• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

Official Smash Ultimate Discussion

Almost one month has passed since release. In retrospect....

  • This is by far the best Smash ever. Like, I don't even know how they will top this.

  • Pretty freakin' good; I have a few qualms over things like internet play, balancing issues, etc.

  • It's ok, but [insert Smash game here] is better.

  • I'd rather play Parcheesi.


Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Cutie Gwen

Lovely warrior
Joined
Jul 1, 2014
Messages
63,088
Location
Somewhere out there on this big blue marble
Also I'd like to add that cutting
Yes, but you've both ignored the core of my argument.

Where do you take the series from here?

What more could you possibly do to get the majority of gamers excited? Not just core Smash fans, but gamers at large. Because let's be honest, it's only a subsection of Smash fans who obsess over roster entries. The majority of people aren't gonna get excited over Spring Man, or yet ANOTHER FE protag. In fact, most would be more disappointed to see Cloud or Ryu not make it back. Who do you spark that interest in that crowd? What do you do to distinguish this Smash from the last? Why should people bother with Smash 5 when if it's just an upgrade, it'd be less exciting than 4?

The fact of the matter is, the only people who are invested in seeing their personal favorites return, are hard core Smash fans, and in fact, only a portion of them. Luigi for example has been missing from a majority of MARIO games, and you honestly don't hear much of a fuss over it. If him, or Puff, or Ness go missing when you're doing a full reboot, where everyone is getting totally redone, most people aren't gonna care that much, they'll be more excited about a fresh new start I'd argue, and curious about all the new interpretations of the characters. In fact, I'm sure many would openly welcome the idea of certain characters getting a much needed redo. Plus, it's not like any of those characters are totally off the cards, they can always be added in as DLC or used to hype up future entries.

People seem to forget that most people wants a fun game with things to get excited about. Not a wish fullfillment MUGEN-sized roster screen full of obscure characters.
"Only a few people buy the game that sells itself on the characters you can play as care about the characters!" . Sure, you can argue they jumped the shark but look at MVCI sales and tell me people don't buy crossover fighters for the characters. Unless you're secretly Combofiend, you'd agree that the characters are what make Smash special. YOU seem to forget that the main appeal of Smash is all these characters. The same thing is the case for MVCI. MVCI cut a CHUNK of characters, and the game is a commercial failure. Smash is already a major success, they don't NEED to cater to newcomers, the fact you can be Mario and beat up Pikachu alongside Sonic and Cloud is PRECISELY why people play it. FOR. THE. CHARACTERS. If you don't understand this concept so simple that anyone who's 5 years old understands and likes, you have no right to say what should happen to the franchise. Also, didn't you say they should make the game more competitive earlier? Either make it more competitive or appeal to a more casual audience, you literally can't do both with a series like Smash

EDIT: Also, your suggestion on releasing cut characters as DLC is ****ing stupid. MVCI is doing that and people aren't buying the game so they can wait for an Ultimate edition. Has the game even broken 10k sales yet?
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member

Guest
Also I'd like to add that cutting

"Only a few people buy the game that sells itself on the characters you can play as care about the characters!" . Sure, you can argue they jumped the shark but look at MVCI sales and tell me people don't buy crossover fighters for the characters. Unless you're secretly Combofiend, you'd agree that the characters are what make Smash special. YOU seem to forget that the main appeal of Smash is all these characters. The same thing is the case for MVCI. MVCI cut a CHUNK of characters, and the game is a commercial failure. Smash is already a major success, they don't NEED to cater to newcomers, the fact you can be Mario and beat up Pikachu alongside Sonic and Cloud is PRECISELY why people play it. FOR. THE. CHARACTERS. If you don't understand this concept so simple that anyone who's 5 years old understands and likes, you have no right to say what should happen to the franchise. Also, didn't you say they should make the game more competitive earlier? Either make it more competitive or appeal to a more casual audience, you literally can't do both with a series like Smash
But the majority of the characters that GENUINELY MATTER, ergo the most popular, would obviously return.

The X-Men were THE most popular characters of MvC, and what started it all. Cutting them is like cutting all Mario and Zelda characters from Smash. The comparison isn't the same. It'd be like cutting Captain Falcon, who at this point is more synonymous with Smash than with F-Zero.

And again, you're still ignoring the core of my argument:

What do you do to keep people interested?

How do you top Smash 4 in terms of hype? Especially since, if characters like Cloud or Ryu fail to return, and you instead add more Pokemon and FE characters, less people are gonna care.

I seriously doubt you could convince Sakurai to come back for a 5th time, especially given his health issues. Plus, it's evident Smash 4 as a whole feels a lot less inspired than Melee and even Brawl. So what better time for a franchise reboot than under a new director?
 

Cutie Gwen

Lovely warrior
Joined
Jul 1, 2014
Messages
63,088
Location
Somewhere out there on this big blue marble
But the majority of the characters that GENUINELY MATTER, ergo the most popular, would obviously return.

The X-Men were THE most popular characters of MvC, and what started it all. Cutting them is like cutting all Mario and Zelda characters from Smash. The comparison isn't the same. It'd be like cutting Captain Falcon, who at this point is more synonymous with Smash than with F-Zero.

And again, you're still ignoring the core of my argument:

What do you do to keep people interested?

How do you top Smash 4 in terms of hype? Especially since, if characters like Cloud or Ryu fail to return, and you instead add more Pokemon and FE characters, less people are gonna care.

I seriously doubt you could convince Sakurai to come back for a 5th time, especially given his health issues. Plus, it's evident Smash 4 as a whole feels a lot less inspired than Melee and even Brawl. So what better time for a franchise reboot than under a new director?
You say that as you cut one of the most popular pokemon of all time, the Fire Emblem character who beat Marth twice in the same popularity poll iirc, the character who won a write-in popularity poll and many more. Plus, again, Roy, Mewtwo and Wolf became VERY popular requests once they were cut, meaning cutting over 30 characters means upsetting all the people who liked to play as those characters

If it was JUST the X-Men, why are people upset Dr. Doom is gone? Why are people upset Vergil is gone? What about Wesker? His cut stung the fanbase VERY hard

Add more content, which Nintendo CAN do considering their resources, add a twist to the gameplay, which just needs a guy with ideas behind the wheel, add new modes, etc.

It doesn't need to top Smash 4. It just needs to be exciting. Plus, before DLC, Smash 4's newcomers could be considered underwhelming when compared to Brawl's additions

Sakurai doesn't need to come back. He's not the only video game developer in the world. And why exactly, would a director decide "Right, let's get rid of a huge chunk of what made this game popular"?

