Official Smash Ultimate Discussion

[Kirby Dragons]

I disagree slightly, game-play is and should always be the most important aspect of a game. However, at the same time, I absolutely agree with the rest of your sentiment. As a cross-over, they should definitely prioritize the roster based on what people would actually like to see.

Although I think gameplay is a very important part of Smash, I do agree with you when you say speculatory movesets shouldn't be taken too seriously. What fans come up with is almost never close to what we actually get. This causes certain characters to get unwarranted hate or unobtainable, high expectations.

I could've been a bit more clear. Of course a game's gameplay is a huge part of the game; I was referring more to the way a specific character plays. While it should be considered, it shouldn't always be held as the most significant factor of the character's inclusion.

 

[TheLastJinjo]

What's more important? A more famous character from the less famous series, or a less famous character from the more famous series?

Neither.

 

[Bowserlick]

Buzzwole can be the bloodsucking rival of Simon Belmont in Smash.

Blood-swollen pecs versus shapely legs that go all the way up... Simon's skirt

 

[Sonic Poke]

Albeit, if you could make the argument for any of the above, would that not imply that Sakurai would more or less have the decision. They usually push a certain Pokemon; however, if the rumors are true and Pokemon Switch is just a Gen 1 remake, or retreading Gen 7, I could see them giving Sakurai creative control. And in that event, it is hard not to see him go with Decidueye/Mimikyu, if you ask me.

If the rumors are true and pokemon for switch is a gen 1 remake, I think the Pokemon Trainer actually has a shot again. Or at least Squirtle and Ivysaur. But they are vets. The newcomer would definitely be gen 7.

I mean, even if gen 8 with a entire new region is coming for switch this year, the newcomer will be gen 7 anyway.

 

[Cosmic77]

What's more important? A more famous character from the less famous series, or a less famous character from the more famous series?

I'd argue the latter. Mario and Pokémon are still getting characters in Smash, despite Rosalina and Greninja being far less iconic than Peach and Charizard.

 

[Godzillathewonderdog]

Sakurai: But, you know I get requests like, “Please put Goku in”
Sugita: GOKU!?
Sakurai: “Please put Spongebob”
Sugita: SPONGEBOB?!
Sakurai: That’s impossible

https://sourcegaming.info/2015/03/22/mewtwo-dlc-takamaru-and-sakurais-nico-nico-appearance/

Sakurai has also stated that Smash characters must originate in video games.

Sakurai says that, and then we get R.O.B., he says a lot of different things that he later backs down from. I would not hold my breath based on that alone.

I don't think Sakurai ever specifically stated characters must originate in video games. He said no manga characters and that they must carry game history with them (which R.O.B. does), but he didn't specifically say they must originate in a video game, and this was just referring to third party characters. There could be different rules for Nintendo characters.

 

[ErenJager]

The word impossible is being semantically argued.

I think we can understand the writers conveyed intent of the word impossible even if it's not technically the most perfect word to be using. (Anything is technically 'possible' when you get down to very minuscule odds people tend to lump it in as impossible)

Are there rules for additions to the Smash roster?
Yeah, sort of.
They're more of expectations then actual rules, and as most rules, specific exceptions do exist.

ROB, yes he debuted as a peripheral for the NES.
He's also had guest appearances in games since then.
He's Nintendo owned, clearly we see and understand the difference between him and a third party.

Has that rule been broken?
Technically - Yes.

Does that mean the flood gates are open for any character that didn't debut in a video game?
No, of course not.

If you want to argue and debate whats practically possible and whats nearly impossible (yet still technically possible), have fun, go a head.

Also I have to mention Lucario debuted in an anime movie, not a video game.
Another exception to the "rule".

 

[Scoliosis Jones]

I don't speak for everyone, but I'm not too focused on how the characters I want will play, aside from wanting them to not be clones. I support characters mainly because I like them and/or their series, or I recognize their importance. It's supposed to be a crossover; gameplay isn't the most important thing.

In terms of movesets, Opossum's are the only ones that get attention for some reason. Regardless, a fan moveset could very well be far off from what the character's moveset would actually be, so I don't feel like it's the best reason to support a character. I mean, I kind of want Decidueye if he uses trick arrows, but that's an if. Decidueye might just have regular arrows throughout his whole moveset, along with peck and wing attacks.

See, I completely disagree when people say that, “gameplay isn’t the most important thing”. At this point, while there are other factors involved in character selection, I think it’s far more important than it ever has been.

