Honestly, I kinda get why people seem to act like characters are the only/best way to represent things.
That doesn’t mean it’s true.
As
@Frostwraith said, characters have to start at a base. This is a video game that has to function. Randomly throwing things from a game into a fighting moveset just really doesn’t speak to game design with Smash, or actively ignores it. The moves have to make sense, they have to be cohesive and serve a sort of purpose.
Characters themselves represent the games they come from. That’s kinda the point of adding characters from all these popular games. However, I still truly believe that the idea of “reps” is silly and out of context.
Characters, in my humble opinion, should represent themselves first. They should do things they’re known for, but that also flow into one cohesive moveset. This probably shouldn’t change too drastically between titles, as you want players who like the play style to not be all that deterred from playing that character. This is why I always play Mario, no matter the Smash i’m playing.
When you have options of stages, music, assist trophies, regular trophies, and items, I think it’s silly to put all the weight of representation of games themselves on characters when really, there’s so much more to those games than the characters.
Zelda is nothing without Hyrule, everyone knows that. Sure, the characters are the focus, but Zelda is also a game with several different art styles and settings. Smash should honor that rather than making moves themselves reflect games they come from.
Otherwise, we’re looking at a Link that can also use the Ocarina, a Toon Link with a Leaf Glide, or any character with Z targeting, which may sound good in theory, but may not translate well or balance well in Smash.
Just something to think about. Just because a character CAN do something or represent something doesn’t mean it would work well or make sense in the context of Super Smash Bros.