And I have a few questions. Why would casual gamers who are unfamiliar with the franchise buy the game? You say "We need to cut these characters to appeal to casuals" but a game with lots of characters sounds a lot more enticing than a game that plays similarly with significantly less.
Question 2: Why would a casual fan of the franchise pay 60 smackeroos for an incredibly downgraded version of a game they enjoyed? The last game they bought in the franchise was just as much with a lot more characters they might have really liked to play as and that's excluding DLC. Question 3: Do you REALLY believe this generation of gaming will be excited for lots of cut characters? Gamers have become very cynical, and as soon as people heard no X-Men were going to be in MVCI, what was the thing they said after "Why the **** did you think that's a good idea?"? It was "Let me guess, they'll be DLC". And MVCI also caught a LOT of flak for it's DLC despite people thinking the characters were cool choices to add. Gamers these days love nothing more than to ***** and moan and whine. What makes your stupid hypothetical any different than what happened there? Question 4: What exactly, would replace the gap in the game? It's like selling a big 5 dollar apple pie, and only selling small slices for 5 dollars the week after. People aren't stupid, they'll go "Hey, there was a lot more last time! This isn't worth it anymore, I'll go buy something else, that other company's selling something that looks better than this". If Smash fails to fill the void in the game, people will buy different games with more content unless they are die-hard loyalists, which even then, doesn't mean they won't complain
 

Verde Coeden Scalesworth

Flap and Swish~
Premium
Joined
Aug 13, 2001
Messages
34,005
Location
Cull Hazard
NNID
Irene4
3DS FC
1203-9265-8784
Switch FC
SW-7567-8572-3791
Characters matter to someone. Every cut hurts.

That's the thing about Smash. Characters are severely important, and the game was literally built on the fact the characters are important. That's why it wasn't released as Dragon King: The Fighting Game, which had generic characters.

Cutting anyone will matter no matter who it is, but it doesn't mean cuts won't happen. With the exception of Dr. Mario, the rest of the Mario cast is huge and important. Same with the Donkey Kong, Wario, and the Pokemon cast(I do agree that if a Pokemon has to go besides Mewtwo rarely making the base roster, Jigglypuff is understandably the easy cut out of any. It doesn't matter she should be cut, but her being lower priority than others has reasoning behind it. This may change if she has more relevance in the anime again, of course).

The only real cuts from the Zelda cast without losing the important characters at best are Toon Link and Sheik. Sheik is popular, but is not relevant, and a logical cut for a "reboot roster". Zelda and Ganondorf must absolutely stay. That said, if the reboot also does moveset changes, that'll be interesting, even if it'll alienate some fans.

As for 3rd parties. the only ones I could see are the DLC bar Bayonetta. Sonic, Pac-Man, and MegaMan are huge icons as is. Bayonetta won the ballot and thus having a bit of extra protection against cutting is understandable. As for the FE cast, only Roy and Lucina make sense to ever cut. Corrin can also depend if he's supposed to be a flavor of the month choice and rotated out. Marth, Ike, and Robin are more than unique enough.
 
D

Deleted member

Guest
Well calm down for a second. It's merely a point of discussion. Not something I'm trying to convince people of.

Rather something I feel is worth exploring as I feel it needs to eventually happen, and am certain WILL happen sooner or later. Who gets cut, who gets returns, idk, I merely went for what I felt were the most popular picks while adding it big name 3rd parties. Imo, Smash expanding into a celebration of all gaming, rather than just Nintendo seems like a likely direction that would maintain excitement, and a reboot is sooner or later inevitable.

Rather than continue to discuss the roster under the assumption that it would continue to expand, which is incredibly unreasonable at these lengths and would honestly hurt the series as a whole. Why not explore what NEW directions the series could go in, on order to stay fresh?

Instead of seeing what YOU would like to see as Smash fans, why not sit down and try to explore what might be best for the series, if anything as a thought experiment and a talking point.

It's nothing worth getting overly defensive over.

Yes, I know people don't like cuts, but they are inevitable, and once again I ask:

Where else could you possibly take Smash when simply adding more stuff isn't merely gonna cut it anymore?

Forget about what you wanna or don't wanna see, try to explore new potential routes. What MORE could you do to keep people interested? Imo, a franchise reboot is that sort of answer.

Assuming that things will continue to expand with certainty as they have is equal to assuming with certainty that Cloud would never make it in Smash... and look where we are today. Anything can happen, and Nintendo is company running a business, so look at it from that angle. As far as "giving fans what they want" they pretty much went all out with Smash 4.

So...

Now what?

Food for thought.
 

Cutie Gwen

Lovely warrior
Joined
Jul 1, 2014
Messages
63,088
Location
Somewhere out there on this big blue marble
Well calm down for a second. It's merely a point of discussion. Not something I'm trying to convince people of.

Rather something I feel is worth exploring as I feel it needs to eventually happen, and am certain WILL happen sooner or later. Who gets cut, who gets returns, idk, I merely went for what I felt were the most popular picks while adding it big name 3rd parties. Imo, Smash expanding into a celebration of all gaming, rather than just Nintendo seems like a likely direction that would maintain excitement, and a reboot is sooner or later inevitable.

Rather than continue to discuss the roster under the assumption that it would continue to expand, which is incredibly unreasonable at these lengths and would honestly hurt the series as a whole. Why not explore what NEW directions the series could go in, on order to stay fresh?

Instead of seeing what YOU would like to see as Smash fans, why not sit down and try to explore what might be best for the series, if anything as a thought experiment and a talking point.

It's nothing worth getting overly defensive over.

Yes, I know people don't like cuts, but they are inevitable, and once again I ask:

Where else could you possibly take Smash when simply adding more stuff isn't merely gonna cut it anymore?

Forget about what you wanna or don't wanna see, try to explore new potential routes. What MORE could you do to keep people interested? Imo, a franchise reboot is that sort of answer.

Assuming that things will continue to expand with certainty as they have is equal to assuming with certainty that Cloud would never make it in Smash... and look where we are today. Anything can happen, and Nintendo is company running a business, so look at it from that angle. As far as "giving fans what they want" they pretty much went all out with Smash 4.

So...

Now what?

Food for thought.
It was indeed a point of discussion. You may be certain a franchise which sells itself on the playable characters that are beloved should remove all that because you can't see it adding more characters for some reason, but I am absolutely certain that would NOT go over well at all judging by what we've seen with our own eyes.

But the only reason you're so certain is because it's your idea. You have to think of more than a concept, how would it be received by fans? What satisfying additions could be made and could they make up for what was lost? What happens if the game flops which it absolutely do? If you're trying to discuss this, then you need to listen to what others have to say and think "Yes, what WOULD happen then?" If you're saying we have to think about your idea, you need to take the feedback in consideration.

How would it hurt the franchise by adding more content? Sure, it'd cost more over time, but not only can you have other countermeasures like reusing assets to heavily save the costs, if the franchise is still as successful as it always has been, would it hurt THAT much? Even then, how do you make it fresh by getting rid of a huge chunk of the game's appeal? Change the genre of fighting game? That WOULD justify the absurd amount of cuts, but brand recognition is a thing, when people se Brawlout, Icons, Rivals of Aether and Indiepogo, they go "So it's like Smash". Smash's brand IS the platform genre

So merely giving solid counter arguments to your hypothetical is too defensive for you? That's not how it works

What else to add when adding more content won't cut it anymore? That means the franchise has crashed and burned with no means of resurrection possible. There's NOTHING you could even DO if adding more content won't cut it anymore!

