I might give up on the bet where I lick a Ridley toy with a laughing tears emoji if Ridley makes it into Smash... that is just weird.
@Cyndane Do not get any ideas either ma'am..
Do you guys want me to lick the statue?
Bomberman is relevant? All I know of Bomberman recently is a small and not greatly received Switch game. Is there another big game coming out featuring him? (This might sound combative, but I'm legit asking/am confused)
Bomberman is getting a game on the Switch so... he is relevant for now. I know you already said this, but more can come if Bomberman continues to remain on a Nintendo console. Plus his games have been getting popular recently I thought, so why not add him.
I feel like that can go down the road of brigading/witch hunting all too easily.
I agree, lets not post weird and creepy YouTube videos.
Just quick skimming; a couple things:
1.) I really don't mind having more "sword characters." Sword movesets can be just as varied and diverse as any other fighting style. The idea of "too many sword users" comes across to me the same as someone saying "too many fist fighters."
2.) I think Goku is iconic enough to gaming. Even if he is most well-known as an anime/manga character, there have been literally dozens of Dragon Ball games, whether they're fighter games, adventure games, or RPGs, many of which are tied exclusively to or just associated with Nintendo, and some that date all the way back to NES.
I agree with both of them. The new DBZ fighters is really popular, so Goku can be classified as a "gaming character".
Honestly Goku is more related to a third party than a fourth party.
Why do people want Goku when Darth Vader is an objectively better choice?
True true, but Darth Vader is fourth party and Goku is closer to third party. Vader is less likely to be in Smash than winning the lottery yet it is interesting to see a legit mature person say they want Darth Vader in Smash Bros....