So why do so many have issues with swords?

[Arthur97]

As the title says, why do so many seem to have this distaste for sword fighters? For a while I thought it may have been more of a cover for FE hate, but now Pyra and Mythra seem to be getting at least some of it too. What does it matter so long as a moveset is unique? Just because it's a fighting game doesn't mean it need to be hand to hand as it were. So, why?

 

[DougEfresh]

I think most of it does come from the fact that the FE gang mostly have very similar movesets and designs (barring Robin and Corrin), which just makes them feel bland to play as. Byleth might be a bit different as well, but I can understand the feeling of FE representation feel pretty bloated.

That's probably the most significant portion of the disdain for swords, but I think more recently (at least my feeling on this matter, anyway) it's that we've gotten quite a few JRPG protags as playable characters, especially for DLC, and most (if not all) have swords and if sword attacks are what the characters' moveset designs are, there's only so many ways to design those in a way that feel unique to play as.

I mean, look, I get that Nintendo is a Japanese company, and that due to language barriers and other practical factors, Nintendo has largely chosen to pick characters from companies in their own region, but do their choices HAVE to be the most JRPG, weeb-fodder characters as playable? I can give credit where credit's due as I think Pyra & Mythra will at least have a unique design to lessen the blow, but I can completely understand people's irritation and frustration with this growing oversaturation of JRPG sword characters that have more often than not been the newcomers to the smash series for quite some time.

 

[Janx_uwu]

Sword characters just aren't fun to me.

 

[Arthur97]

I mean, swords are an overwhelmingly popular weapon in video games. Now if you wanna talk an RPG saturation, maybe. As for Fire Emblem, the ones that were meant to be unique I think are, and that goes for Ike too. Roy's also fairly unique these days, but still very much a semi-clone. I think there's an overgeneralization. Some people seem to see a sword and just assume they fight like Marth which is just a terrible assumption. Talking about uniqueness, most of them are, but people seem to ignore that. Shall we go over how many similar hand to hand moves there are? How many back airs are back kicks? So long as they are unique, what's the problem with using a sword?

Now, aesthetic is much more subjective of course, but you probably don't help the situation by calling them weeb-fodder.

 

[DougEfresh]

I mean, swords are an overwhelmingly popular weapon in video games. Now if you wanna talk an RPG saturation, maybe. As for Fire Emblem, the ones that were meant to be unique I think are, and that goes for Ike too. Roy's also fairly unique these days, but still very much a semi-clone. I think there's an overgeneralization. Some people seem to see a sword and just assume they fight like Marth which is just a terrible assumption. Talking about uniqueness, most of them are, but people seem to ignore that. Shall we go over how many similar hand to hand moves there are? How many back airs are back kicks? So long as they are unique, what's the problem with using a sword?

Now, aesthetic is much more subjective of course, but you probably don't help the situation by calling them weeb-fodder.

I mean sure, swords are extremely common weapons in VGs, but I would say in the context of smash, swords see disproportionately high usage compared to brawlers and other character archetypes which doesn't help the situation one bit. Roy is a bit better these days and Ike is fine enough, but overall the FE crew is just designed in an uninspired and/or subpar way, Imo. And if you want to get picky about my word choices, fine, but Idk what else you want it to be called when all the swordies are from FF, FE, or Xenoblade Chronicles. I actually don't mind Shulk, he's one of my most played characters and like how he was designed (we'll see about Pyra & Mythra, but so far so good from what I can tell), but the general lack of differentiation and majority of the playable swords being stereotypical anime characters and personalities doesn't help anything for a change in attitude about these characters even if some of their movesets are a bit more interesting.

 

[Arthur97]

I mean sure, swords are extremely common weapons in VGs, but I would say in the context of smash, swords see disproportionately high usage compared to brawlers and other character archetypes which doesn't help the situation one bit. Roy is a bit better these days and Ike is fine enough, but overall the FE crew is just designed in an uninspired and/or subpar way, Imo. And if you want to get picky about my word choices, fine, but Idk what else you want it to be called when all the swordies are from FF, FE, or Xenoblade Chronicles. I actually don't mind Shulk, he's one of my most played characters and like how he was designed (we'll see about Pyra & Mythra, but so far so good from what I can tell), but the general lack of differentiation and majority of the playable swords being stereotypical anime characters and personalities doesn't help anything for a change in attitude about these characters even if some of their movesets are a bit more interesting.

There are also swords from Zelda, Kirby, DQ at least. Also, for perhaps the most popular weapon in gaming, it's still vastly outnumbered by other types of fighters. Where are the complaints about too much punching or kicking? Not having a gimmick doesn't make Ike not unique. You're free to not like them, but arbitrarily saying there are two many sword fighters is a poor argument.

As for characters, do you actually know anything about any of their personalities? Have you ever played any of their games to actually judge? Besides, even non-JRPGs aren't always dripping with deep character.