You don't need to top a previous installment in order to still be a successful video game. You just need to make sure the people who liked the last installment will like the new one, and it's very easy to do these days. Fans may want more and more, but they're not asking for the best thing since sliced bread and tummyrubs, they're asking for more of what you gave them back then.
 
D

Deleted member

Guest
A Smash reboot would have less guests, not more.

Also, Banjo is a pillar of gaming?
 
D

Deleted member

Guest
A Smash reboot would have less guests, not more.

Also, Banjo is a pillar of gaming?
Whatever man, toss Banjo out and replace him with Doomguy or Rayman. The roster not absolute, just a means of getting a point across.

The idea is still an expansion toward a celebration of gaming by having MORE 3rd party characters in order to maintain hype, and also, strengthen relationship between Nintendo and 3rd party studios.

It was indeed a point of discussion. You may be certain a franchise which sells itself on the playable characters that are beloved should remove all that because you can't see it adding more characters for some reason, but I am absolutely certain that would NOT go over well at all judging by what we've seen with our own eyes.

But the only reason you're so certain is because it's your idea. You have to think of more than a concept, how would it be received by fans? What satisfying additions could be made and could they make up for what was lost? What happens if the game flops which it absolutely do? If you're trying to discuss this, then you need to listen to what others have to say and think "Yes, what WOULD happen then?" If you're saying we have to think about your idea, you need to take the feedback in consideration.

How would it hurt the franchise by adding more content? Sure, it'd cost more over time, but not only can you have other countermeasures like reusing assets to heavily save the costs, if the franchise is still as successful as it always has been, would it hurt THAT much? Even then, how do you make it fresh by getting rid of a huge chunk of the game's appeal? Change the genre of fighting game? That WOULD justify the absurd amount of cuts, but brand recognition is a thing, when people se Brawlout, Icons, Rivals of Aether and Indiepogo, they go "So it's like Smash". Smash's brand IS the platform genre

So merely giving solid counter arguments to your hypothetical is too defensive for you? That's not how it works

What else to add when adding more content won't cut it anymore? That means the franchise has crashed and burned with no means of resurrection possible. There's NOTHING you could even DO if adding more content won't cut it anymore!

You don't need to top a previous installment in order to still be a successful video game. You just need to make sure the people who liked the last installment will like the new one, and it's very easy to do these days. Fans may want more and more, but they're not asking for the best thing since sliced bread and tummyrubs, they're asking for more of what you gave them back then.
But it's not cutting content, you're rebooting the franchise.

I already mentioned one of the problems currently present in 4 is roster clutter.

A reboot isn't merely taking old stuff and repasting it into the new one, every character is totally remade and has a totally new moveset and entirely new mechanics are added. ALL stuff not seen in previous Smash games. Under this premise, and considering the workload of having to totally remake veterans, a smaller roster is understandable and the new takes of veterans offer something new for people to get excited about considering they'd be totally different from previous entries.

Tell me, why does this seem so outlandish to you when it's not so uncommon in just about any other franchise. Adding more and more stuff only offers diminishing returns, toe, it's far more outlandish to assume that things wouldn't eventually reboot sooner or later. In fact, just about every single Nintendo franchise has seen a reboot, why would Smash be any different?

You underestimate both how much more this costs each time, and how little you get back from this in terms of excitement. People are excited when the unexpected happens, not when they can predict most roster entries to make it into the next game.

What happens if the game flops?

You try something different with the next one. Taking risks is always more beneficial as opposed to a slow death due to clutter and stagnation.

Nintendo is privy to risk taking. And Smash won't be a franchise with a 100 character roster, I guarantee it. Hell it won't even hit 70. People ALREADY complain the Smash 4 roster is too big. Imagine if you add more characters few people recognize or care about.

What happens if you don't top the last game in terms of excitement?

Then you see less sales, and then less with the following entry, and so forth. And when each entry increases the development cost exponentially due to the amount of content, I'm sure it's easy to see why this isn't a smart business strategy. Especially when it's one if Nintendo's flagship franchises and a supposed system seller. Aka, the main reason you wanna appeal to gamers at large, not just Smash fans
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Cutie Gwen

Lovely warrior
Joined
Jul 1, 2014
Messages
63,088
Location
Somewhere out there on this big blue marble
Whatever man, toss Banjo out and replace him with Doomguy or Rayman. The roster not absolute, just a means of getting a point across.

The idea is still an expansion toward a celebration of gaming by having MORE 3rd party characters in order to maintain hype, and also, strengthen relationship between Nintendo and 3rd party studios.


But it's not cutting content, you're rebooting the franchise.

I already mentioned one of the problems currently present in 4 is roster clutter.

A reboot isn't merely taking old stuff and repasting it into the new one, every character is totally remade and has a totally new moveset and entirely new mechanics are added. ALL stuff not seen in previous Smash games. Under this premise, and considering the workload of having to totally remake veterans, a smaller roster is understandable and the new takes of veterans offer something new for people to get excited about considering they'd be totally different from previous entries.

Tell me, why does this seem so outlandish to you when it's not so uncommon in just about any other franchise. Adding more and more stuff only offers diminishing returns, toe, it's far more outlandish to assume that things wouldn't eventually reboot sooner or later. In fact, just about every single Nintendo franchise has seen a reboot, why would Smash be any different?

You underestimate both how much more this costs each time, and how little you get back from this in terms of excitement. People are excited when the unexpected happens, not when they can predict most roster entries to make it into the next game.
You just suggested adding specific characters to keep it interesting. They can do that. Wanna know why? That's EXACTLY what they've been doing in the franchise.

If it has less content than the last game, it's cut content. Period. Slapping 'reboot' doesn't change that. If anything, slapping 'reboot' on something will make people more critical. Devil May Cry doesn't exactly use it's reboot anymore for a reason when appealing to the fanbase. If people are content with what they got last time and want more of it, giving them something with the same name but completely different won't make them happy

It's so outlandish when I've seen other fighting games fail miserably when trying this stuff

"Just about every Nintendo franchise has seen a reboot" ****ing what? Examples. Now. Mario hasn't gotten a reboot unless you count the added subseries of the New Super Mario Bros as a reboot. Zelda has never seen a reboot, Kirby has never seen a reboot, Pokemon has never seen a reboot, Metroid has never seen a reboot, Kid Icarus has never seen a reboot, Earthbound has never seen a reboot... You get my point

You're not exactly well educated in video game development either. Reusing assets allow you to make more with the same budget, and if you're about to tell me Nintendo doesn't have the resources, you're going to give me a migraine
 
D

Deleted member

Guest
You just suggested adding specific characters to keep it interesting. They can do that. Wanna know why? That's EXACTLY what they've been doing in the franchise.