Smash 4 provided us with gameplay additions that we’d not seen in previous titles. Rosalina is a puppeteer, Shulk changes his stats, Robin is a hybrid between magic (distance) and swordplay (close range), Duck Hunt is a 3-part moveset between Duck, Dog, and Zapper, Bowser Jr. fights in a car with numerous contraptions, Little Mac uses a meter, and is very strong on the ground...there’s more I could talk about, but I’ll leave that for now.

My point is, Rosalina wasn’t the most talked about Mario character. That was Toad. Not to say Toad couldn’t be unique, but there was an opportunity to put a different character who provided more on a gameplay level. Very few Nintendo characters provide for a puppeteer moveset, but Rosalina does.

Robin was not considered the front runner for Smash 4. That was Chrom. Robin got in because he had more that made him different from the Fire Emblem roster at the time. If gameplay (or being different) didn’t matter, we probably would have had Chrom.

The focus on gameplay is why, in my humble opinion, Smash 4 has the best roster expansion in the series up to this point. Each character brings something new for the most part.

There’s also the fact that each trailer for Smash 4 focused on gameplay aspects of the character. Robin had a lot of info, and he even makes a point to say, “Which is why I carry my Levin sword!” There's also the fact that it wasn't always necessary to sell fans on the characters. Even in Brawl, we were getting the "All-Star" level characters. Meta Knight, Dedede, Diddy Kong, Wario...all big name Nintendo characters. Now? The characters we're getting certainly don't stack up in notoriety to say, Mario, Pikachu, Link, etc...They can't simply get in on namesake alone. They need something else, and that something else is gameplay.
---
Speaking of gameplay, I'm fascinated by the idea of Mimikyu. I'm actually going to try catching one and training it for competitive play, but I'm not entirely sold on it making sense in Smash. I've seen it brought up by a number of fans, but I'm not sure how it would translate.

It doesn't have arms to speak of, and i'm not really sure how the Disguise ability would contribute to making it unique beyond a counter of sorts. I'd love to hear some ideas, but again...I'm not sure how it would work in a fighting game like Smash. How does it grab onto the ledges? Would shadow-like arms work? Would that still fit the game?

I'm all ears!

 

[True Blue Warrior]

The word impossible is being semantically argued.

I think we can understand the writers conveyed intent of the word impossible even if it's not technically the most perfect word to be using. (Anything is technically 'possible' when you get down to very minuscule odds people tend to lump it in as impossible)

Are there rules for additions to the Smash roster?
Yeah, sort of.
They're more of expectations then actual rules, and as most rules, specific exceptions do exist.

ROB, yes he debuted as a peripheral for the NES.
He's also had guest appearances in games since then.
He's Nintendo owned, clearly we see and understand the difference between him and a third party.

Has that rule been broken?
Technically - Yes.

Does that mean the flood gates are open for any character that didn't debut in a video game?
No, of course not.

If you want to argue and debate whats practically possible and whats nearly impossible (yet still technically possible), have fun, go a head.

Also I have to mention Lucario debuted in an anime movie, not a video game.
Another exception to the "rule".

Lucario was conceptualised as a video game character, though.

 

[ErenJager]

Lucario was conceptualised as a video game character, though.

So to reiterate my statement, he's an exception.

The perceived rule is "debuted" in a video game, not "conceptualized" for a video game.

But for arguments sake is there evidence to support he was actually conceptualized for the video games first?

I feel he was more likely conceptualized to be a popular and marketable character for a multimedia franchise which includes anime, movies, toys, plushies and video games.

What came first the chicken or the egg?

Was he designed for the games first then applied to the multimedia marketing second, or vice versa?

I don't know - I personally can't find evidence either way beyond mere speculation.

Regardless being conceptualized and debuted are two different things, and still maintains my point that there are exceptions to the "debuted in a video game rule".

 

[True Blue Warrior]

On the topic of roster vs gameplay priority, I agree the roster is somewhat more important than gameplay uniqueness(which,let's be clear now, is about raw mechanics, not aesthetics) though that still is incredibly important. We ultimately play as characters and failure to understand that has lead to the MvCI "functions" meme.

 

[Deleted member]

Plus Bandai Namco has excluisivity rights on the IP for video games.

Money moves mountains, tho

Though that actually works to Smash's favor on the hypothetical that Namco-Bandai is involved again.
But yeah, if they aren't, that's one more problem.

Impossible is an opinion, it could still be possible no matter how improbable it is. Unfeasable would be a better word to use.

AFAIK (and I could be very wrong) Bandai owns all rights to DBZ games. Also FUNIMATION and TOEI have both "jokingly" expressed desire to have Goku in Smash.

Toei did? First I've heard that they have...
Got a link?