 

[Bowser D.X]

There was quite a few sword character's announced in Smash 4, but I think Corrin was mainly what contributed to people thinking they were putting too many swordsmen in. IIRC when Byleth was released people had somehow convinced themselves that the next DLC was going to be some long requested character, and got mad when it wasn't. That pretty much cemented the whole "Too many swords" thing for people.

All that said, swords are cool.

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

I have a comp. friend who dislikes swordfighters because of disjoints and how they're used in Smash.

I personally find there's not much you can do with just a sword and some magic.

 

[Arthur97]

I just don't really get why swords are seen as something inferior or that should be kept extremely small in number. There are still way more fighters to punch and kick if that's what you want. Though, part of the problem seems to be how much people view them as samey. Never mind how they vary like hand to hand fighters. A fighter is a fighter. So long as they are unique (which does not require a gimmick) which they generally are and remember Chrom and Lucina were low effort (unfortunately) and even in the case of the Links, Toon Link has several different moves not even counting differences in their similar moves or how different Young Link may play even with similar animations to Link, there shouldn't be an issue in regards to moveset variety. Unless, of course, it's a smoke screen to try to make it sound more reasonable when they're just mad it wasn't what they wanted.

 

[DougEfresh]

There are also swords from Zelda, Kirby, DQ at least. Also, for perhaps the most popular weapon in gaming, it's still vastly outnumbered by other types of fighters. Where are the complaints about too much punching or kicking? Not having a gimmick doesn't make Ike not unique. You're free to not like them, but arbitrarily saying there are two many sword fighters is a poor argument.

As for characters, do you actually know anything about any of their personalities? Have you ever played any of their games to actually judge? Besides, even non-JRPGs aren't always dripping with deep character.

I think you're being a bit obtuse, since it's rather clear "swords" are typically the class of characters I referred to above, not the Links, or Kirby with final cutter, or even meta knight. Hero has sword attacks, sure, but his command menu and specials with mana are more prevailing with his moveset and design than the sword attacks in his kit. I'm not even saying I dislike them per se (or that there are "too many" swords overall in terms of raw numbers), just that I understand the reasons why people are annoyed with their presence in smash and that I think the concentration of JRPG characters in smash is getting a bit much in terms of recent newcomers (even if I've liked some characters from that genre like Joker and Sephiroth).

You've expressed your confusion, if not even your own frustration, about other people's less than enthusiastic attitude towards swords in smash a number of times in the past, and it does feel like you're projecting that a bit onto me by saying I'm making the same arguments that you commonly see from users far more salty about swords than I am. If you really think things Marth having a tipper mechanic and Lucina not having that, Roy having a sweetspot/sourspot distinction while chrom doesn't along with a poor man's Ike up b, etc. make them "unique," knock yourself out. I can't agree with you there, though. And I already conceded that Ike, Robin and Corrin are somewhat better in at least making an effort to differ the movesets a bit.

Fwiw, I'm not a JRPG fiend by any stretch of the imagination (big surprise, huh?), but I have tried playing the genre...I'm just selective at best about which games from that I play. The characterizations of the protagonists in them might have mild differences, but I'd say there's quite a bit of similarities personality-wise, and I don't need 1000+ hours logged with any particular JRPG franchises to arrive at that conclusion on my own.

I think we'll probably have to leave this as a "agree to disagree" discussion, because I've expressed myself to the best of my ability in my sincere beliefs about why I think others feel the way that they do about these characters, and while I may be starting to have a slightly similar sentiment as time goes on with these reveals, I feel nowhere near as strongly about it as many others probably do. There are plenty of other characters, in Ultimate especially, that I quite enjoy.

 

[Perkilator]

My only wish is that there were less Marth clones or copy-pasted core ideas from Marth (like Azura instead of Corrin and Celica instead of Chrom). Byleth at least avoids this by not only having a sword that’s nothing like a normal one, but mixing in different weapons as well.

 

[xzx]

Here's the thing: there are bigger differences/varieties (and playstyles) between the brawlers than between the swordfighters. Swordfighters have come to the point of being oversatured, as there isn't much you can do with them. The Links, Hero and Robin are great examples of unique swordfighters as they bring something more than swords to the table, unlike say, Lucina and Chrom.

Why I'm dissatisfied with characters like Corrin, Byleth, Sephiroth and Pyra & Mythra is because... Why? Why them over something more unique? We've already seen anime swordfighters before, we don't need more. (Just my subjective opinion btw.)

Now Imagine if Smash had too many FPS characters. (Especially as DLC.) Wouldn't that be boring? Or if a new Fighters Pass was just Metroid characters.

In the end, however, this all boils down to whether you mind "overrepresentation" or not. Whether you mind it or not.

