Important The Ridley for SSB4 Thread - End of an Era

[AustarusIV]

First of all, sorry about this being a qoute to something unrelated. I accidently clicked reply and couldn't undo it.
second,
I really don't understand where the "too big" mindset comes from, and that's coming from an ex toobigger. Honestly when I first heard the idea of Ridley being in smash, it was from my brother pre brawl, and I had never played a metroid game or heard Ridley requested for smash bros. and my first thought was "isn't he a little big for smash?" It wasn't until I played my first metroid game (Other M) please don't kill me and fought Ridley that I thought "wait, this is the guy I thought was so huge? He's not that big. Bowsers bigger than he is in sunshine." That's when I came around to the idea of Ridley being in smash. I have no idea why I thought Ridley was too big. I had never played a metroid game, and I had never heard "Ridley's too big" so there was no logical reason for me to conclude that Ridley was too big. It's like there's something supernatural about Ridley that makes people hate him for no reason.

I think most peoples' perception of Ridley being "too big" comes from his appearances in the SSE, where he was sized up from his portrayal in Super Metroid.

In Other M, he's still among the smallest bosses in the game. (Credit goes to @Smashoperatingbuddy123 for taking the picture)

 

[WayfaringElf]

I just read some posts from back on the day of the direct and afterwards ._. let's not let that happen.

 

[Sigran101]

I think most peoples' perception of Ridley being "too big" comes from his appearances in the SSE, where he was sized up from his portrayal in Super Metroid.

In Other M, he's still among the smallest bosses in the game. (Credit goes to @Smashoperatingbuddy123 for taking the picture)
View attachment 17538

But this was pre brawl.

 

[Deleted member]

But this was pre brawl.

Probably because your brain wasn't fully developed at the time /half-joking

 

[Sigran101]

Probably because your brain wasn't fully developed at the time /half-joking

This may be a viable theory considering that at the time the character I wanted the most in smash was King Dodongo. No joke.

 

[Deleted member]

This may be a viable theory considering that at the time the character I wanted the most in smash was King Dodongo. No joke.

Too big sorrynotsorry
Last character I remember wanting before becoming a Ridley supporter is Yuga and Gunman Clive, this was months ago, my brain developed faster than to make a single hazard

 

[majora_787]

I supported normal stuff pre-Brawl like Zant, but I think before Ridley I supported really bizarre things like Geno and Claus.

But regardless, the too big thing really is a load of crap where people literally just go out of their ways to lie to themselves and each other and convince themselves that for some reason Ridley is a superstitious entity that abides by literally no rules of video game characters at all despite not even being particularly LARGE in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Sigran101]

I supported normal stuff pre-Brawl like Zant, but I think before Ridley I supported really bizarre things like Geno and Claus.

But regardless, the too big thing really is a load of crap where people literally just go out of their ways to lie to themselves and each other and convince themselves that for some reason Ridley is a superstitious entity that abides by literally no rules of video game characters at all despite not even being particularly LARGE in the grand scheme of things.

That's the thing though. I had nothing against Ridley, wasn't really invested in smash, and no one had ever told me that Ridley was too big. I don't know how I came to that conclusion.

 

[Deleted member]

EVEN MY 11 YEAR OLD BROTHER CAN UNDERSTAND THAT RIDLEY CAN'T BE DOWNSIZED! sorry for caps, not really

 

[majora_787]

The worst part of the too big argument is people literally look at boss characters that are generally huge and use appearances where they are PLAYABLE as evidence that they can be resized and Ridley can't.

They then turn around and reject and deny the fact that if Ridley were playable in a game, he could and *would* be resized to a workable scale and form like literally everyone else.

It literally has to happen for people to acknowledge it's possible. It's like a person going "YOU CAN'T FLY WITHOUT WINGS UR F****** DUMB DELUSIONAL MORON" under the premise of having not seen any of the MANY WORKING AIRPLANES WE HAVE ON EARTH actually flying in the air.

Or really to make it more accurate, they HAVE seen ALL of the planes fly but one but still insist that "JUST BECAUSE LITERALLY EVERY PLANE ON EARTH BUT THIS ONE IS PHYSICALLY ABLE TO FLY WITHOUT WINGS DOESN'T MEAN THIS PLANE CAN, JUST BECAUSE IT'S ALSO A FULLY FUNCTIONAL PLANE."