Your last sentence more or less summarizes my thoughts. Most opinions are based on facts, that does not make them any less opinionated. I believe the unlikelihood is heavily exaggerated, personally. Four separate legal entities does not necessarily make it more difficult per se. Perhaps longer; however, as far as I can tell, they are not overly protective of him and that is where most issues regarding licensing a character come from. I could definitely be wrong, but it is just something that, if Nintendo is interested, they will need to feel out for themselves. If they are genuinely interested, FOUR entities is not going to deter them.

It's still a major deterrent when none of the guests so far have had such an issue.

Sakurai: But, you know I get requests like, “Please put Goku in”
Sugita: GOKU!?
Sakurai: “Please put Spongebob”
Sugita: SPONGEBOB?!
Sakurai: That’s impossible

https://sourcegaming.info/2015/03/22/mewtwo-dlc-takamaru-and-sakurais-nico-nico-appearance/

Sakurai has also stated that Smash characters must originate in video games.

No, he never actually said that.
That was solely fan interpretation on what he said about guests back in Brawl. When directly translated, what he actually said was "manga characters will not participate".

But the "must originate in a video game" interpretation isn't necessarily unfounded considering how the Ballot was structured and how a guest is supposed to carry "gaming history" with them, which most characters from non-gaming origin don't carry, with just "they have games in their franchise" being the most they tend to have.

And no, Morbi, Just because Goku has a lot of games doesn't mean he carries "gaming history" with him.

Sakurai says that, and then we get R.O.B., he says a lot of different things that he later backs down from. I would not hold my breath based on that alone.

Even if the "must originate in a video game" thing was ACTUALLY what was said as I pointed out above, R.O.B. is not a valid counterexample.

a. He is Nintendo; the context for the mistranslated statement was in regards to non-Nintendo fighters.
b. He is a gaming peripheral specifically tied to a line of video games and is significant to not only Nintendo's history but gaming history as a whole.

You would have had a better argument with Lucario if it weren't for Nintendo having ownership of the Pokemon franchise.
He literally debuted in an anime film a couple years before making his actual video game debut and was included in Brawl's roster back when the ONLY thing he had was said film.

I could care less about the difference, all I care about is that the rule was objectively broken. Arguing otherwise is honestly just pathetic. However, I definitely encourage anyone to grasp at straws if it makes them feel better.

What's more pathetic is that you care so much about a rule that never truly existed being broken by your own invalid standards to where you feel the need to insult anyone who doesn't accept them as absolute truth.

I get that you have a hard-on for Goku showing up in Smash, but if you're using R.O.B. of all things as reason for it being possible, then there is something very wrong with how your thought process works.

 

[MasterOfKnees]

Obviously gameplay is the most important thing at the end of the day, but when we're supporting characters to get into the game it's a difficult thing to take into consideration, because we really don't know how Sakurai's vision of the character might turn out. You have someone like Mega Man who fits very well with some of the ideas his supporters had for him, but I doubt the few Rosalina supporters that existed imagined her as a puppet master, and neither did I see any Bowser Jr. concepts of him in the clown car, it was always about the paintbrush.

I've supported Ridley for 12 years now, but there's still the chance that if he finally does get in I might end up hating his moveset. It would be unfortunate of course, but it's not something that would ever make me regret putting so much passion into the idea, because I love the character and would be overjoyed to see him in regardless. It's incredibly hard for me to bring myself to support a character solely based on moveset potential, as a Nintendo fan I still want to play as characters that I like outside of Smash, and while it does happen that I like playing a character who I didn't care for in their own series beforehand (Captain Falcon, Ike), and that there were characters I were excited for that I didn't like playing (Wario, Greninja), it's an impossible thing to predict, especially this early into speculation.

I think there's a balance to be found between moveset gimmicks and characters' star power, obviously there aren't as many all-stars left anymore, but in the context of what we have to deal with I still think it's important to pick out the few big names that are available. Personally I feel Brawl struck the best balance in this regard, you got the best of both idealogies, and often even a mix of them, there were surprises and unique concepts, but also a lot of recognizable characters that really brought that special feeling out in you that only Smash can do.

 

[Bowserlick]

Mimikyu's Disguise ability: Under 55 percent Mimikyu has Ghost Type versions of Pikachu's specials. These specials can act slightly different and are not as strong. Mimikyu also has Pikachu's taunts.

Over and at 55 percent, Mimikyu becomes busted and gets a new set of specials and taunts.

 

[Sonic Poke]

I really miss individual break the targets and board the platforms modes. I think they should bring them back, along with the shared break the targets from brawl. 5 levels and an individual extra.

Overall I miss the 1-player experiences from previous games. Board the platforms from 64 was fun and should return. I think the classic mode from melee is the ideal one. Really organized an consistent. As for the Adventure mode, a SSE like mode would be fantastic. Some tweeks should be made to make it less repetitive and the smash world should look more like the worlds from the other franchises. But overall it needs to return.