 

[Galgatha]

Copying my post from the Competitive Character thread:

It's not really that sword characters are bad, or that you can't come up with unique ways of making a sword fighter (MK, Mii Swordfighter, and now Sephiroth come to mind), it's just that here in the west...Fire Emblem really isn't as popular as it is in the east. And I believe alot of the Nintendo fans feel jilted that a series like Fire Emblem now has 8 characters (which is 10% of an 80 character roster), while other huge name series from Nintendo (Mario, Zelda, Pokemon) have only 9 (counting 1 echo []), 6, and 8 (counting as 1 character instead of 3) respectively. For many, it just feels off balanced. Are these feelings logical, not necessarily, but they do influence how people react to seeing new characters. And since the grand majority of the FE characters are sword users, the feelings get transmitted to almost any sword user we get.

These are my thoughts of course, but I feel like they are appropriate.

 

[StrangeKitten]

I think it's a Fire Emblem thing. Had the amount of FE characters been kept down to say, 4 or 5, I don't think people would have taken so much issue with them. Because outside of FE, there's not that many of them. You're only looking at Cloud, Shulk, and Pyra & Mythra who fall under "uses swords for nearly every move". There are the partial-swordies too, which includes the Links, the Pits, Hero, and Sephiroth among others, but they use their non-sword moves a lot as well. The total for full-swordies (+Byleth because they feel more like a full swordie than a partial) is 10. Adding partial-swordies brings the total up to 20. Which is really not a lot in a game of over 80 characters in my opinion.

For the record, not trying to hate on FE or swordies. I don't mind them in Smash as much as most others do.

 

[JOJONumber691]

I mean people were begging for Rex, so I'm thinking the hate on Pyra and Mythra mostly just comes down to sexism lmao.

 

[Nah]

Hello, this is your regularly scheduled reminder that most complaints about the roster boil down to crying about not getting exactly what they want, born from naivete and an unwarranted sense of entitlement.

 

[Galgatha]

I mean people were begging for Rex, so I'm thinking the hate on Pyra and Mythra mostly just comes down to sexism lmao.

How did you come to this conclusion? Wanting Rex (Main character in Xenoblade 2) over Pyra/Mythra (basically his weapons) isn't exactly sexist.

 

[JOJONumber691]

How did you come to this conclusion? Wanting Rex (Main character in Xenoblade 2) over Pyra/Mythra (basically his weapons) isn't exactly sexist.

Rex is just the Player's Vessel, similar to Cross in X, while Pyra and Mythra are the Real Characters who move the Plot along, similar to Elma in X. That and Mythra has one more appearance than Rex, being the Torna DLC, which could've given a Solo Aegis a Big Advantage over Rex. So, these characters are just as much of, if not more, of a Main Character, and definitely WAYYYYYY More Important In-Universe than Rex. That and I have seen complaints about this Character being nothing but **** as well. So yeah, I'd say a part of this hate is definitely some Sexism.

 

[Galgatha]

Rex is just the Player's Vessel, similar to Cross in X, while Pyra and Mythra are the Real Characters who move the Plot along, similar to Elma in X. That and Mythra has one more appearance than Rex, being the Torna DLC, which could've given a Solo Aegis a Big Advantage over Rex. So, these characters are just as much of, if not more, of a Main Character, and definitely WAYYYYYY More Important In-Universe than Rex. That and I have seen complaints about this Character being nothing but **** as well. So yeah, I'd say a part of this hate is definitely some Sexism.

Hmm, I've personaly never played any of the Xenoblade games, so I just figured Rex was the main character. I can still see why people would maybe want Rex over the other 2 since you PLAY as Rex (as you said). Some people may have sexist reasons I suppose, but that wasn't displayed if your first post.

 

[JOJONumber691]

Hmm, I've personaly never played any of the Xenoblade games, so I just figured Rex was the main character. I can still see why people would maybe want Rex over the other 2 since you PLAY as Rex (as you said). Some people may have sexist reasons I suppose, but that wasn't displayed if your first post.

Cool.Thanks for the clarification.

 

[ZenythSmash]

I mean people were begging for Rex, so I'm thinking the hate on Pyra and Mythra mostly just comes down to sexism lmao.

nah, people just prefer the girls.
I still seen a lot of folk just wishing they could get in without Rex nor having to carry the Driver and Blade in the major gameplay.
they got their wish, lol.

also lol, if there's sexism, nobody cared about Sephiroth/Shulk's shirtless alts. Pyra/Mythra are easy targets to complain on twitter, since its the male gaze topic.
Like, I see the point, there's a huge coomer following, but it's just gas-lighting like how people try to start **** by bringing up the race topic with the lack of Twintelle, another Yabuki favorite.

 

[MyB]

People want more unique movesets

 

[Arthur97]

Rex is not Cross. Rex is an actual character with a personality as rare as that may be for modern RPG protags. Believe it or not, people do really like him, but that's neither here nor there. I wanted him, and his Chrom treatment may sting a bit, but I'll take what I can get here.