EDIT: Feel free to add the ever-used but irrelevant arguments of "This plane would look DUMB if it weren't on the ground".

 

[False Sense]

If I may ask a rather fundamental question, how likely would you all say Ridley is at this point?

 

[BlueBubbee]

I'd say he's quite likely, but at the same time he's not. If Sakurai puts him in, it'll be pure fan-service. Seeing as what he did with that one Waluigi picture shouldn't have any meaning to this at all, Waluigi was unlikely anyway.

Oh and as for that tease in the direct: it could have been playable Ridley jumping over the camera angle. Maybe? Hopefully?

 

[Snagrio]

If I may ask a rather fundamental question, how likely would you all say Ridley is at this point?

90% The way Sakurai has danced around his fate for this amount of time is just too glaring. The other 10% is just in case he thinks giving us a small, sluggish, rehashed boss hazardley is worth teasing for over a year.

 

[majora_787]

90-95%. Ish.

 

[Nietona]

If I may ask a rather fundamental question, how likely would you all say Ridley is at this point?

No certainties, by a mile. I'd stick with 50/50. I see a boss hazard as likely, but I also absolutely see the reasoning behind playability and would by far prefer the playable version, of course. Seeing everyone posting their 90%s gives me hope. Damn, do I hope you're all right.

 

[BlueBubbee]

Damn, do I hope you're all right.

So do I, man, so do I. No matter what, he'll be in smash somehow (trophy, boss, playable, assist), but that's just my pessimism showing through again. Here's to Ridley!

 

[majora_787]

I'm honestly sick of the pessimism wrapped around everything. It's stupid. Most people I have talked to about literally every new game not yet released is insanely pessimistic about everything concerning every game. I'm done playing the 50/50 safe game for a situation that either makes sense at all or DOESN'T at all. Though that's just me personally.

 

[BlueBubbee]

I'm honestly sick of the pessimism wrapped around everything. It's stupid. Most people I have talked to about literally every new game not yet released is insanely pessimistic about everything concerning every game. I'm done playing the 50/50 safe game for a situation that either makes sense at all or DOESN'T at all. Though that's just me personally.

I guess it's really that pessimism gives off the best effect on games, having the stuff you didn't expect and all that. I waver between pessimism and optimism when on Smash. Especially on Ridley.

 

[AustarusIV]

If I may ask a rather fundamental question, how likely would you all say Ridley is at this point?

To be honest, despite all the evidence that seems to be leading towards the fact that he was downsized from his boss portrayal, I'm going to say 50/50. I wouldn't be surprised either way if Ridley turned out to be playable or not.

If he's playable, then it's not too much of a surprise to me because Nintendo was on a trolling binge lately (remember the Mario Kart 8 Direct?).

If he's not playable, then I guess Sakurai really did mean for us to take the shadow at face value.

 

[Nietona]

I'm honestly sick of the pessimism wrapped around everything. It's stupid. Most people I have talked to about literally every new game not yet released is insanely pessimistic about everything concerning every game. I'm done playing the 50/50 safe game for a situation that either makes sense at all or DOESN'T at all. Though that's just me personally.

Totally understandable, of course. One of the main reasons I don't want to budge from this 50/50 spot, despite it not making sense, is the safety net. In the event that Ridley IS a pathetic hazard, I don't want to feel too let down. Of course I'll feel let down either way, but I'll feel better sooner in the worst case if I stick by 50/50.

 

[BlueBubbee]

\ In the event that Ridley IS a pathetic hazard, I don't want to feel too let down. Of course I'll feel let down either way, but I'll feel better sooner in the worst case if I stick by 50/50.

Pessimism at work here. There's a good chance that he'll be a less-pathetic stage hazard (or more-pathetic, depends on your side choice) being a boss. I just really don't want to beat the **** out of Ridley unless he's being controlled by another player.

 

[Snagrio]

I'm going to be highly disappointed in potential stage hazardley regardless, so I might as well be optimistic in the meantime.

 

[False Sense]

90% The way Sakurai has danced around his fate for this amount of time is just too glaring. The other 10% is just in case he thinks giving us a small, sluggish, rehashed boss hazardley is worth teasing for over a year.