If it has less content than the last game, it's cut content. Period. Slapping 'reboot' doesn't change that. If anything, slapping 'reboot' on something will make people more critical. Devil May Cry doesn't exactly use it's reboot anymore for a reason when appealing to the fanbase. If people are content with what they got last time and want more of it, giving them something with the same name but completely different won't make them happy

It's so outlandish when I've seen other fighting games fail miserably when trying this stuff

"Just about every Nintendo franchise has seen a reboot" ****ing what? Examples. Now. Mario hasn't gotten a reboot unless you count the added subseries of the New Super Mario Bros as a reboot. Zelda has never seen a reboot, Kirby has never seen a reboot, Pokemon has never seen a reboot, Metroid has never seen a reboot, Kid Icarus has never seen a reboot, Earthbound has never seen a reboot... You get my point

You're not exactly well educated in video game development either. Reusing assets allow you to make more with the same budget, and if you're about to tell me Nintendo doesn't have the resources, you're going to give me a migraine
You're not exactly keen on how Smash development happens. Very few assets are reused from entry to entry, mods in Smash 4 and Brawl are proof enough.

It's not about having the resources to spend, is that it's poor from a business standpoint. Why continue to add to the cost of development with each entry when it only makes the series go stale? You've pretty much pushed it as far as you can with 4, now what? Who could you possibly add that would make people lose their minds as much as Cloud? Son Goku?

And yes, every Mario entry has been a reboot of sorts, as have most Zelda entries.

Sunshine shares very little with 64 and goes in a different direction, as does Galaxy, and then 3D World, and now Odyssey. Every game explores new ideas rather than adding stuff onto established successful games. Same for Zelda, which for a while stuck to a formula, and then tossed that totally out the window for BotW, with great success in fact. Star Fox saw a Reboot as well (4 in fact). Mario Kart as well, every entry tries new things and gets a new roster. Literally the only franchise that's purely additive is Pokemon, and MAN has that series gotten stale.

Anyway, you seem so focused on the fact that there won't be a reboot, so, are you asserting that there is ZERO possibility that Smash will ever see a reboot with 100% certainty?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Cutie Gwen

Lovely warrior
Joined
Jul 1, 2014
Messages
63,088
Location
Somewhere out there on this big blue marble
You're not exactly keen on how Smash development happens. Very few assets are reused from entry to entry, mods in Smash 4 and Brawl are proof enough.

It's not about having the resources to spend, is that it's poor from a business standpoint. Why continue to add to the cost of development with each entry when it only makes the series go stale? You've pretty much pushed it as far as you can with 4, now what? Who could you possibly add that would make people lose their minds as much as Cloud? Son Goku?

And yes, every Mario entry has been a reboot of sorts, as have most Zelda entries.

Sunshine shares very little with 64 and goes in a different direction, as does Galaxy, and then 3D World, and now Odyssey. Every game explores new ideas rather than adding stuff onto established successful games. Same for Zelda, which for a while stuck to a formula, and then tossed that totally out the window for BotW, with great success in fact. Star Fox saw a Reboot as well (4 in fact). Mario Kart as well, every entry tries new things and gets a new roster. Literally the only franchise that's purely additive is Pokemon, and MAN has that series gotten stale.

Anyway, you seem so focused on the fact that there won't be a reboot, so, are you asserting that there is ZERO possibility that Smash will ever see a reboot with 100% certainty?
But that just proves my point that reusing assets would be extremely cost effective and allow more content to be added

But the series isn't going stale. The franchise has existed for well over a decade, and because Nintendo likes to wait years before a new Smash installment, it means that the franchise can't get stale simply due to lack of installments and competition

Congratulations, you're ignoring how YOU DON'T NEED TO TOP THE LAST INSTALLMENT TO BE SUCCESSFUL

That... That's not a reboot. Taking something and putting it into a new direction isn't a reboot.
Also, 4 Star Fox reboots? Are you counting 643DS? A reMAKE? And Zero, a reIMAGINING? I'll give you 64, but there's no other reboot. Only other games are Adventures, which takes place after 64, Assault, which takes place after Adventures, Command, which takes place after Assault and 2, which takes place after the first game, which if anything, would mean there are multiple timelines and that 64 ISN'T a reboot. Mario Kart got new entries, not reboots. Plus, not only were people REALLY ****ing angry at 7's roster, but the roster in a racing game is SIGNIFICANTLY less important than a roster of a fighting game.

I'm saying a reboot like what you're saying would not work as a critically acclaimed and commercially successful title like the rest of the series.

I don't want to continue talking to someone who clearly has no clue what they're talking about if they say a character driven game losing a huge chunk of characters would be good or saying a new installment is a reboot, so bye bye!
 

PeridotGX

Smash Hero
Joined
Jun 8, 2017
Messages
8,768
Location
That Distant Shore
NNID
Denoma5280
When I see people think halving the roster is a good idea:

There are so many things that are wrong with that roster-and the idea in general-, that I don't know If I can say them all. But I'll try..

1.In your roster, there are 24 characters. 24. Just a note: Melee, a game released in 2001, had 26 characters, two more than in this hypothetical Nintendo Switch game.

2. Not only that, but you're cutting fan favorites. When Mewtwo and Roy were cut in Brawl, people outraged. When Wolf, Snake, Lucas, and the Ice Climbers got cut in 4, people outraged. Cutting nearly half the roster and forfeiting characters like Luigi, Peach, Ness, Olimar, Lucario, Lucas, and Zelda? Can you imagine the backlash?

3. The amount of Third parties is ridiculous. Out of 24, 9 are third party. You would think that a reboot would resolidify the fact that this is a NINTENDO game, but no. Banjo-Kazooie, a now Microsoft owned game that hasn't had a game since 2008 (And a well received one since 2000) takes precedence over Luigi. And the only 3rd party that you cut, Bayonetta, was actually requested personally by the fans and won the ballot.

4. The fact that you're redoing every character. Say you mained Luigi, but had a secondary in Mario. You would probably try to continue on with him. Turns out he's barely recognizable from Wii U. It's basically a complete roster overhaul, just some of the characters look the same as old ones

5. You keep claiming it's for the casual's sake, preventing it from getting stale. But look at it at face value: They could either buy a 3ds game with 58 characters, or a Switch game with 24. Seems like an obvious choice in my book.
 
Last edited:

TeddyBearYoshi

Banned via Warnings
Joined
Oct 26, 2014
Messages
358
I don't see there being any benefit to rebooting Smash. It's core gameplay, while can be just as competitive, is definitely not to be as much as Street Fighter or MvC was. There's also only a few movesets that really "need" to be redone, and even then, what says Nintendo even wants to?

Where do they take the series from Sm4sh I can't say. I expect Smash on Switch to be a port of Sm4sh as "leaks" and business sense for Nintendo have suggested thus far. Smash 5 will likely be based around some gimmick, and a roster somewhere inbetween Brawl and Sm4sh's size. Just my predictions.