I think you're being a bit obtuse, since it's rather clear "swords" are typically the class of characters I referred to above, not the Links, or Kirby with final cutter, or even meta knight. Hero has sword attacks, sure, but his command menu and specials with mana are more prevailing with his moveset and design than the sword attacks in his kit. I'm not even saying I dislike them per se (or that there are "too many" swords overall in terms of raw numbers), just that I understand the reasons why people are annoyed with their presence in smash and that I think the concentration of JRPG characters in smash is getting a bit much in terms of recent newcomers (even if I've liked some characters from that genre like Joker and Sephiroth).

You've expressed your confusion, if not even your own frustration, about other people's less than enthusiastic attitude towards swords in smash a number of times in the past, and it does feel like you're projecting that a bit onto me by saying I'm making the same arguments that you commonly see from users far more salty about swords than I am. If you really think things Marth having a tipper mechanic and Lucina not having that, Roy having a sweetspot/sourspot distinction while chrom doesn't along with a poor man's Ike up b, etc. make them "unique," knock yourself out. I can't agree with you there, though. And I already conceded that Ike, Robin and Corrin are somewhat better in at least making an effort to differ the movesets a bit.

Fwiw, I'm not a JRPG fiend by any stretch of the imagination (big surprise, huh?), but I have tried playing the genre...I'm just selective at best about which games from that I play. The characterizations of the protagonists in them might have mild differences, but I'd say there's quite a bit of similarities personality-wise, and I don't need 1000+ hours logged with any particular JRPG franchises to arrive at that conclusion on my own.

I think we'll probably have to leave this as a "agree to disagree" discussion, because I've expressed myself to the best of my ability in my sincere beliefs about why I think others feel the way that they do about these characters, and while I may be starting to have a slightly similar sentiment as time goes on with these reveals, I feel nowhere near as strongly about it as many others probably do. There are plenty of other characters, in Ultimate especially, that I quite enjoy.

I'm not saying Chrom and Lucina are very unique (though as far as echoes go, they are pretty unique just from such minor changes as a tier list may show you in Lucina and Marth's case), but most of them are. Even Roy is fairly altered and plays differently from Marth. Even then, just objectively most of them have plain different moves from each other. Might find a few common similar moves, but that's true for hand to hand as well (like back kick bairs). They aren't somewhat better, they are different and unique movesets. Ike is no more similar to the others as Bowser is to Charizard.

And calling swordfighters like Link what they are is not obtuse. Link is almost all swords. How is he not a sword fighter? Of course Kirby isn't one, but Meta Knight definitely is. Most of Heroes normals are sword attacks and even some of those specials. How is that not a sword fighter?

And, okay, echoes and Roy aside, show me how the movesets are the same. Anyone. Take me through the vast majority of swordfighters' moves and show me how they are mostly the same. Link and Young Link? Sure, but I can raise you Mario and Dr. Mario. Overhead swing? Back kick bair. Lingering nairs. Similar moves are not just a swordfighter phenomenon people. Just look at Banjo and Kazooie who seem to have no less than four similar moves to others (nair-plant, fair-doc, dash attack-DK, down throw-K.Rool), but that doesn't make them not unique.

Though, in the end I suppose it doesn't matter. If I remember correctly, people still generally use sword fighters a good bit. Even if their detractors are loud, and even if I don't exactly understand the issue from a logic point. I can...sorta see it, but I'd hardly call Shulk a clone of Ike or Marth.

 

[Quillion]

Frankly, I think there are more "complaints about the complaints" for sword users than there are actual complaints about sword users at this point.

Any sparse sincere complaints about the latter come across as drive-by trolling.

 

[MyB]

Side note: Was everyone on Smash Boards an English major? Getting vibes.

 

[Ridley64]

Side note: Was everyone on Smash Boards an English major? Getting vibes.

I can read Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows in 2 hours, does that count?

Also, I think it's a combination of so many anime sword users, every slot means there's less chance of a character we want, people not playing Xenoblade, and other stuff.

 

[Galgatha]

Side note: Was everyone on Smash Boards an English major? Getting vibes.

I'm an author (see signature). Does that count? :D

 

[CheeseAnton]

Because people are mad we still don't have an Axe fighter.

(I can't think of any other major game characters that wield an Axe so maybe that's why we don't have any)

 

[Arthur97]

Anime sword user is such a vague term though. That's just a weapon and artstyle. Come on.

 

[Quillion]

Anime sword user is such a vague term though. That's just a weapon and artstyle. Come on.

Don't put much stock in that complaint. It's just a meme that's latched onto to give people something to complain about.

Like I said, I don't think there's anyone who complains about anime sword users who actually wants to have a serious discussion about why they're so prevalent.