All those things I mentioned are really unlikely, but to me they are ideal. The single player experience in SSB4 was really lame imho.

 

[Reality_Ciak]

Has the title "Super Smash Bros: Rift" been suggested? It could be a double entendre; the Smash logo could literally be a rift between worlds, and, as far as the potential story goes, the cast could find themselves divided on something, leading to unlikely alliances and rivals.

Included below are my current roster idea, as well as a "rifted" version.

current roster draft

Spoiler

 

[Deleted member]

You know, the talk about Bandanna Dee beign not that appearling or interesing makes me worried that he could suffer the same fate Chrom had.

 

[Jubileus57]

You know, the talk about Bandanna Dee beign not that appearling or interesing makes me worried that he could suffer the same fate Chrom had.

At least Bandana Dee doesn't have to worry about being a clone to anybody, and isn't yet another Fire Emblem blue-haired swordsman.

Besides I'm pretty sure that he is far more well-known than Chrom is.

 

[blackghost]

i can't believe im reading now that people are placing gameplay under roster in terms fo importance. I dont want smash to be a repeat experience of my time with dbfz. gameplay is what lives on. if players like a game they will develop attachment to characters through the gameplay they like.
dbfz for me failed because most of the cast distuighes itself on tiny changes. in comparison it would be like if most of the cast were semi clone spacies, marths, or falcon clones in smash 5. I dont find it enjoyable to watch or play.
My top picks are not getting in. thats fine. but whoever gets in needs to bring something new ot the table. It more than likely wont be there iconic status (they would have already been here) so it needs to be gameplay. This is why the inklings are a good idea. this is why i find ribbon girl to be a good idea, or geno, or others. Characters like laura croft and dixie and waluigi will require more work to stand out.
also: mario sports have been represented by peach for the past two games (side smash). ironically the only major mario title peach doesn't represent is her own.

 

[Kirby Dragons]

See, I completely disagree when people say that, “gameplay isn’t the most important thing”. At this point, while there are other factors involved in character selection, I think it’s far more important than it ever has been.

Smash 4 provided us with gameplay additions that we’d not seen in previous titles. Rosalina is a puppeteer, Shulk changes his stats, Robin is a hybrid between magic (distance) and swordplay (close range), Duck Hunt is a 3-part moveset between Duck, Dog, and Zapper, Bowser Jr. fights in a car with numerous contraptions, Little Mac uses a meter, and is very strong on the ground...there’s more I could talk about, but I’ll leave that for now.

My point is, Rosalina wasn’t the most talked about Mario character. That was Toad. Not to say Toad couldn’t be unique, but there was an opportunity to put a different character who provided more on a gameplay level. Very few Nintendo characters provide for a puppeteer moveset, but Rosalina does.

Robin was not considered the front runner for Smash 4. That was Chrom. Robin got in because he had more that made him different from the Fire Emblem roster at the time. If gameplay (or being different) didn’t matter, we probably would have had Chrom.

The focus on gameplay is why, in my humble opinion, Smash 4 has the best roster expansion in the series up to this point. Each character brings something new for the most part.

There’s also the fact that each trailer for Smash 4 focused on gameplay aspects of the character. Robin had a lot of info, and he even makes a point to say, “Which is why I carry my Levin sword!” There's also the fact that it wasn't always necessary to sell fans on the characters. Even in Brawl, we were getting the "All-Star" level characters. Meta Knight, Dedede, Diddy Kong, Wario...all big name Nintendo characters. Now? The characters we're getting certainly don't stack up in notoriety to say, Mario, Pikachu, Link, etc...They can't simply get in on namesake alone. They need something else, and that something else is gameplay.

It kind of goes in waves; characters who could be added now wouldn't be as important as our first twelve, but there are always leaders of who's left. When pondering Sma5h newcomers, my mind goes more to their own personal significance. KKR was the main antagonist of his franchise, Bandana Waddle Dee completes the quartet of face-value Kirby characters, Inkling's the protagonist of a highly successful new series, etc. For characters like these, gameplay is more secondary to "this character is something noteworthy and should be in this game".

If a character is popular enough, and still realistic, they could very well take priority over someone potentially more unique. It should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. If I could divide Sm4sh's newcomers into three categories, based on the main reason for their inclusion, I'd go:
Popularity:
Gameplay:
Significance:

With left out characters being undetermined (or clones).

I am seeing your point though. Sm4sh's characters are surely more unique gameplay-wise than SSB64's, Melee's, or Brawl's. Though, I'd imagine some of these unique opportunities were seen during development as opposed to before.