I agree, the way Sakurai has handled the situation so far is, I think, one of the best indicators of Ridley possibly being playable. It's been forever since the Pyrosphere was initially revealed and Ridley was alluded to, and the only thing we've seen since is an ambiguous suggestion that Ridley is a boss, and his shadow (which seems to be relatively small, but that's beside the point). I feel like if Ridley really was a boss, we would have seen something by now. He didn't even show up in any of the numerous pictures shown after the Direct (which in retrospect, it would seem that they even had Pac-Man hiding in some, why couldn't they show Ridley?). The way Ridley has been teased yet has practically no information about him revealed is very odd. Actually, it's eerily similar to how Palutena was teased before her reveal... Really, look at the comments that came with the reveals of the Pyrosphere and Palutena's Temple. They're remarkably alike.

I wouldn't say Ridley is as likely as 90%, since he has been directly teased as a boss, but I would say he has a very real chance at being playable still. I'm actually kind of tempted to write up a detailed analysis of Ridley's chances, like I did for Robin awhile back.

 

[aldelaro5]

I was bored and it's been awhile since I posted here so, here's a surprise essay on the "too big" argument. Since it's meant to be a realtalk, you know what it means: EARTHBOUND AMBIANCE!!!

< REALTALK >

Well, no matter how I see it or no matter how I want ridley, I'm still wondering how it got THAT huge.

Like seriously, this argument getting talked form time to time or briefly, ok that would make sense because it's understandable that not all people check the other side and thus, need explanation. However, the fact that it's CONSTANTLY being talked is what is probably one of the most impressive debate condition EVER.

There's a part that is subjective though: the look he would have after getting downsized. Even considering the melee trophy, that doesn't mean that all people would like that as playable that would depends how you see him.

BUT, the fact that it would not be possible to resize him FOR THE ONLY reason that he's canonically a huge sized boss IS SO OBJECTIVELY FALSE.

That's not even arguable, no alternative, no negotiation. You don't even have to point out the bowser instance, you would just need to say: "Because Smash isn't canon, the elements may alter from their original game to suit the need of the game." That's true because you don't HAVE to get the EXACT content of ANY game to put THE SAME content into ANOTHER game. That's not even just for characters even stages and I'll go as far to say music since some are remixed.

Like, honestly, the fact that this thread still has to bring facts like this leaves me speechless. Even the brawl rep (which I made my point awhile ago: SSE + dynablade = only a boss because of how he looked like dynablade) doesn't destroy that because, well, what does it have to do with him NOW? He WAS a boss so, is there any reason that he HAVE to be a boss NOW because he WAS a boss? It's like saying that smash will never change but it actually needs to change to not feel repetitive.

huh... I legitimately wonder if this thread got that much pages for stuff like this. It's really depressing for me to even think that what I said above had to be used multiple time before to make people realise that it's not relevant. Because honestly, if I did think that ridley wouldn't make sense playable, I would've at least be subjective because that would literally be an opinion. Here, it's like stated as false fact every single time so you shouldn't even need to argue with this. How could I possibly make sense if what I'm stating is impossible to interpret with the correct facts?

Actually, look at how it's stated; it's exactly what happens: "Ridley is too big to be playable!", "Ridley was made to be a boss!", "You can't resize ridley because he was made to be big!", "Ridley is..." okay you get the idea but there's tons of instances that you may (and should not) have seen that has always this in common: it is stated as false fact.

So, just this is fascinating. Can anyone tell me why it got worse? Ah right... because he was in danger which means more discussion. And what these discussions still had because of that "argument"? It is stated as facts again and you know what it means: even more people are even more ENTITLED to think that he CAN'T be in smash. Not WON'T or SHOULDN'T but CAN'T; it just goes downhill like that. The direct got that even worse as if it wasn't enough (I had to wait a full MONTH to do a big essay on him at E3 because of how it was just impossible to tell it and then having to do it again after it was already said anyway).

There IS actually legit and subjective opinions against him that was probably discussed already and those should be considered and argued more carefully. But not that, it's not even worth it just stating the right fact is enough and that's not arguing, that's correcting.

All this text to say that I HIGHLY respect how this thread is handling this. To still not losing interests of support after all this is awesome. You're seriously though and your 1k pages was well deserved.