A smaller roster may make more sense in balance sense, but not for sales or keeping fans happy. I certainly don't think I could be interested in a Smash game with a Melee sized roster at this point, when I have Sm4sh and Project M to play. May sound entitled to some, but I legitimately don't see what they could do to get me to want to play a game where inevitably a lot if not most of my favorites have been cut.

Pokemon (the highest grossing franchise of all time) also certainly does fine going installment to installment with essentially the same exact game for years on end. No need to reboot that.
 
Last edited:

N3ON

Gone Exploring
BRoomer
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
21,444
Location
Vancouver
*looks at response to MVCI roster* Sure, cut all the fanfavs in a game that exists as fanservice, that'll go over well with the public
That's the very tip of the iceberg when it comes to why people are reacting the way they are with MvCI. Especially since one of the biggest complains is too many returning characters as opposed to new ones. The characters people are clamouring highly to return number only like... a half dozen maybe. Wolverine, Storm, Doom, Magneto, Wesker, Deadpool...

The switch between MvC2 and 3 also lost many a fan favourite character, the trick is to replace them. It's not that you can't cut them. This time around the grievances primarily seem to be that the roster very frugally reused characters while not bothering to add a) enough new ones b) ones that people actually wanted. And also the whole locking several of the new, popular characters behind a paywall.
 
Last edited:

Ura

Smash Legend
Joined
Feb 4, 2014
Messages
12,838
Switch FC
SW-2772-0149-6703
When I see people think halving the roster is a good idea:

There are so many things that are wrong with that roster-and the idea in general-, that I don't know If I can say them all. But I'll try..

1.In your roster, there are 24 characters. 24. Just a note: Melee, a game released in 2001, had 26 characters, two more than in this hypothetical Nintendo Switch game.

2. Not only that, but you're cutting fan favorites. When Mewtwo and Roy were cut in Brawl, people outraged. When Wolf, Snake, Lucas, and the Ice Climbers got cut in 4, people outraged. Cutting nearly half the roster and forfeiting characters like Luigi, Peach, Ness, Olimar, Lucario, Lucas, and Zelda? Can you imagine the backlash?

3. The amount of Third parties is ridiculous. Out of 24, 9 are third party. You would think that a reboot would resolidify the fact that this is a NINTENDO game, but no. Banjo-Kazooie, a now Microsoft owned game that hasn't had a game since 2008 (And a well received one since 2000) takes precedence over Luigi. And the only 3rd party that you cut, Bayonetta, was actually requested personally by the fans and won the ballot.

4. The fact that you're redoing every character. Say you mained Luigi, but had a secondary in Mario. You would probably try to continue on with him. Turns out he's barely recognizable from Wii U. It's basically a complete roster overhaul, just some of the characters look the same as old ones

5. You keep claiming it's for the casual's sake, preventing it from getting stale. But look at it at face value: They could either buy a 3ds game with 58 characters, or a Switch game with 24. Seems like an obvious choice in my book.
Not to mention buying Smash 3DS would be a much more price conscious decision for casual gamers over buying an expensive Switch version of Smash that takes away half of the roster.

Preach my man. I really wish people would stop it with the reboot nonsense.
 
Last edited:

N3ON

Gone Exploring
BRoomer
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
21,444
Location
Vancouver
Fwiw while I'm not exactly behind the reboot idea as it was presented here, if you're upfront about overhauling the roster and therefore cutting a huge chunk of the characters, it'll mitigate some backlash opposed to if you just string people along with no confirmation as to the fate of their supported character until the very end, as it usually happens. That's part of why there's so much acrimony.
 

Ura

Smash Legend
Joined
Feb 4, 2014
Messages
12,838
Switch FC
SW-2772-0149-6703
Fwiw while I'm not exactly behind the reboot idea as it was presented here, if you're upfront about overhauling the roster and therefore cutting a huge chunk of the characters, it'll mitigate some backlash opposed to if you just string people along with no confirmation as to the fate of their supported character until the very end, as it usually happens. That's part of why there's so much acrimony.
Yeah. It's just a poor solution to having a lot of characters and just saying "lets get rid of half the roster to make the game look newer".

If they were going to trim the roster come Smash 5 then the absolute lowest they could do without immense backlash is like 50 characters and even then there's going to be a lot of complaints about that.
 

Blue_Sword_Edge

Smash Lord
Joined
May 18, 2015
Messages
1,166
NNID
Blue_Sword_Edge
3DS FC
1633-5415-5386
As for the next Smash, I am looking forward to newcomers in the game. But, I also want to see things like some variety of alternate costumes that are not just palette swaps or even crossover costumes that keep within Smash's limits/traditions.

I would also would like to expand the vault into a fully fledged museum experience, similar to how Bandai Namco (well the Namco half at the time) did that with the Namco Museum collections on PS1. Just let your Miis run around to different franchise's museum halls to explore that franchise's history, fighter info, trophies of said franchise ,and maybe accessories for your Miis. I would even go as far as making said accessories interactive in museum mode for some good photo opportunities. Of course, I would add a list style view said content as a "Quick View" for a "Get on with it" option and bypass museum mode.

As for the roster, I can see the benefits of both scaling down rosters or keep adding to them. As of right now, I see the negatives of scaling down the roster outweighing the benefits, especially when the Nintendo Switch is a hybrid console/portable device. A Smash game on the Switch wouldn't need to get a 3DS port or version so resources can be focused and have lesser chances of hardware constraints thanks to the Switch's portability.
 

Swamp Sensei

Today is always the most enjoyable day!
BRoomer
Joined
Jan 4, 2013
Messages
37,931
Location
Um....Lost?
NNID
Swampasaur
3DS FC
4141-2776-0914
Switch FC
SW-6476-1588-8392
Honestly.

I think we're more likely to stay at our roster size with cycling characters than a reboot that cuts most of the roster.



That said, I fail to see why a reboot is needed. It only seems to cater to a small part of an already small competitive crowd while not giving much to the casual majority (lets be real, a lot of the competitive community would be begging for old favorites too).

Too many downsides and not enough upsides.
 
Last edited:

Staarih

Smash Master
Joined
Dec 19, 2013
Messages
3,138
Location
Finland
Smash will always be a party game at heart, and the best part of all the mayhem are the characters... and, like, a good selection of them. Something like 8-player Smash is clearly catering to casual, crazy fun loving players who want options all around. The characters are a major selling point. While I agree that the roster just can’t keep on growing and growing, I don’t think a total reboot would be a good idea either.

There are other ways to make a game feel fresh: Pokemon, for example, has always kept the core elements but experimented in other areas (like, I dunno, trials in SM). Smash could very well keep about a same roster amount: some cuts, some newcomers, maybe some costumes + new modes and content, and still feel fresh enough.
 
D

Deleted member

Guest
Preach my man. I really wish people would stop it with the reboot nonsense.
Why is it nonsense?