Speaking of gameplay, I'm fascinated by the idea of Mimikyu. I'm actually going to try catching one and training it for competitive play, but I'm not entirely sold on it making sense in Smash. I've seen it brought up by a number of fans, but I'm not sure how it would translate.

It doesn't have arms to speak of, and i'm not really sure how the Disguise ability would contribute to making it unique beyond a counter of sorts. I'd love to hear some ideas, but again...I'm not sure how it would work in a fighting game like Smash. How does it grab onto the ledges? Would shadow-like arms work? Would that still fit the game?

I'm all ears!

Mimikyu could use Shadow Claw (or Psychic) as its grab. As for Disguise, it could be a direct translate; the first attack that hits it has no damage or knockback, but makes it Busted Mimikyu, who has altered hurtboxes and hitboxes.

Busted Mimikyu could also have other properties for more usefulness.

 

[ColietheGoalie]

See, I completely disagree when people say that, “gameplay isn’t the most important thing”. At this point, while there are other factors involved in character selection, I think it’s far more important than it ever has been.

Smash 4 provided us with gameplay additions that we’d not seen in previous titles. Rosalina is a puppeteer, Shulk changes his stats, Robin is a hybrid between magic (distance) and swordplay (close range), Duck Hunt is a 3-part moveset between Duck, Dog, and Zapper, Bowser Jr. fights in a car with numerous contraptions, Little Mac uses a meter, and is very strong on the ground...there’s more I could talk about, but I’ll leave that for now.

My point is, Rosalina wasn’t the most talked about Mario character. That was Toad. Not to say Toad couldn’t be unique, but there was an opportunity to put a different character who provided more on a gameplay level. Very few Nintendo characters provide for a puppeteer moveset, but Rosalina does.

Robin was not considered the front runner for Smash 4. That was Chrom. Robin got in because he had more that made him different from the Fire Emblem roster at the time. If gameplay (or being different) didn’t matter, we probably would have had Chrom.

The focus on gameplay is why, in my humble opinion, Smash 4 has the best roster expansion in the series up to this point. Each character brings something new for the most part.

There’s also the fact that each trailer for Smash 4 focused on gameplay aspects of the character. Robin had a lot of info, and he even makes a point to say, “Which is why I carry my Levin sword!” There's also the fact that it wasn't always necessary to sell fans on the characters. Even in Brawl, we were getting the "All-Star" level characters. Meta Knight, Dedede, Diddy Kong, Wario...all big name Nintendo characters. Now? The characters we're getting certainly don't stack up in notoriety to say, Mario, Pikachu, Link, etc...They can't simply get in on namesake alone. They need something else, and that something else is gameplay.

Honestly, I think the truth is in the middle.

Sometime I think people forget that Smash is a crossover game as much as a fighting game. Unlike some other fighting franchises, they're not making characters up, so they can't just be like "We need a spacing moveset. What if he was a sword-wielding koala!?!" and make it so. You're actively paying tribute to and celebrating Nintendo's past and present. So, despite what some people say, reps mean something. Picking characters that people identify with and care about is part of the game.

Yes, we got some great ideas/concepts on the roster for 4, and those are much appreciated, and should continue to be added. But if they said "Ridley can be added, but there'll be nothing special about him. Just claws and fire", I'd go for it in a heartbeat, because I care about having the character.

---
Speaking of gameplay, I'm fascinated by the idea of Mimikyu. I'm actually going to try catching one and training it for competitive play, but I'm not entirely sold on it making sense in Smash. I've seen it brought up by a number of fans, but I'm not sure how it would translate.

It doesn't have arms to speak of, and i'm not really sure how the Disguise ability would contribute to making it unique beyond a counter of sorts. I'd love to hear some ideas, but again...I'm not sure how it would work in a fighting game like Smash. How does it grab onto the ledges? Would shadow-like arms work? Would that still fit the game?

I'm all ears!

His actual form under the costume can grow shadowy arms I believe, so they would just need to be peaking out when need be.

As for uniqueness, he's a ghost/fairy type, so all manner of deception, disappearing, and feinting are on the table I imagine. Plus "Let's Snuggle Forever" has the potential to be a terrifying Final Smash.