 

[YoshiandToad]

Probably doesn't help that 6/10 of the Fighters Pass DLC have been sword users: Hero, Byleth, Steve, Sephiroth, Pyra and Mythra. Yes, Mythra has her own number unlike Alex or the other Hero alts...otherwise include them and it's even more overwhelming.

 

[DougEfresh]

I'm not saying Chrom and Lucina are very unique (though as far as echoes go, they are pretty unique just from such minor changes as a tier list may show you in Lucina and Marth's case), but most of them are. Even Roy is fairly altered and plays differently from Marth. Even then, just objectively most of them have plain different moves from each other. Might find a few common similar moves, but that's true for hand to hand as well (like back kick bairs). They aren't somewhat better, they are different and unique movesets. Ike is no more similar to the others as Bowser is to Charizard.

And calling swordfighters like Link what they are is not obtuse. Link is almost all swords. How is he not a sword fighter? Of course Kirby isn't one, but Meta Knight definitely is. Most of Heroes normals are sword attacks and even some of those specials. How is that not a sword fighter?

And, okay, echoes and Roy aside, show me how the movesets are the same. Anyone. Take me through the vast majority of swordfighters' moves and show me how they are mostly the same. Link and Young Link? Sure, but I can raise you Mario and Dr. Mario. Overhead swing? Back kick bair. Lingering nairs. Similar moves are not just a swordfighter phenomenon people. Just look at Banjo and Kazooie who seem to have no less than four similar moves to others (nair-plant, fair-doc, dash attack-DK, down throw-K.Rool), but that doesn't make them not unique.

Though, in the end I suppose it doesn't matter. If I remember correctly, people still generally use sword fighters a good bit. Even if their detractors are loud, and even if I don't exactly understand the issue from a logic point. I can...sorta see it, but I'd hardly call Shulk a clone of Ike or Marth.

I think you and I have different ideas and standards of what "unique" means in the context of smash movesets. You can find just about anyone with a similar or damn near identical move somewhere, no matter the archetype, and especially in Ultimate, a game with 80 characters and growing, there's going to be both creative and practical limitations in terms of how differently one back air can be animated from another back air of another character, for example.

I'll reiterate that I think most of the complaints come from a perceived (and potential even "true") notion that FE is started to feel oversaturated, with often similar moveset animations on the majority of their kits. Shulk at least has monado arts to add some "flare" to an otherwise dull sword-exclusive moveset (outside of grabs, of course), but I can also appreciate that a lot of his moves differ from most other swords (a forward lunge strike for fsmash, 3 spins around himself for dsmash, ftilt being a "baseball bat swing" than an arcing forward motion, etc.) I think that's people's issue with FE: the characters from that series largely have the same weapon, with an extremely similar aesthetic, with damn near the same arcing motions forward, backward, upward, or downward, especially in the air; changing some properties of their moves in certain spots doesn't override this pervasive similarity that contributes to their perception of being so samey everywhere else.

Also, I define the class of characters called "swords" to be those that possess and rely almost exclusively on their sword attacks on their kits, i.e., FE, cloud/sephiroth, shulk. Typically, the "swords" classification is very limited in its gameplan and playstyle variations, if they offer any at all. Maybe it's subjective, but I at least find shulk and sephiroth more interesting despite heavy reliance on sword attacks because of monado arts and shadow flare/giga flare respectively lending themselves some cool set ups and significant differentiation from just "big sword swing go brrr." The Links and Hero, Pit, etc, surely have swords, but they also have projectiles that they heavily rely on in combination with their sword attacks to make them diverse enough to not be pigeonholed in the category of "swords" in the same way, for example. Link has bomb and boomerang set ups, hero, for better or worse, has 21 additional options in command menu and his neutral b and side b that allow him different set ups and playstyles to prevent the same staleness of just mashing sword attacks. Pits have arrows for a significant neutral tool, and Metaknight almost exclusively uses sword attacks, but that's an instance where the animations and properties of attacks are significantly different to actually feel unique. You get the idea. It feels like you're being a literalist here by saying because a character has a sword, they are automatically a "sword fighter" when there's more to the definition than that, and this is what I meant by being "obtuse" in calling these subset of characters "swords."

That might sound silly to argue, but it escapes the common usage and classification of what's largely meant by "swords" in smash (whether you disagree with that definition or not is an entirely different debate altogether, but it's undeniable that "swords" have been used in much the way I originally used the term above).

In short, I think the vast similarities reach into more than one significant area of smash character design (aesthetic, attack animations, and playstyles) with many swords (again, FE being the biggest culprit of this) and THAT is what gives off the complaints we see today. If the similarities were just focused on one, maybe two, aspects of their overall design, I imagine there would be far fewer complaints, but who knows. It is the smash community, after all. They always find something to complain about anyway.

 

[Arthur97]

Link is a swordfighter whether you think he is or not. So is Meta Knight. So are the Heroes. I am being literal with both definitions.