Honestly.

I think we're more likely to stay at our roster size with cycling characters than a reboot that cuts most of the roster.



That said, I fail to see why a reboot is needed. It only seems to cater to a small part of an already small competitive crowd while not giving much to the casual majority (lets be real, a lot of the competitive community would be begging for old favorites too).

Too many downsides and not enough upsides.
Are there?

Would a series reboot only appeal to competitive gamers?

My argument was that opening the brand to even more 3rd party characters would draw in people who aren't Nintendo faithful. Ergo, the same people who were very excited when Cloud was revealed for Smash 4, or when Snake or Sonic first appeared in Brawl. My argument is that your average gamer doesn't care about the remaining obscure Nintendo characters, and really only care about the most iconic ones: Mario, Link, Fox, Pikachu, etc...

Rebooting the franchise not only allows for things to be revitalized, but also allows for a newer and more expansive approach to the roster, as well as a new take on veterans.

This isn't about casuals vs. noncasuals or competitive gamers. I'm not factoring either into any of this. Really, I'm saying appeal to your average gamer vs. the demands of the core fanbase. Both I'd say are people who like videogames quite a lot. Only one needs to be convinced to buy the FIFTH entry in the series. Plenty can be done to appease the negativity from the core fanbase, since only a subsection are so heavily invested on the roster, and negativity and vitriol will always come from this people no matter how small the cut, or if their most wanted character gets turned into a stage hazzard.

Think about it this way:

A roster of this size is more of a limiting factor for the series, should you ever wanna add new ideas that radically change the game.

Any sort of universal mechanics like an integrated cancel, or well-made super moves, or expanded normals, etc... whatever, all of this is exponentially more difficult to do when your roster is over 50 characters large, AND you're expected to add even MORE characters to keep people happy. The result winds up being poorly balanced half-assed attempts that everyone ignores. And the deal is, this HAS happened already, with custom specials. They're basically an afterthought in Smash 4, and it's a pity, cause if properly balanced and integrated, they could have been a total game changer, allowing players to have various customized builds for their favorite characters that were actually valid to use and meant something. Instead, custom moves became more of a gimmick and a hassle at that, akin to items and final smashes.

Quality over Quantity I always say, and everyone seems to stay focused on MORE AND MORE stuff, as if the roster is the only thing that matters, and ignoring how a roster of this size begins to negatively affect the development of the game. And it even goes beyond mechanics or new ideas, but also single player content as well. Look at how polished a lot of the 1P stuff in Melee was, from an adventure mode that properly reflected the various franchises (the Metroid one had you escape from the area, the Zelda one had you explore a dungeon, the F-Zero one had you race to the finish, etc...), to Target tests that were unique to each character, to event matches that were well designed and fun to play, all these small touches added a lot more personality and charm to the game, not present in the following two entries because a chunk of the development was focused elsewhere, and the roster bloat made it unmanageable.

At the end of the day, the previous games still exist, and they all have character mods. I'd much rather see the series head in new directions and try bold new ideas that freshen up the gameplay like: properly implemented custom specials, or well balanced super moves, or expanded normal movepools, than to get essentially the SAME game we've played since Melee, but this time even more prettier and with even MORE content. As far as the general public goes, the general consensus seems to be that content-wise, 4 is difficult to surpass. There's a slow building apathy about Smash among most people, and unlike past games, where even as early as release people had dozens for ideas for what other characters they'd like to see, this time around, you hear a lot of very samey and expected predictions, and some people just no longer care. We've seen Sonic, Megaman, Ryu, and Cloud all show up in Smash... where else do you go from here?

Going back to scratch and creating a new take on the game with all sorts of interesting new mechanics would excited people a lot more than adding in even more characters to the roster, even if it is by cutting or cycling other characters. The very idea of allowing properly balanced custom builds is something that would resonate a lot more strongly with people, than adding in any new face.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Bowserlick

Smash Hero
Joined
Jul 25, 2005
Messages
5,136
A Smash spinoff with only Mario characters or Pokemon or Mushroom Kingdom VS Capcom would be a fun direction to go in. (While keeping the main Smash series)
 

Diddy Kong

Smash Obsessed
Joined
Dec 8, 2004
Messages
25,967
Switch FC
SW-1597-979602774
A Smash spinoff with only Mario characters or Pokemon or Mushroom Kingdom VS Capcom would be a fun direction to go in. (While keeping the main Smash series)
This is what I thought as well. Not a complete reboot, but a crossover Smash game but with a lot of cuts from the Nintendo side. I do NOT want this to happen at all... Mind you. But I think it's a whole lot more likely than a complete Smash reboot.

They could make a new separate Smash 'spin off' title out of this, or create something totally different, like just Nintendo Fighters or something like that. A more traditional Nintendo fighter game akin to say, Mortal Kombat, Street Fighter, Tekken and the like. Sure they would make it far more cartoony and fitting to Nintendo overall, but I do think this is a nice direction to go.

Smash 4 would serve well as a ported game next to either such of these games. It would be a waste not to, cause there's literally nothing to lose by porting Smash 4 to Switch.
 

Diddy Kong

Smash Obsessed
Joined
Dec 8, 2004
Messages
25,967
Switch FC
SW-1597-979602774
There's still good Nintendo characters left who would hype up a great deal of casual and hardcore fans all the like honestly. I won't say that all of them are extremely likely. But the possibility to add them still exists.
 

Bowserlick

Smash Hero
Joined
Jul 25, 2005
Messages
5,136
Cutting characters free resources and time to create new characters.

The good thing is that DLC allows a few of these cut characters to return. There is now a fairly sized pool of cut characters. In the next Smash, a past cut character could get DLC priority over other characters that have returned after being axed. Therefore, fan favorites like Wolf can make the roster as a downloadable fighter over ones that already came back from the abyss.
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member

Guest
There's still good Nintendo characters left who would hype up a great deal of casual and hardcore fans all the like honestly. I won't say that all of them are extremely likely. But the possibility to add them still exists.
I have a hard time thinking of ANY that could top Cloud. Anything after him is now a little more expected barring something totally off the wall like Goku.

Not only that, but Cloud is up there among one if the most iconic and beloved video game characters of all time. FFVII for a long time was regarded as a contender for one of the greatest games ever made (game is good, but I don't personally agree with this). Cloud and Link over the 00s were also seen a two incredibly popular characters, easily in the top 10 most iconic characters of all time.

You got Mario, Link, DK, Pikachu, Megaman, Ryu, Snake, Cloud, Sonic, Pac-Man...

Who else could you possibly add? Who else is missing?

Well Simon is. But that's besides the point

Sure you got other very iconic characters who deserve a spot in their on right, like Lara Croft, Rayman, Banjo, Doomguy, etc... But would any draw as near as much hype as Cloud.

I'd personally argue that Banjo would purely out of nostalgia factor and the fact that it'd be his return to a Nintendo console, but even I have my doubts. Comparing Banjo and Cloud side by side, it's clear one is far more popular and beloved, while the other fell off the wayside became more niche.