 

[True Blue Warrior]

i can't believe im reading now that people are placing gameplay under roster in terms fo importance. I dont want smash to be a repeat experience of my time with dbfz. gameplay is what lives on. if players like a game they will develop attachment to characters through the gameplay they like.
dbfz for me failed because most of the cast distuighes itself on tiny changes. in comparison it would be like if most of the cast were semi clone spacies, marths, or falcon clones in smash 5. I dont find it enjoyable to watch or play.
My top picks are not getting in. thats fine. but whoever gets in needs to bring something new ot the table. It more than likely wont be there iconic status (they would have already been here) so it needs to be gameplay. This is why the inklings are a good idea. this is why i find ribbon girl to be a good idea, or geno, or others. Characters like laura croft and dixie and waluigi will require more work to stand out.
also: mario sports have been represented by peach for the past two games (side smash). ironically the only major mario title peach doesn't represent is her own.

In a crossover fighting game revolving around established properties, of course people are going to care more about who is in it than how they play (nobody actually stated they would be okay with poor gameplay, nobody made that argument).

There is a reason why Playstation All Stars gets more criticism for its roster than gameplay.

At least Bandana Dee doesn't have to worry about being a clone to anybody, and isn't yet another Fire Emblem blue-haired swordsman.

Besides I'm pretty sure that he is far more well-known than Chrom is.

You say that like it is a bad thing.

 

[Spazzy_D]

You know, as far as the whole smash characters = gaming characters thing goes, let's remember that James Bond was actually considered for Smash. I mean, sure, he was quickly dismissed...but he was considered.

https://sourcegaming.info/2016/04/29/duflupdate/

 

[True Blue Warrior]

You know, as far as the whole smash characters = gaming characters thing goes, let's remember that James Bond was actually considered for Smash. I mean, sure, he was quickly dismissed...but he was considered.

https://sourcegaming.info/2016/04/29/duflupdate/

Well, the whole "no manga character" rule still means Goku ain't happening.

Spoiler

Gaston, on the other hand, still has a chance!

 

[RouffWestie]

I don't speak for everyone, but I'm not too focused on how the characters I want will play, aside from wanting them to not be clones. I support characters mainly because I like them and/or their series, or I recognize their importance. It's supposed to be a crossover; gameplay isn't the most important thing.

At some point in the past I may have felt the opposite way. But after actually singling out the newcomers in each game that got a genuine, “Wow, I'm excited to play as this character,” out of me, I feel like the characters are more important than the gameplay.

For me, different =/= good. Smash 64 through Brawl offered me characters and franchises I recognized and updated interpretations of classic forgotten characters all meeting together in a unique fighting game. That, to me, is good. I don't plan to play as every character, because I just have no real interest in some of them, so that effort put into making them unique is just wasted for me. There was tons of effort put into making many unique Smash 4 newcomers, but I don't have any interest in playing as in the first place; they're not characters I care about or feel I should care about. That, to me, is bad. Toon Link being a clone was disappointing, but I'd rather he be in at all with his minor differences than wait several years hoping that he gets a chance to be represented.

 

[asia_catdog_blue]

A character that will make a not buy a game is Steve from Minecraft. I don't want his ugly *** in smash. The only way to make me buy the game with him in it if all the characters from smash 4 return, Shulk get two new outfits and every smash game comes with a bottle of Pepto-Bismol so I can drink to be able to stomach him is smash.

The character I want in smash that will make be people mad is Barista

He's from rhythm heaven, he's the dog that you talk to in the bar in rhythm heaven for the ds, Wii, and Megamix. He also appears in the ds and Wii credits mini-games and helps you clear a mini-game that you have a hard time completing. I feel that he will be a good rhythm Heaven rep.

I'm sorry, but, he doesn't look like he belongs on a battlefield.

 

[Deleted member]

You know, as far as the whole smash characters = gaming characters thing goes, let's remember that James Bond was actually considered for Smash. I mean, sure, he was quickly dismissed...but he was considered.

https://sourcegaming.info/2016/04/29/duflupdate/

Goldeneye 007 for the N64 was a big deal. It shouldn't be surprising that Bond at the time would at least be given brief consideration.

 

[Rockaphin]

Significance:

If Ryu wasn't so dang iconic, I'd almost put Ryu into the gameplay category. During the direct, if I'm not mistaken, they really stressed the unique traits of the character(weak/strong, SF inputs, 2 Final Smash attacks). At the end, I think I recall a disclaimer stating that Ryu received special development while working on the character.

All those things I mentioned are really unlikely, but to me they are ideal. The single player experience in SSB4 was really lame imho.

I agree, I really enjoyed Break the Targets and Board the Platforms from Smash 64. I did not enjoy the Wii U's single player modes. Especially the "not-so Classic mode" ugh.

 

[Knight Dude]

In a crossover game like this, gameplay and characters that the player's get attached to are often nearly important.

As time went on, I very so slightly cared more about gameplay of the two, which led to me using Ike in Brawl, despite not caring about Fire Emblem much. Now he's my favorite character from that series, for what it's worth.