I consider unique by what it actually is. A unique moveset that is not the same or mostly the same as another. Ike's is unique from Marth's. Toon Link's is largely unique from Link's. Sephiroth's is unique from Cloud. Chrom's is not unique from Roy's but that's the point. The Corrins aren't Marth, Ike isn't Marth, the Byleths aren't Marth, and this idea the FE swordfighters are pretty much the same just isn't accurate outside of the obvious clones and semi-clone. Yes, fighters can have similar "game plans", but that can be true of non-sword users. Even if archetypes are perhaps too broad as it is.

I still don't see much logic in the too many sword fighters logic. Even saying too many Marth derivatives seems muddies by how many seem to think that almost every FE fighter is a derivative of him. There may be droplets of logic in there, but are you sure it doesn't more so come down rationalizing hating on newcomers people don't like? Maybe not for everyone, but some at least. If you have to change the definition of unique to something more subjective, perhaps you shouldn't be using unique as a case.

 

[StrangeKitten]

Side note: Was everyone on Smash Boards an English major? Getting vibes.

Non, ma matière principale n'étais pas anglais. C'étiat le français.
(No, my major wasn't English. It was French.)

 

[DougEfresh]

Link is a swordfighter whether you think he is or not. So is Meta Knight. So are the Heroes. I am being literal with both definitions.

I consider unique by what it actually is. A unique moveset that is not the same or mostly the same as another. Ike's is unique from Marth's. Toon Link's is largely unique from Link's. Sephiroth's is unique from Cloud. Chrom's is not unique from Roy's but that's the point. The Corrins aren't Marth, Ike isn't Marth, the Byleths aren't Marth, and this idea the FE swordfighters are pretty much the same just isn't accurate outside of the obvious clones and semi-clone. Yes, fighters can have similar "game plans", but that can be true of non-sword users. Even if archetypes are perhaps too broad as it is.

I still don't see much logic in the too many sword fighters logic. Even saying too many Marth derivatives seems muddies by how many seem to think that almost every FE fighter is a derivative of him. There may be droplets of logic in there, but are you sure it doesn't more so come down rationalizing hating on newcomers people don't like? Maybe not for everyone, but some at least. If you have to change the definition of unique to something more subjective, perhaps you shouldn't be using unique as a case.

I'm going to be real with you here...I've really tried engaging in this thread discussion in a productive way, and it's fine if you disagree with me or anyone else on their interpretations or explanations of why people complain about swords or think there are "too many" of them in smash. But you don't seem particularly open to actually hearing these other viewpoints and are remaining firm and steadfast on your own opinions on the matter, and I think a lot of it is exceedingly narrow in understanding and interpretation. We can split hairs all day long about definitions and ways in which characters are or are not "unique," but if you can't see that "swords" are commonly referred to as a specific subset of characters with overall vast similarities and not literally any character with a sword, especially in this context (whether or not you agree!), then we're just wasting our time by engaging in reformulations of our respective viewpoints instead of a discourse where we can try to understand the other's side, maybe evolve our own opinions around that, and reach a somewhat meaningful conclusion on this topic. Have a nice day!

 

[Arthur97]

Problem is, I don't see these "vast" similarities. You wanna say how similar they are, but where is it? Is it the "gameplan"? If you're broad enough everyone has the same gameplan so that doesn't work. That they have disjoints? Whatever way you slice it the similarities all seem to be broad strokes. Moreso, even if it is these things, they seem more geared toward the competitive side of things which is the minority. Then again, that kind of fits as the complainers seem to be the minority and several of the influencers.

Go into detail. How is Ike like Marth. How are the Corrins and Byleths like Marth since those seem to be the most common ones. How are they alike outside of rather broad terms? Doesn't seem to be the moves themselves. Does every rushdown fighter feel the same to you? Every zoner? If we're talking archetypes than swordfighter is not a good term, and even within archetypes there are variations. Especially with how broad the Smash community can be. Don't pin it on the weapon if that isn't what you mean. Because in that cause it isn't sword fighters you don't like, it's whatever archetype you think some of them fall into apparently.

At the end of the day, your definition of sword fighter, at least so long as you call it as such, seems more based on feelings. What you think feels like a swordfighter rather than looking at the objective data of their moves themselves.

 

[RetrogamerMax]

I think it mostly has to do with the amount of Fire Emblem characters and almost half of them being clones or semi-clones and being blue haired like Marth. Most of the sword fighter hate is because of the Fire Emblem characters.

 

[Arthur97]

See, I used to think it was largely tied to FE, even if as a mask of hating it rather than nothing else as even unique fighters got hit with the complaint, but now Pyra and Mythra get hit with it, and Xenoblade isn't exactly bursting with fighters. It just doesn't seem to make sense if you actually look at things logically. The arguments seem largely tied to feelings. What people feel is unique rather than what actually is. Which, I can get that, humans are emotional creatures, but the evidence that they are samey as a whole seems lacking.