< / REALTALK >

Ouf, this one was long but I like this SO MUCH

His chances? Frankly, I don't know any more. The direct is now perfect 50/50 for me and the demo could go either way. I'll say by words: I think that Ridley has "GOOD" chance to be playable in Super Smash Bros 4. No percent because I hate arbirtrary numbers but you get that it's above 50. I believe that the purpose was hidden for a very good reason and at this point, I just think that hazard isn't THAT worthy for that. I didn't say "GREAT" because it's still worthy, in a way. I just don't agree with this way and also, I'm more doubtful. Before, I may have said "GREAT" or "BIG" but now, I just want to be safe and realistic.

I still kinda want him though. Not that much but you got to agree that either way, it would be delicious to watch this thread.

 

[JaidynReiman]

If I may ask a rather fundamental question, how likely would you all say Ridley is at this point?

I've been stating that I think there's about a 90% chance IMO that Ridley is playable at this point. Which also helps my #1 pick greatly (Ridley's only about #5 to me at this point.)

 

[majora_787]

It's not even normal pessimism. It's always INSANE levels of pessimism, which is why it grates so much. The "I dunno, it could go anywhere so I don't want to get my hopes up" pessimism is literally not nearly as common-feeling as the "The game is going to be garbage, good things will literally be avoided on purpose by the developers" kind of pessimism. Which is entirely why I'm so sick of it.

I can hardly stomach the pessimism enough to be pessimistic myself at this point.

 

[PlTe]

I've been stating that I think there's about a 90% chance IMO that Ridley is playable at this point. Which also helps my #1 pick greatly (Ridley's only about #5 to me at this point.)

You really think he's 90% possible? Even with the shadow and all the other things against Ridley at this point? I'd say it's a 90% he WON'T be in it. I'm not saying I don't support Ridley's inclusion, but at this point I just genuinely don't think he'll be in this edition of Smash.

 

[BlueBubbee]

I was bored and it's been awhile since I posted here so, here's a surprise essay on the "too big" argument. Since it's meant to be a realtalk, you know what it means: EARTHBOUND AMBIANCE!!!

< REALTALK >

Well, no matter how I see it or no matter how I want ridley, I'm still wondering how it got THAT huge.

Like seriously, this argument getting talked form time to time or briefly, ok that would make sense because it's understandable that not all people check the other side and thus, need explanation. However, the fact that it's CONSTANTLY being talked is what is probably one of the most impressive debate condition EVER.

There's a part that is subjective though: the look he would have after getting downsized. Even considering the melee trophy, that doesn't mean that all people would like that as playable that would depends how you see him.

BUT, the fact that it would not be possible to resize him FOR THE ONLY reason that he's canonically a huge sized boss IS SO OBJECTIVELY FALSE.

That's not even arguable, no alternative, no negotiation. You don't even have to point out the bowser instance, you would just need to say: "Because Smash isn't canon, the elements may alter from their original game to suit the need of the game." That's true because you don't HAVE to get the EXACT content of ANY game to put THE SAME content into ANOTHER game. That's not even just for characters even stages and I'll go as far to say music since some are remixed.

Like, honestly, the fact that this thread still has to bring facts like this leaves me speechless. Even the brawl rep (which I made my point awhile ago: SSE + dynablade = only a boss because of how he looked like dynablade) doesn't destroy that because, well, what does it have to do with him NOW? He WAS a boss so, is there any reason that he HAVE to be a boss NOW because he WAS a boss? It's like saying that smash will never change but it actually needs to change to not feel repetitive.

huh... I legitimately wonder if this thread got that much pages for stuff like this. It's really depressing for me to even think that what I said above had to be used multiple time before to make people realise that it's not relevant. Because honestly, if I did think that ridley wouldn't make sense playable, I would've at least be subjective because that would literally be an opinion. Here, it's like stated as false fact every single time so you shouldn't even need to argue with this. How could I possibly make sense if what I'm stating is impossible to interpret with the correct facts?

Actually, look at how it's stated; it's exactly what happens: "Ridley is too big to be playable!", "Ridley was made to be a boss!", "You can't resize ridley because he was made to be big!", "Ridley is..." okay you get the idea but there's tons of instances that you may (and should not) have seen that has always this in common: it is stated as false fact.