So obviously, some characters I support because I like them, while others I see great potential as a fighter, regardless of what I think of them.

 

[Deleted member]

Here's something that i was imagining:

Remember when Kimishima said about expanding Nintendo to Movies and such?

Well, imagine this scenario: Nintendo somehow creates an animated series............that's not based on a pre-existing franchise and it somehow becomes a big deal, getting games (developed in-house i assume) and the like.

If that event, no matter how unlikely, actually ended up happening, would the main character of that franchise be a possible candidate for Smash?

 

[AwesomeAussie27]

The winner was Alph, I guess to show there are many out there that thinks he deserve his own slot than being an alt. Louie was definitely close to beating him, and Brittany was proven more wanted than Charlie.

Next would be the first of many Sonic themed polls, this one focusing on Sonic's closest friends. Your choices are Tails, Knuckles, Amy, and the Avatar from Sonic Forces.

There was a problem fetching the tweet

Begin.

 

[Knight Dude]

Here's something that i was imagining:

Remember when Kimishima said about expanding Nintendo to Movies and such?

Well, imagine this scenario: Nintendo somehow creates an animated series............that's not based on a pre-existing franchise and it somehow becomes a big deal, getting games (developed in-house i assume) and the like.

If that event, no matter how unlikely, actually ended up happening, would the main character of that franchise be a possible candidate for Smash?

Hard to say. Sounds like now we're talking just business. If they own the character/IP, then they can do whatever they wanted with them.

But realistically, if they branched out into other mediums, they'd use their familiar IPs at first, because they have "pre-made" audience interested in watching/reading whatever. What's gonna grab people more, a new show that Nintendo just so happens to own, or a series based on something popular, like Zelda, Metroid or Fire Emblem?

 

[IronTed]

The big issue with break the targets and board the platforms is the roster size.

In 64 you had 12 characters, and therefore 24 stages.

Melee over doubled the roster, so cutting board the platforms basically made the work load the same as 64.

Brawl increased the roster to well over 30 characters, so making several generic stages greatly lessened the load.

At this point we're looking at a roster potentially over 60 characters. Making a unique stage for each would eat up a lot of time.

 

[Radical Bones]

Potentially fun game - name a character that you'd be happy to see as a clone because you know they'd never get full development time.

For me, I'd love to see Funky Kong in Smash Bros. Switch even if he was just a Donkey Kong clone holding a surfboard.

For this little game, I'll allow VERY MINOR changes for example Funky's up special has him pull out a surfboard and helicopter with that instead of his arms. That's all though.

So yeah, I'm wondering what new clones would you be cool with?

 

[ColietheGoalie]

Potentially fun game - name a character that you'd be happy to see as a clone because you know they'd never get full development time.

For me, I'd love to see Funky Kong in Smash Bros. Switch even if he was just a Donkey Kong clone holding a surfboard.

For this little game, I'll allow VERY MINOR changes for example Funky's up special has him pull out a surfboard and helicopter with that instead of his arms. That's all though.

So yeah, I'm wondering what new clones would you be cool with?

• Dark Samus as a Samus clone, just change her attacks to be Phazon-based with slightly different properties.
• Giygas as a Mewtwo clone, just some aesthetic tweaks
• Waluigi as a Ganondorf clone, because it would be ridiculous
• Maybe Koopa cloning Squirtle's old moveset?

 

[SmashChu]

You know, as far as the whole smash characters = gaming characters thing goes, let's remember that James Bond was actually considered for Smash. I mean, sure, he was quickly dismissed...but he was considered.

https://sourcegaming.info/2016/04/29/duflupdate/

Its a fair point for sure. Characters are (mostly) getting added on the whims of one guy, so it's hard to live by hard and fast rules.

Also, didn't realize you were still around.

 

[~ Valkyrie ~]

See, I completely disagree when people say that, “gameplay isn’t the most important thing”. At this point, while there are other factors involved in character selection, I think it’s far more important than it ever has been.

Smash 4 provided us with gameplay additions that we’d not seen in previous titles. Rosalina is a puppeteer, Shulk changes his stats, Robin is a hybrid between magic (distance) and swordplay (close range), Duck Hunt is a 3-part moveset between Duck, Dog, and Zapper, Bowser Jr. fights in a car with numerous contraptions, Little Mac uses a meter, and is very strong on the ground...there’s more I could talk about, but I’ll leave that for now.

My point is, Rosalina wasn’t the most talked about Mario character. That was Toad. Not to say Toad couldn’t be unique, but there was an opportunity to put a different character who provided more on a gameplay level. Very few Nintendo characters provide for a puppeteer moveset, but Rosalina does.