Another theory was that just because it was labeled a fighting game by people they just think it should be more punching and kicking which is a faulty argument if true, but no one seems to have put that one forward so guess not.

 

[GamerZeus]

"So why do so many have issues with swords?"

If anything, all I see is people praising the inclusion of Pyra and Mythra. It's obvious that everyone LIKES more anime sword fighters (BOOBA!), and the ones who don't like them are just a negligible minority.

So far, I've mostly seen people voicing their discontent regarding "anime swordfighters" being nothing but mocked and ridiculed, as if there was absolutely NO reasons to NOT like characters like Byleth, Pyra/Mythra, Sephiroth (...) being added to the game.

The thing is, there are reasons why its annoying but it doesn't matter because the majority of people want more anime swordfighters. Even if the game would be filled with them, they'll tell you "it's perfectly fine! You're just an 'anime swordfighter' hater lmao".

A someone pointed out, the game would (rightfully) be criticized if most DLC/New character would be FPS characters, such as: Master Chief, Doom Guy, Joanna Dark, CoD Protags, Destiny Protags, and so on.


Now, here's my 2 cents:

When I bought SSB64, back in the day, there was this feeling of getting the apex of what video games had to offer. Each characters were unique, and gave this "grand tournament" vibe. Every fighters were respected equally on their own merit (except maybe for jigglypuff... until rest KO was discovered).

Nowadays, SSBU indubitably feels less so. Series such as Pokémon, Fire Emblem and (arguably) other "Anime Sword Fighters" series take more space than anything else, usually due to their sheer popularity instead of value. The rest of the roster feels more like trophies who are there for the sake of it (Everyone is here!). You can literally browse the roster and be like "oh yeah, I completely forgot this character was here... well, who cares."


Regarding the "anime" part:

When you look at anime (or mangas and video games), you find out it's a highly standardized art style used for good and mostly low quality product/narratives (see: most shonen) because it's a simple art style that can be easily scale up into detailed artworks if needed. And since every artists you hire are expected to know how to draw in that style. And so, the more artist have to know that style, the more it becomes prevalent. Ironically, because of production requirements, the art that can be used by japanese artists became more restrictive, less creative and uninspired. That said, it doesn't the style is wrong by itself. In fact, americans have the same "problem" with the Disnay style, the gritty style and the comic book style.

Implicitly, that's what people try to point out: adding more anime style feels bland and uninspired because, in a way, it is. To quote a friend of mine: "Most people like me really like Big Macs, but they still feel cheap."


As for the "sword fighter" part:

Swords are prevalent in every culture. In a way, a game like smash who aggregate various heroes of various stories and series alike will have to face it in a way or another. Some use this argument to justify or even encourage putting more sword fighters in smash. Then, there are people who disagree and would rather let smash be as diverse as it used to be (or rather feel to be), instead of it turn into Soulcalibur.

Those actively favoring sword characters would argue that sword fighter in smash are already very unique but, if we excludes Links and specials, I do not agree with that at all. Even Soulcalibur, which has plenty of sword fighters in it, has more unique movesets than smash currently has.

Of course, "anime swordfighters" can be unique, but they currently are not as unique as other types of character are between themselves.


As for the "uniqueness" part:

There are many characters (even with swords) who are more unique than most of smash's swordfighters. You could even get characters from already included series. In that regard, there are plenty of options from series like Megaman, Sonic, The legend of Zelda, Donkey Kong, Metroid, (...), that would be more unique merely on the way they move and fight (again, even with a sword or not). Then, there are plenty of series not in smash yet that can bring some fresh air.

Characters like Hero are unique even with a sword (even with the RNG BS). Even if I really don't like him, he's still a good addition to smash because his moveset has a lot of character and is still very unique.

Characters like Pyra/Mythra or Byleth, on the other hand, aren't as much. They either flashy or a melting pot of existing stuff. Once you see beyond that, you realize they don't offer something unique at all, aside for esthetics.

Hero was "flashy" too, but he functionally remained unique after a while you get used to.

Just ask yourself: What do they add to the game? What do they add to smash that stand out enough for players to choose them over the rest of the roster?

I could give you an answer for Hero, Link, Marth, Sephiroth or even Lucina, but I'm not so sure about either Pyra/Mythra or Byleth.


Regarding technical/gameplay stuff:

There are also more technical reasons for why sword fighters being added isn't a good thing. Such as how "safely" they can trade hits with brawlers, thanks to disjoints, or that they can space out and camp easily most of the cast (thanks to: reflects/counter/range/great framedata/projectiles).

In that regard, not only swords are perceived as an issue, but any melee weapon added to smash are potentially an issue as well. Especially if they are swung just as fast, if not faster, as any brawler can punch when the latter doesn't have the same reach as the former.