So, just this is fascinating. Can anyone tell me why it got worse? Ah right... because he was in danger which means more discussion. And what these discussions still had because of that "argument"? It is stated as facts again and you know what it means: even more people are even more ENTITLED to think that he CAN'T be in smash. Not WON'T or SHOULDN'T but CAN'T; it just goes downhill like that. The direct got that even worse as if it wasn't enough (I had to wait a full MONTH to do a big essay on him at E3 because of how it was just impossible to tell it and then having to do it again after it was already said anyway).

There IS actually legit and subjective opinions against him that was probably discussed already and those should be considered and argued more carefully. But not that, it's not even worth it just stating the right fact is enough and that's not arguing, that's correcting.

All this text to say that I HIGHLY respect how this thread is handling this. To still not losing interests of support after all this is awesome. You're seriously though and your 1k pages was well deserved.

< / REALTALK >

Ouf, this one was long but I like this SO MUCH

His chances? Frankly, I don't know any more. The direct is now perfect 50/50 for me and the demo could go either way. I'll say by words: I think that Ridley has "GOOD" chance to be playable in Super Smash Bros 4. No percent because I hate arbirtrary numbers but you get that it's above 50. I believe that the purpose was hidden for a very good reason and at this point, I just think that hazard isn't THAT worthy for that. I didn't say "GREAT" because it's still worthy, in a way. I just don't agree with this way and also, I'm more doubtful. Before, I may have said "GREAT" or "BIG" but now, I just want to be safe and realistic.

I still kinda want him though. Not that much but you got to agree that either way, it would be delicious to watch this thread.

Very fitting music. I want to leave these here with four words: The Choice Is Yours.

Oh and this too, if you haven't seen it:

The choice is really up to the imagination.

 

[Yomi's Biggest Fan]

As quoted from Metroid's Nightmare Fuel page on TV Tropes:

"Hell, Ridley in general's pretty scary; he's a freakin' near-unkillable draconic space terrorist (hell, it takes an planet-scale bomb to actually kill him), and alsomurdered Samus' parents in front of her makes him an extremely frightening foe, and he's certainly one of Nintendo's most sadistic villains (he takes a cruel delight in describing the exact way he killed the parents of his archnemesis, after all)."

This proves that Ridley is indeed one of Nintendo's darkest villains in history (though I think that lich from Eternal Darkness is much worse).

 

[BlueBubbee]

(hell, it takes an planet-scale bomb to actually kill him),

Oh and sorry about the super long post, I haven't exactly gotten the hang of Spoilers yet.

 

[WayfaringElf]

I'm sick of all the pessimism. I'm don't care if it's a little or metric ton. Please stop being so Pessimistic, you either think that he is included or not, there is no: Ooh well he has a slight chance of being a boss. No, he doesn't have a chance at anything, Lord Ridley is in one way or another and his role is determined, there ARE no chances.

 

[majora_787]

As quoted from Metroid's Nightmare Fuel page on TV Tropes:

"Hell, Ridley in general's pretty scary; he's a freakin' near-unkillable draconic space terrorist (hell, it takes an planet-scale bomb to actually kill him), and alsomurdered Samus' parents in front of her makes him an extremely frightening foe, and he's certainly one of Nintendo's most sadistic villains (he takes a cruel delight in describing the exact way he killed the parents of his archnemesis, after all)."
This proves that Ridley is indeed one of Nintendo's darkest villains in history (though I think that lich from Eternal Darkness is much worse).

Ganondorf's extensive lore isn't much better, considering he is the manifest rage of an ancient demon king from the depths of hell whose anger manifests after his death to hunt down and kill the families of the heroes who stopped him from subjugating the world. He then continues to try to subjugate the world as Ganon and Ganondorf with astonishing regularity. And it's had a number of effects, many most apparent in Ocarina of Time. In which he:

- Killed the only guardian of the Kokiri from the inside out with a parasite
- Attempted to starve the entire goron race to death and eventually abducted every last one of them for a mass ritualistic sacrifice to a fire dragon
- Attempted to kill the ZORA deity with another parasite, and then froze the entire Zora race and their home in ice, damaging Hyrule's collective water supply

Not to mention, just like Ridley, Ganondorf's response to small children is to attempt to smite them with magic.

Ridley may be sadistic and dark, but Ganon really isn't any better.

EDIT: Really, the reason it took a planet-scale bomb to kill Ridley was they had to kill everyone who would try to rebuild him along with him. Which they definitely did.