Robin was not considered the front runner for Smash 4. That was Chrom. Robin got in because he had more that made him different from the Fire Emblem roster at the time. If gameplay (or being different) didn’t matter, we probably would have had Chrom.

The focus on gameplay is why, in my humble opinion, Smash 4 has the best roster expansion in the series up to this point. Each character brings something new for the most part.

There’s also the fact that each trailer for Smash 4 focused on gameplay aspects of the character. Robin had a lot of info, and he even makes a point to say, “Which is why I carry my Levin sword!” There's also the fact that it wasn't always necessary to sell fans on the characters. Even in Brawl, we were getting the "All-Star" level characters. Meta Knight, Dedede, Diddy Kong, Wario...all big name Nintendo characters. Now? The characters we're getting certainly don't stack up in notoriety to say, Mario, Pikachu, Link, etc...They can't simply get in on namesake alone. They need something else, and that something else is gameplay.
---

I'm all ears!

I guess my only current criticism I've come to to all of this over time is that these characters' innovative gameplay styles tend to lean on less pick-up and play nature than the newcomers have been in last games over time - though I guess this might be not as big case in casual play and is also based on the game's engine which can give boons or nerfs to various characters, but as Smash-series has started to bit corporate some competitive nature to itself, whether in slight missteps in Smash 4's online modes, yet more core acknowledging via balance patches, I think it implies the criticism from more competitive side is being taken in account to some degree (even if a lot low-tiers ultimately didn't get the buffs they deserved )

With these highly varying playstyles though, they tend to become generally hit-or-miss over time as these characters' performance and potential gets throughly explored - with general consensus being that most of them didn't get enough optimization to be solidly performing to play (Robin, Bowser Jr, Shulk, Pac-Man, etc), while some possess such differing playstyles that they tend to outperform more "traditionally" fighting characters outright than last games did (Rosalina and all of newcomer DLC for example.)

Thus my concern on any upcoming newcomers just got more increased if say, they end up being actually difficult to utilize to their best because their very quirky playstyles - like, I'm sure many would be bummed if they'd wanna pick up Inklings, only realize their playstyle is middling at best when thoroughly explored and played with.

And well, I might say, receive Captain Toad, but if he's so built on a gameplay style that has him not being able to jump, while rest of him is trying extremely to make up for it in similar fashion to Little Mac, I'm just gonna have very odd character to play here, and might not even be tournament-viable. It's bit why I'm bit looking on characters more critically upon their reveals this time.

In general, I kinda hope they reconstruct the various gameplay styles to not become overcentralizing to characters to compensate ultimately on them being generally all-around well-performing characters to pick up and play as, instead of having such high learning curves that don't ultimately serve much because the character's attributes and moveset data sucks in general. ( and compared to and for example)

 

[Crap-Zapper]

Potentially fun game - name a character that you'd be happy to see as a clone because you know they'd never get full development time.

So yeah, I'm wondering what new clones would you be cool with?

Black Shadow - ... Ganondorf... (At least we would get a new F-Zero character)
Jody Summer - Zero Suit Samus. (Well, why not!?)
Raichu - Pikachu (Maybe a skin would be better, but ok.)
Medusa - Palutena (Just because, Medusa.)
Alph - Olimar. (Deserves it.)
Birdo - Yoshi. (Don't care about the character, but ok.)
Daisy - Peach. (Don't kill me D-Fans.)
Sami - Solid Snake. (It could work, plus Advance Wars, yay)
Pink Golden Peach - Peach (Just for Nathaniel Bandy)
Ridley - Charizard.

I'm sure there are more, oh well.

 

[Guybrush20X6]

Just remembered an obscure character I want to see in Smash in some way, Tethu from Ever Oasis.

 

[Knight Dude]

The big issue with break the targets and board the platforms is the roster size.

In 64 you had 12 characters, and therefore 24 stages.

Melee over doubled the roster, so cutting board the platforms basically made the work load the same as 64.

Brawl increased the roster to well over 30 characters, so making several generic stages greatly lessened the load.

At this point we're looking at a roster potentially over 60 characters. Making a unique stage for each would eat up a lot of time.

Honestly, it should be fine if there's a dozen or so Target levels, like in the original game, you don't need unique ones for each character. Brawl only had 5. But a solid dozen should offer enough variety, especially if you want to clear them all with multiple characters.

But I'd rather have an adventure mode like Melee. I don't need long cutscenes and 6-hour runtime, but I'm sure many people really like the character interactions, I think short scenes can do that job. Just a handful of levels based on each major franchise, including third parties if possible. And have a 2-player version of it.

Though if they did another Subspace style mode I just hope it doesn't take too much away from other potential gameplay modes.