'Nuff said

 

[StoicPhantom]

I'm not inherently opposed to swords, but I'm not a fan of how Smash Ultimate implements them. I'm aware that they're radically different games, but Soul Calibur had lots of ways to vary swords that made them feel unique like different stances and different sword styles. Smash is too simple to allow for a lot of variation, so I think it really comes down to aesthetic and style.

Robin's (Levin) swordplay is by far my favorite in Ultimate. It's smooth, clean, intuitive, and you can feel every hit. While I love the mage/sword hybrid I also wouldn't hate if they removed the mage aspects and just made the Levin sword their thing. But the rest of FE is pretty eh for the most part.

I understand the variance and nuance things like tippers make, but I think they are a little oversold. Yes they do make a difference and they do change things a bit, but I never felt a major difference from the core of say Chrom/Roy as opposed to Ness/Lucas. The former feel different in specific situations while the latter feel like entirely different characters. And even including people outside these dynamics like Ike still feels like swords are basically small variations in arcs and power.

Ultimate Marth/Lucina are paper swords without the grace the Smash 4 incarnations had. Marth's tippers notwithstanding, everything about them feels weightless and generic. Whether it was the engine or specific aesthetic implementations in Smash 4 they felt much more graceful to make up for that lack of impact and not only did that grace mesh with their general aesthetic, it also really highlighted the contrast when Marth landed a tipper.

Cloud too was another and perhaps the biggest casualty in the transition in my opinion. Everything about him just feels so neutered. I'm not just talking about moveset, but everything about his general aesthetic has been diminished significantly. His sword suffers from the Marth/Lucina paper hit problem and lacks the oomph the Smash 4 version had, his Limit moves no longer have the fancy close-ups or even feel powerful or threatening, and he lacks any of the explosive movement or combos he used to have. He just feels really lame all around and has gone from one of my favorites to one of my least favorites to play.


I understand that most of my complaints are very subjective and aesthetic oriented, but I feel like they are a big reason why I went from playing mostly swordies in 4 to barely touching them in Ultimate. Corrin, Lucina, and Cloud were some of my most played characters in 4 and I hardly touch them in Ultimate. To be fair I think Ultimate's limited nature and linearity is largely responsible, i.e. every character feels like Nair/Fair the character, but I think the basicness of sword characters means they need that extra aesthetic flair to really shine. I think the problem is just most apparent with sword characters.

But because Ultimate itself is the limiting factor, meaning Shulk will feel like Ike regardless if it is faster Ike or more powerful Ike, I don't really want to see more sword characters. Sephiroth is a step in the right direction, but even his flashy kit still feels monotonous sometimes. I feel like Pyra/Mythra will follow in his footsteps, but they are handicapped by Ultimate's shallowness unfortunately.



On the subject of "anime swordfighter" ...

Spoiler

...and? This game is teeming with furries and oblong characters. For what is generally considered "anime" we have 18 characters and that's only if you count Kid Icarus and Dragon Quest as anime. That's about 22% or not even a quarter of the cast. There are plenty of "ball with eyes" or furries to suit any taste.

Nah, I'm kidding. I still can't get over the highly innovative design the first fighter pack brought of another anthropomorphic animal of vague origins that has a bird on its back and says "Guh-huh" instead of vague growls. I have never seen anything quite like it. It certainly follows in the footsteps of the highly innovative duo of a giant ape and a smaller ape that does the same things, but smaller. There's even one that's actually scaly instead of being furry.

Let's not forget all of the furry humanoid Pokemon with such innovative gameplay such as sitting back charging powerballs or the highly skilled art of mashing side-B.

What we absolutely need is another pink ball with eyes that will have endless complaints about their lack of range and disjoint. I can't imagine a more creative design that drawing a sphere and putting a face and stubby little limbs on it. One is even edgy and has a cute little cape.

Speaking of stubby: what about all of the tiny men and women in the game? If there's one thing I love more than anything else in this game it is fighting ******* that for some reason can safely mash planet-sized hitboxes up and down the stage. There's nothing more fun than being low-profiled by Italian stereotypes, cartoonish blobs, and small furries.

Heaven forbid we make sweeping generalizations about the style our coveted ******* and furries occupy, but never stop dunking on "anime stereotypes" for not being an anthropomorphized animal.

When you look at anime (or mangas and video games), you find out it's a highly standardized art style used for good and mostly low quality product/narratives (see: most shonen) because it's a simple art style that can be easily scale up into detailed artworks if needed. And since every artists you hire are expected to know how to draw in that style. And so, the more artist have to know that style, the more it becomes prevalent. Ironically, because of production requirements, the art that can be used by japanese artists became more restrictive, less creative and uninspired.

Um, no. It's a style without regard for productivity or economy, like most are. You can make it as bland or as appealing as you want it to be and it really is up to the artist/design team. The "anime" artstyle has never been exclusively for anime and is a Japanese style. It is relatively simple in some respects and relatively complex in others because that's what artists and the audience find more appealing.