 

[Phaazoid]

As quoted from Metroid's Nightmare Fuel page on TV Tropes:

"Hell, Ridley in general's pretty scary; he's a freakin' near-unkillable draconic space terrorist (hell, it takes an planet-scale bomb to actually kill him), and alsomurdered Samus' parents in front of her makes him an extremely frightening foe, and he's certainly one of Nintendo's most sadistic villains (he takes a cruel delight in describing the exact way he killed the parents of his archnemesis, after all)."
This proves that Ridley is indeed one of Nintendo's darkest villains in history (though I think that lich from Eternal Darkness is much worse).

And, on a nightmare fuel page, his size isn't specifically noted.

So that kinda kills the 'his size isintegral to his character" argument, again.

 

[majora_787]

Oh. I forgot about how the Zelda series even went all forward with this in other games. How about the ENTIRE series of games centered entirely around Ganon having killed the Hero of Time and became so powerful that he turned the sacred realm into a dark world of death and despair? The timeline where he was basically impossible to kill but was more or less a timeline of "How long can we go without anyone reviving Ganon"?

OR that one game where Ganon was defeated, but came back and wasn't stopped from destroying the earth so the gods had to flood the earth to stop him? Which didn't even entirely work?

And I'm not even going to get into Andross becoming evil because he accidentally car-bombed his secret crush. Moral of the story is, Ridley really isn't an "exceptionally dark or scary villain" or anything. And really, it is a T-rated game. If it's not too much to be in a T-rated game, it's not too much for Smash. ...Obviously. If it were, it wouldn't be T rated.

 

[BlueBubbee]

Oh. I forgot about how the Zelda series even went all forward with this in other games. How about the ENTIRE series of games centered entirely around Ganon having killed the Hero of Time and became so powerful that he turned the sacred realm into a dark world of death and despair? The timeline where he was basically impossible to kill but was more or less a timeline of "How long can we go without anyone reviving Ganon"?

OR that one game where Ganon was defeated, but came back and wasn't stopped from destroying the earth so the gods had to flood the earth to stop him? Which didn't even entirely work?

And I'm not even going to get into Andross becoming evil because he accidentally car-bombed his secret crush. Moral of the story is, Ridley really isn't an "exceptionally dark or scary villain" or anything. And really, it is a T-rated game. If it's not too much to be in a T-rated game, it's not too much for Smash. ...Obviously. If it were, it wouldn't be T rated.

 

[ppbto]

I'm not pessimist nor optimist, I'm a realistic person. Looking from an objective view the Ridley's case we can't confirm nor deny Ridley's playability. Sakurai has been too careful to be as ambiguous as possible.

IMO, Ridley playability is at 50/50.

 

[majora_787]

Bowser is usually not very serious or tragic, though he definitely can't die from anything and doesn't even need mechanical enhancements. Though he DID come back as a zombie that one time.

I still wouldn't call him a "dark villain", but yeah.

 

[JaidynReiman]

You really think he's 90% possible? Even with the shadow and all the other things against Ridley at this point? I'd say it's a 90% he WON'T be in it. I'm not saying I don't support Ridley's inclusion, but at this point I just genuinely don't think he'll be in this edition of Smash.

AGAINST Ridley? The shadow is EXACTLY why I think Ridley is playable. I'm not even going to bother explaining, because I'm just going to waste my time outlining every detail and its going to blow right over your head.

 

[Sehnsucht]

AGAINST Ridley? The shadow is EXACTLY why I think Ridley is playable. I'm not even going to bother explaining, because I'm just going to waste my time outlining every detail and its going to blow right over your head.

Outlining details for Ridley's playable possibility is hardly a waste of time.

 

[AustarusIV]

As quoted from Metroid's Nightmare Fuel page on TV Tropes:

"Hell, Ridley in general's pretty scary; he's a freakin' near-unkillable draconic space terrorist (hell, it takes an planet-scale bomb to actually kill him), and alsomurdered Samus' parents in front of her makes him an extremely frightening foe, and he's certainly one of Nintendo's most sadistic villains (he takes a cruel delight in describing the exact way he killed the parents of his archnemesis, after all)."
This proves that Ridley is indeed one of Nintendo's darkest villains in history (though I think that lich from Eternal Darkness is much worse).

I've looked at the Metroid TVTropes page, and it's caught my attention that fans have somehow spotted Omega Ridley's shadow flying away during his "death scene". Is this really true?