The point being, it's not that there aren't other characters, it's just, you can't top this, and everything from here will be comparatively disappointing, simply cause there's no more hype surprises, and you're getting what you expect. Brawl was a deluge of hype with Sonic and Snake, to this day, Snake's reveal is still memorable and chilling, Ryu and Cloud caused a similar effect, with Cloud totally blowing people away. Now what?

My point is, the wildest dreams and wishes have been fulfilled in terms of roster entries, so now.... where do you take things from here?

The excitement for Smash is beginning to die down, and the series is starting to feel stale. If you don't keep things fresh, if you don't keep people excited and hopeful, and generating hype... sales will inevitably start to drop with each entry. Adding more stuff isn't gonna cut it anymore, you gotta find new creative ways to keep that flame going.

And again, I still argue that a roster of 50 characters is unmanageable if you wanna make any game changing decisions.

25-35 is reasonable to work with in order to properly implement large new mechanics and balance them. From there you can build upon that.

My thoughts at least.
 

Diddy Kong

Smash Obsessed
Joined
Dec 8, 2004
Messages
25,967
Switch FC
SW-1597-979602774
Cloud?

Well yes he generated some hype, I agree. But personally his reveal didn't do much positive for me anyway. Quite the opposite actually, as his Sony-mascot status still makes me question his inclusion. Sure, popular. But amongst the Smash fanbase? I strongly question it.

Think that Snake overall was the best 'surprise' addition of all Smash games. Yet he also didn't make the transition from Brawl to Smash 4. Not that I expect the same with Cloud, but it's reasonably possible. Square might yet decide that it was a one time deal. Would've expected the FF7 remake on Switch for example, but no. I don't think his chances are that safe honestly.

That aside, why would they even create a BALLOT to see what characters else are popular? I mean, that's the most counter productive thing I can think of... Why hype a ballot, and then completely disregard it claiming 'lol Link, Kirby, Mario and DK are more popular then these dudes anyway'.

I just don't think a Smash reboot is very likely. I'd like a complete reboot in terms of keeping Smash a Nintendo-only fighting game, but I know it won't happen either... So, yeah, am just rooting for a few things that I might actually like instead of getting absolutely nothing for Smash 4. :rolleyes:
 
Joined
Jul 12, 2014
Messages
19,183
Location
An elevator
But personally his reveal didn't do much positive for me anyway.
Sure, popular. But amongst the Smash fanbase? I strongly question it.
This is the exact point Manly is trying to make.


The hardcore fanbase is the extreme minority. Most people thought cloud was super hype. While for places like here it was like, a 70/30 split, everywhere else it was pure undistilled hype. More than any 1st party character could have ever generated. The majority of consumers + outside fans is how you get sales, not the vocal minorities, with the exception of some niche titles taht survive on word of mouth.
 
Last edited:

Curious Villager

Puzzles...
Joined
Jun 24, 2012
Messages
11,751
Location
London
While I'm a little out of the loop in regards to the current conversation, I agree that they wouldn't set up a ballot with the notice of it being potentially used under consideration for future games if all they do at the end is cut down the roster in half because they feel that there aren't any popular characters left.

Perhaps what they could maybe do is do a sort of spin off or side game that focuses more on the competetive elements with a more manageable roster. I've seen the idea of a Nintendo vs Capcom thrown around from time to time, so perhaps something like that might work?
 
Last edited:

Diddy Kong

Smash Obsessed
Joined
Dec 8, 2004
Messages
25,967
Switch FC
SW-1597-979602774
This is the exact point Manly is trying to make.


The hardcore fanbase is the extreme minority. Most people thought cloud was super hype. While for places like here it was like, a 70/30 split, everywhere else it was pure undistilled hype. More than any 1st party character could have ever generated. The majority of consumers + outside fans is how you get sales, not the vocal minorities, with the exception of some niche titles taht survive on word of mouth.
So after 4 major console releases, Smash shouldn't try and garder support for their hardcore base? I played Smash 64, Melee and Brawl since their release! Hell, I've even brought a Freeloader so I could play my NTSC version of Brawl before the PAL release... Yet, I never once thought about buying a Wii U just for Smash 4 alone.

I now own a 3DS, and Smash won't be a game am buying. Why? I don't feel like am part of the target audience anymore, whilst I felt the exact opposite with Brawl safe for the ****ed up mechanics of the game.

I am the hardcore 'fanbase' that felt alienated with Smash 4. And I know am not the only one around. The choice of characters and target audience for Smash 4 is one of the game's biggest gripes. No newcomer feels genuine, all is because of "relevance" or plain ass sales.

I haven't met a single person IRL who was hyped about Cloud either. Most people I play Smash with are die hard Nintendo fans. They didn't even recognise him. While they would very much know who say, King K.Rool would be.
 
D

Deleted member

Guest
Cloud?

Well yes he generated some hype, I agree. But personally his reveal didn't do much positive for me anyway. Quite the opposite actually, as his Sony-mascot status still makes me question his inclusion. Sure, popular. But amongst the Smash fanbase? I strongly question it.

Think that Snake overall was the best 'surprise' addition of all Smash games. Yet he also didn't make the transition from Brawl to Smash 4. Not that I expect the same with Cloud, but it's reasonably possible. Square might yet decide that it was a one time deal. Would've expected the FF7 remake on Switch for example, but no. I don't think his chances are that safe honestly.

That aside, why would they even create a BALLOT to see what characters else are popular? I mean, that's the most counter productive thing I can think of... Why hype a ballot, and then completely disregard it claiming 'lol Link, Kirby, Mario and DK are more popular then these dudes anyway'.

I just don't think a Smash reboot is very likely. I'd like a complete reboot in terms of keeping Smash a Nintendo-only fighting game, but I know it won't happen either... So, yeah, am just rooting for a few things that I might actually like instead of getting absolutely nothing for Smash 4. :rolleyes:
Yeah, but that's your own opinion.

The general public was much more welcoming to his inclusion than most core Smash fans (this board in fact was very negative about it). And it's the general public I'm arguing for, because they're the ones not guaranteed to pick up every Smash game purely on name recognition alone.

As far as the ballot goes... almost all Smash fans were disappointed by the result, I think that's testament to the difference between what Smash fans want, and what the general public wants.

And iirc, wasn't Cloud a result of that ballot? Regardless, Bayonetta seems to have been, despite us seeing names like Banjo and Isaac and Ridley and K.Rool take the top spots in the polls. Once again, highlighting that heavy disconnect between the fans of the franchise, and gamers at large.

If anything the results of the ballot help to reinforce my point.
 

shinhed-echi

Smash Hero
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Messages
5,636
Location
Ecuador - South America
NNID
punchtropics
3DS FC
5301-0890-0238
I get where people are going with this whole reboot thing, but here's the thing.

