the second best selling individual game of all time. Beaten only by Tetris and above Grand Theft Auto V, Wii Sports, and Super Mario Bros.

 

[PsychoJosh]

I believe that the controversy with this conversation right now is a misunderstanding of what this word means.


In order for something to be iconic, it must be:

1. Widely recognized.
2. Well-established.

The sticky part of this is that "widely" depends on the context. (ie, widely recognized to whom? well established in what?) I believe that, generally, the understanding for third parties is that they must be widely recognized by the general public and/or well-established in popular gaming culture.

Whether Bayonetta is "iconic" or not is up for debate (I would argue so, but that's not the point). Whether Steve? is or not really isn't. The character is widely recognized by the general populace and is well-established in popular gaming culture by virtue of being the best-selling PC game of all time.

EDIT: Oh, yeah, and also the second best selling individual game of all time. Beaten only by Tetris and above Grand Theft Auto V, Wii Sports, and Super Mario Bros.

Alright, well I already conceded the Steve argument. I wanted to talk about Bayonetta instead.

 

[N3ON]

Bayonetta isn't iconic.

She has a dedicated fanbase who knows her. She has critical acclaim and commercial mediocrity. There are dozens of starring video game characters more prevalent in the public eye. There are probably hundreds of more identifiable video game characters, because a unique appearance is not synonymous with ubiquity. If it was no one would know who Nathan Drake was. It'd be all about Aero the Acrobat.

Being well known in some circles does not an icon at large make. Perhaps in those circles, sure, but that isn't the context at hand. The only source that should be necessary in validating these claims is even a cursory knowledge of her series, its audience, and their history. Your argumentation is pretty strange, Josh. By your logic, iconography is endemic to a very wide swath of characters, which itself almost defeats the existence of the term.

 

[TheLastJinjo]

I hear people saying Smash for Switch is going to be a Smash 4 port, and I would prefer a new sequel to be honest. A new sequel with some interesting gimmicks and other things is nice, not a direct Smash 4 port. Subspace Emissary would be nice, but that would take a long time. If Smash for Switch was Smash 5, hopefully they do not cut any characters from Smash 4 and add some more even.

You'd probably have more time for new content if you ported the game. Focus less on making veterans from scratch and have more time for newcomers, stages, and new modes. Possibly even personal Break The Target stages.

And not have to remake the entire line of Smash Amiibo.

Of course you could still make adjustments to veterans such as their move sets. And the only characters that would need to undergo aesthetic design changes are Fox, Falco, and Bayonetta.

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

A good way to look at it is this; If you ask 9/10 people, they would know the character or recognize them by name and/or design if you ask them. Bayonetta is nowhere near this factor, although to be fair, she is getting there. She's just not there. Yet. She's closer to about 5/10 or maybe 6/10 these days overall speaking. Which is still pretty good, relatively speaking, for a newer character.

 

[N3ON]

A good way to look at it is this; If you ask 9/10 people, they would know the character or recognize them by name and/or design if you ask them. Bayonetta is nowhere near this factor, although to be fair, she is getting there. She's just not there. Yet. She's closer to about 5/10 or maybe 6/10 these days overall speaking. Which is still pretty good, relatively speaking, for a newer character.

Are you asking gamers or just anybody?

If it's just anybody I'd put it below 5/10. I'd maintain that, while a darling of the gaming industry, she's still a very niche character.

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

Are you asking gamers or just anybody?

If it's just anybody I'd put it below 5/10. I'd maintain that, while a darling of the gaming industry, she's still a very niche character.

Anybody, to be clear. But fair enough. It's quite clear she ain't a 9/10 at this time, regardless.

 

[N3ON]

Anybody, to be clear. But fair enough. It's quite clear she ain't a 9/10 at this time, regardless.

Yeah, fair play.

Tbh I don't entirely disagree with Josh's facetious sentiment that only about 1/6 (probably closer to 2/6) of the roster would be considered truly iconic, or would score in the 8-10/10 range.

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

Yeah, fair play.

Tbh I don't entirely disagree with Josh's facetious sentiment that only about 1/6 (probably closer to 2/6) of the roster would be considered truly iconic, or would score in the 8-10/10 range.

Nor do I. That's true. Of course, Bayonetta is just among many of those lesser characters, and is really the only currently non-iconic 3rd party to hit Smash. Of course, being iconic did affect many(Snake is the biggest exception) in how they were chosen, although some had other factors than just that alone.

 

[Pacack]

Yeah, fair play.

Tbh I don't entirely disagree with Josh's facetious sentiment that only about 1/6 (probably closer to 2/6) of the roster would be considered truly iconic, or would score in the 8-10/10 range.

Honestly, if we're talking about iconic to the general public, then I would argue the only real contenders in Smash Bros. are Mario, Luigi, Peach, Bowser, Yoshi, Donkey Kong, Link, Kirby (maybe), Pikachu, Miis, Pac-Man, and Sonic. (Keep in mind that Guinness World Records recorded Pac-Man's recognizability in the United States at 94%, followed very, very closely by Mario at 93%.)

If we're talking iconic for people interested in games and iconic to the gaming industry, then our list is much, much bigger.

 

[Deleted member]

Late but....

x-post from FE General:

From Resetera:

Emily Rogers has gotten some things incorrect in the past, but she's been dead on quite a bit as of late.

What exactly is her current track record?
Last I heard she was arrogantly wrong about another leaker's information that happened to be true.

 

[N3ON]

Honestly, if we're talking about iconic to the general public, then I would argue the only real contenders in Smash Bros. are Mario, Luigi, Peach, Bowser, Yoshi, Donkey Kong, Link, Kirby (maybe), Pikachu, Miis, Pac-Man, and Sonic. (Keep in mind that Guinness World Records recorded Pac-Man's recognizability in the United States at 94%, followed very, very closely by Mario at 93%.)

If we're talking iconic for people interested in games and iconic to the gaming industry, then our list is much, much bigger.

I don't know if we'd be able to find a consensus over a definitive list, but I'd say roughly between 10-15 characters on the roster would be about right.

Late but....


What exactly is her current track record?
Last I heard she was arrogantly wrong about another leaker's information that happened to be true.

This is probably your best bet for finding any recent claims:
https://www.resetera.com/threads/switch-rumor-archive-read-posting-rules-in-op.16589/

She seems to be batting close to like .800, which is pretty great. But of course, she's gotten stuff wrong too, so as always, grain of salt and all that. Not sure what time you're referring to in particular though.
Though I'm still convinced Mother 3 is happening and was delayed to accommodate Switch's eventual back catalogue service.

 

[Pacack]

I don't know if we'd be able to find a consensus over a definitive list, but I'd say roughly between 10-15 characters on the roster would be about right.

Agreed.

 

[Al-kīmiyā']

If you showed me Steve before I saw the support thread, I would have identified him as some guy from Minecraft.

If you showed me a similarly bland yet drastically different Minecraft avatar, I would have identified him as some guy from Minecraft.

There's an anecdote for you.

 

[Questionmark222]

Any ideas for a new Classic Mode?

Btw I just realized that Brawl is 10 years old today... I feel old

 

[Deleted member]

This is probably your best bet for finding any recent claims:
https://www.resetera.com/threads/switch-rumor-archive-read-posting-rules-in-op.16589/

She seems to be batting close to like .800, which is pretty great. But of course, she's gotten stuff wrong too, so as always, grain of salt and all that. Not sure what time you're referring to in particular though.
Though I'm still convinced Mother 3 is happening and was delayed to accommodate Switch's eventual back catalogue service.

I mixed her up with Liam Robertson.

 

[The Stoopid Unikorn]

I mixed her up with Liam Robertson.

Funny how every single thing in that leak was completely true

 

[N3ON]

I mixed her up with Liam Robertson.

Yeah, Liam Robertson is a much more shaky source. He also said Shovel Knight was gonna be in Smash.

 

[Guybrush20X6]

Any ideas for a new Classic Mode?

Btw I just realized that Brawl is 10 years old today... I feel old

No but I've got plenty for a classic mode that's a straight forward arcade ladder with no nonsense and arranges by gimmick instead of series to make things less predictable. There's a heck of a lot more difference in fighting Link and Samus than there is between Link and metal Link

 

[Al-kīmiyā']

If it's just a port of Sm4sh, I won't be buying it unless a character I want gets in. I'll wait for Melee HD or 5mash.