The general gamer looks forward to each Smash game mostly for the characters that are added, and I don't think many people would consider over 4 cuts in the roster for each new game in the series.
Rebooting the series will probably be fatal because a LOT of people (if not, most) will be let down. Seriously, people in general want like 10 characters added, and maybe want 1-2 of their least favorites cut. They don't think "Hey, you know what would be great? Cutting half the roster! Yeah, and hope we get these random 3rd party characters that barely even have physical game releases!"
It would get the exact same reaction as MvCi like it was mentioned before, except tenfold because Smash Bros. has a higher pedigree than Marvel games when it comes to character rosters. (There's a reason why people were a lot happier with Megaman on Smash 4 than if he had been included in MvC3).

If it's just about luring gamers from other systems, there's a few things to consider:
- First of all, 3rd parties cost more money. Having half the roster be 3rd parties will end up eating up the game from inside somehow, so they can't just open up the gates for anything.
- Second, who's to say they can't just... you know... keep adding on top of what we already have? Outside Bayonetta and Cloud (and personally, Corrin), Smash 4 has been the most balanced game in the series, and that's not even taking into consideration the absurd ammount of characters we already have.
- Chances are, characters from these other systems won't be their first party characters, and given that, they may already be in Nintendo systems anyway. So the only way of that ever happening would be to get Sony and MS properties in the game. And that's one thing I'm sure isn't happening for at least the next 2 Smash games.


I'm kind of getting bored of Nintendo in general. Or at leasts mainstream Nintendo characters. The only Nintendo characters I play as in Smash, are the more obscure/retro ones, like Little Mac, Pit, and Duck Hunt. And there are so many more that we haven't seen yet. If they remove characters like them, I have half the reason to play. And cluttering the game with "B-side" 3rd party characters instead, isn't the way to go either. Especially if the roster is cut in half in order to do it.

3rd parties should be reserved for franchises of nothing less than legendary proportions. Wether western, japanese, or worldwide.

Just my thouhgts.
 

The Stoopid Unikorn

Spiciest of Guacamoles
Joined
Sep 8, 2014
Messages
77,179
Location
somewhere in Canada
Switch FC
SW-4202-4979-0504
There's a reason why people were a lot happier with Megaman on Smash 4 than if he had been included in MvC3
People were extremely excited about X in Infinite though.

Then again, that was from the very first announcement, before we found out how dissapointing the game would ultimately be.
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member

Guest
So after 4 major console releases, Smash shouldn't try and garder support for their hardcore base? I played Smash 64, Melee and Brawl since their release! Hell, I've even brought a Freeloader so I could play my NTSC version of Brawl before the PAL release... Yet, I never once thought about buying a Wii U just for Smash 4 alone.

I now own a 3DS, and Smash won't be a game am buying. Why? I don't feel like am part of the target audience anymore, whilst I felt the exact opposite with Brawl safe for the ****ed up mechanics of the game.

I am the hardcore 'fanbase' that felt alienated with Smash 4. And I know am not the only one around. The choice of characters and target audience for Smash 4 is one of the game's biggest gripes. No newcomer feels genuine, all is because of "relevance" or plain *** sales.

I haven't met a single person IRL who was hyped about Cloud either. Most people I play Smash with are die hard Nintendo fans. They didn't even recognise him. While they would very much know who say, King K.Rool would be.
I agree and disagree with you here.

I feel the roster is the best it's ever been, and in many ways could be. The revamps on Bowser and ZSS and Roy are great, and a lot of the new additions are incredibly fun to play as. The DLC can feel a bit P2W, but overall, the roster is super solid, and I have no complaints that ruin it for me, just some gripes with the FE cast and clones.

The gameplay however... I fully agree with you there. 1v1 Smash 4 is painful to play, especially online. The game is far too defensive, and gives little room for approach options making the game overall very boring and even frustrating to play at times competitively.

Not saying every game has to be like Melee, but I'm certainly not a fan of many of the decisions made in Smash 4 mechanically. The game is carried by the roster, and on a personal level, a roster that good is poorly wasted on those design choices.

But that's just my opinion. Regardless, this goes back to what I said about ways to please most core fans. If a reboot is made, create a stronger competitive focus that rewards skill, while at the same time introducing brand new mechanics, and a large chunk of the core fanbase would be pleased enough despite their faves not showing up, yet.

Overall however, if we're to speak realistically, as far as Switch goes, I doubt we'll see a reboot or a brand new game. Given the poor performance of the WiiU, it's very likely that 4 will get ported to Switch, have a few new modes, and introduce a bunch of new content to entice double dipping. They'll likely look at the ballot, and really max out what could be done with the roster. This makes sense too, as this would put the least strain on Sakurai in terms of workload, and keep most core fans pleased, while at the same time giving players who missed out, a chance to play the definitive version of the game.

But I wouldn't call that Smash 5, or a new entry in the franchise, its more like Smash 4 Deluxe.

What matters however, is what happens after that. What do you do with the 5th entry? Where do you go from there?

Mark my words, Smash 5, when it does come, will likely be a reboot. The series has nowhere else to go from there.

I called it with the Zelda after SS being open world and "going back to root." And I'm calling it again with Smash 5. It's gonna happen.

Also, the bit about people you've talked to not liking Cloud, that's anectdotal evidence and can't be used as an argument. One quick look at YT and forum archives will show you how most people felt about Cloud.
 

Ura

Smash Legend
Joined
Feb 4, 2014
Messages
12,838
Switch FC
SW-2772-0149-6703
Why is it nonsense?
For the reasons I just mentioned. No one in the right mind would ever want a mass cut on the scale people propose for a reboot.

All it's going to do is alienate the fanbase and cause a divide for all Smash fans. It's a nightmare scenario IMO.
The general public
I really REALLY hate when people try throwing this card around.

"Well the general public likes this so..."

How exactly are you supposed to gauge this? What you're saying is an assumption at best. This particular mentality feels like scapegoating fans in to discrediting what they say.
As far as the ballot goes... almost all Smash fans were disappointed by the result, I think that's testament to the difference between what Smash fans want, and what the general public wants.
Again another assumption on your part. Plenty of people were excited for Bayonetta's inclusion. Not me of course but search around and you'll find a lot of people that liked her inclusion.

And I really fail to see how a series which fails to break a million units (per game that is) is an indication of "see you guys are a vocal minority".

Even more so that we know jack about the Ballot. People just love to jump to conclusions so easily when they really don't know all that much.
This is the exact point Manly is trying to make.


The hardcore fanbase is the extreme minority. Most people thought cloud was super hype. While for places like here it was like, a 70/30 split, everywhere else it was pure undistilled hype. More than any 1st party character could have ever generated. The majority of consumers + outside fans is how you get sales, not the vocal minorities, with the exception of some niche titles taht survive on word of mouth.
I don't think that's true.

Plenty people here were excited for Cloud's inclusion. Myself included. Of course a lot of that is coming from me being an FF fan and all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom