Important The Ridley for SSB4 Thread - End of an Era

[SuperSegaSonicSS]

Even then, Ridley is still pretty wiry for a big guy like him, so I guess he isn't that massive anyway.

What's that? He's NOT "Big as ****?" You don't say?

 

[Zynux]

I know we shouldn't be talking about the roster CSS or whatever, but I have an interesting idea:

What if the final CSS has so many slots that they can't all fit into the 3DS screen, even when they are all at their smallest size possible?

Because of this, you have to scroll around to select the other characters you can't see in the current screen? Since it's a handheld, it wouldn't be a bother during multiplayer.

Oh, but what do I know.

While it's very difficult for me to explain the specifics here, arguments of the CSS is actually a pretty decent case to be made. However, while it's likely it's not confirmed as that's how the CSS is going to work, nor are the "rules" of how the CSS is currently set up is set in stone.

Again, we just have to play the waiting game. I wouldn't treat it as gospel like some others have yet.

 

[Captain Soviet]

Don't be such a baby, you haven't been misled. They've never implied ridley was playable.

You can't twist this into somehow being Nintendo's responsibility for the way you have deluded yourself with nonsense about how "they never said he wasn't playable therefore he must be playable!"

Except for all the other NPCs who they did state were not playable. If you assume the responsibility to say it for the likes of Chrom, Waluigi, and Takumaru, there is no reason to not do so for Ridley.

Wait, no, sorry. I forgot. Ridley is the exception. As always.

 

[SimonBarSinister]

There are different types of trust.

A character not being playable is just that. It's a character not being playable. It sucks, sure, but we get over it.

A character being taunted, teased, and then wind up not playable? After a year of said teasing? When the company knows that you want the character, and have been misinterpreting their posts?

I don't believe that teasing Ridley at that point in time just to give us a middle finger later on was their intent. A guy like me would just take what was shown at that moment for what it was worth and just say, "oh, there are going to be more boss characters besides the Yellow Devil and what looks to be Ridley in the Pyrosphere" and move on from that. Nintendo can't help it if people try to read something into their words that may not necessarily be there. That's their fault, not Nintendo's. If one raises their expectations too much, they're just asking to be disappointed, and that's all there is to it.

You don't have a reason to trust that company, or it's products. It clearly does not value you as a customer. When the employees are posting pics mocking you (Barney pic, Smash Ball Meta Knight on Pyrosphere), when the company teases the character, and doesn't take the same steps to confirm the official status that they do for every other character, that sends a message. That is Nintendo telling everyone still believing in Ridley that they are not a target customer for Nintendo.

I trust Nintendo to do their job, which is to make the games that I like to play. Smash is a game I like to play, and I am confident that they will do their best to maintain the quality of their products. I can't speak for anyone else, though. I'm not going to hold Nintendo to something that wasn't promised to us in the first place. So they can tease a character, playable or not, all they want to. I'm not going to get mad at them for it. I'm still going to get the game, and I'm still going to enjoy it. Nintendo isn't going to try to appease just one group within their entire fanbase. They are trying to make a game that anyone can enjoy. But there are going to be some dissenters out there who will complain that they didn't get EXACTLY what they wanted down to the last detail. They can't please everyone, you know.

Nintendo is saying that @ Eisendrachen 's status as a customer is less important to them than either: A) The fun they get out of trolling the fanbase. Or: B) The effort to make a two line twitter disconfirmation.

Where are you getting this from? Exactly when did they troll us?

Nintendo knows the Ridley fans are here. By this point (more than a year after the tease), they KNOW there's a massive hunk of the fanbase that has misinterpreted the initial post about Ridley (This is assuming that Ridley is not playable, even though he actually is and we all know it.). They have not BOTHERED to take fifteen seconds out of their day to type "Ridley is a stage boss. Unfortunately, he is not playable this time".

That is a company that does not care about you as a customer.


However, I think we can agree, that is NOT Nintendo.

I have no doubt of their knowledge of the Ridley fanbase. By initial post, are you referring to the Pyrosphere POTD? If so, then that situation was left for debate about who would show up there. Although, Sakurai MAY have been referencing the Ridley battle from Other M, which was further alluded to in the Smash Direct. And how do you know Ridley is playable, when no one has anything to go by? I'm not saying he won't be, but his supposed appearance in the boss character section of the Direct seems like a big strike against him. But who knows? Maybe Sakurai is trying to make a form of him playable, but if it doesn't work out, it doesn't work out, and he'd probably tell us that at some point or another.

One final note: if Nintendo didn't care about their customers like you claim, then I HIGHLY doubt that they would've put this much effort into this game.

 

[Naglfarii]

Except for all the other NPCs who they did state were not playable. If you assume the responsibility to say it for the likes of Chrom, Waluigi, and Takumaru, there is no reason to not do so for Ridley.

Wait, no, sorry. I forgot. Ridley is the exception. As always.

It doesn't matter what they did with chrom. Here's the situation

Sakurai: "yo there's other bosses too like maybe ridley on pyrosphere"

ridley is confirmed to be a boss on pyrosphere

Skyblade12: "omg Nintendo can't be trusted!"


How insane is that?

 

[SuperSegaSonicSS]

Sakurai: "yo there's other bosses too like maybe ridley on pyrosphere"?

And why couldn't Sakurai just say that instead of doing something else? Maybe, just maybe, to hide Ridley's true role?

 

[Skyblade12]

Don't be such a baby, you haven't been misled. They've never implied ridley was playable.

You can't twist this into somehow being Nintendo's responsibility for the way you have deluded yourself with nonsense about how "they never said he wasn't playable therefore he must be playable!"

I don't believe that teasing Ridley at that point in time just to give us a middle finger later on was their intent. A guy like me would just take what was shown at that moment for what it was worth and just say, "oh, there are going to be more boss characters besides the Yellow Devil and what looks to be Ridley in the Pyrosphere" and move on from that. Nintendo can't help it if people try to read something into their words that may not necessarily be there. That's their fault, not Nintendo's. If one raises their expectations too much, they're just asking to be disappointed, and that's all there is to it.


I trust Nintendo to do their job, which is to make the games that I like to play. Smash is a game I like to play, and I am confident that they will do their best to maintain the quality of their products. I can't speak for anyone else, though. I'm not going to hold Nintendo to something that wasn't promised to us in the first place. So they can tease a character, playable or not, all they want to. I'm not going to get mad at them for it. I'm still going to get the game, and I'm still going to enjoy it. Nintendo isn't going to try to appease just one group within their entire fanbase. They are trying to make a game that anyone can enjoy. But there are going to be some dissenters out there who will complain that they didn't get EXACTLY what they wanted down to the last detail. They can't please everyone, you know.


Where are you getting this from? Exactly when did they troll us?


I have no doubt of their knowledge of the Ridley fanbase. By initial post, are you referring to the Pyrosphere POTD? If so, then that situation was left for debate about who would show up there. Although, Sakurai MAY have been referencing the Ridley battle from Other M, which was further alluded to in the Smash Direct. And how do you know Ridley is playable, when no one has anything to go by? I'm not saying he won't be, but his supposed appearance in the boss character section of the Direct seems like a big strike against him. But who knows? Maybe Sakurai is trying to make a form of him playable, but if it doesn't work out, it doesn't work out, and he'd probably tell us that at some point or another.

One final note: if Nintendo didn't care about their customers like you claim, then I HIGHLY doubt that they would've put this much effort into this game.

It doesn't matter what they did with chrom. Here's the situation

Sakurai: "yo there's other bosses too like maybe ridley on pyrosphere"

ridley is confirmed to be a boss on pyrosphere

Skyblade12: "omg Nintendo can't be trusted!"


How insane is that?

Let me point both of you to this post again.

I just thought of another good "explanation of marketing" example I wanted to throw out.

Eiji Aonuma, after the initial reveal video about the Wii U Legend of Zelda, was asked about the Link shown. His response was "No one explicitly said that was Link”.

As a result of this, the internet blew up with speculation. "Female Link!" "Playable Zelda!" "Child of Link and Zelda from Skyward Sword!" Etcetera.

Aonuma then came out almost immediately and said that the character in the trailer was indeed Link.

Why? Why would he do that? After all, he never said it wasn't Link. He simply said that they hadn't STATED that was Link. Which was absolutely true.

This is because marketing is NOT about what you say. Marketing is about how the customers INTERPRET what you say. If they interpret your statement incorrectly, it is YOUR job to fix that impression. It is not their job to read your mind and understand what you meant.

It DOESN'T MATTER what Nintendo's "intention" with the tease was. ALL that matters is how it was interpreted. Marketing is a job focused around manipulating customer's feelings. The means by which you do this is largely irrelevant. The end result is what matters. If you upset a large portion of customers right before a major product release, THAT IS BAD MARKETING, and it is SOLELY the fault of your marketing team.

Regardless of what they "intended", they KNOW the current situation. It has been brought to their attention a great deal of times, and they have had plenty of opportunity to resolve the matter. If it upsets customers at this point, that's their fault, not the fault of the customers.

 

[Deleted member]

It doesn't matter what they did with chrom. Here's the situation

Sakurai: "yo there's other bosses too like maybe ridley on pyrosphere"

ridley is confirmed to be a boss on pyrosphere

Skyblade12: "omg Nintendo can't be trusted!"


How insane is that?

There's one huge flaw in that though, sakurai hasn't even mentioned him by name yet. Instead, he leaves it so vague that we're still debating about it right now.

 

[Naglfarii]

And why couldn't Sakurai just say that instead of something else?

Maybe he shouldve but no one here can say with a straight face sakurai had ever suggested ridley was playable, and in fact he has only implied the opposite

 

[SchAlternate]

It doesn't matter what they did with chrom. Here's the situation

Sakurai: "yo there's other bosses too like maybe ridley on pyrosphere"

ridley is confirmed to be a boss on pyrosphere

Skyblade12: "omg Nintendo can't be trusted!"


How insane is that?

Here's what they did with Chrom, though.

*trailer shows him as a non playable character*

IGN: Oh hey guys! Chrom is playable!

Nintendo: Actually, no he isn't.

IGN: Oh, ok, my bad then.


See, despite the fact that it was so glaringly obvious he wasn't playable, Nintendo themselves had to approach IGN and tell them the situation.

Even though it's evident for the rest, why hasn't anyone addressed this supposed fake hype everyone is setting themselves to?

 

[SmilingMad]

It doesn't matter what they did with chrom.

It actually does. Similar situation, hype occurred. For one, a statement was made that clarified stuff, the other was ignored for another few months.

 

[Naglfarii]

Let me point both of you to this post again.




It DOESN'T MATTER what Nitnendo's "intention" with the tease were. ALL that matters is how it was interpreted. Marketing is a job focused around manipulating customer's feelings. The means by which you do this is largely irrelevant. The end result is what matters. If you upset a large portion of customers right before a major product release, THAT IS BAD MARKETING, and it is SOLELY the fault of your marketing team.

Regardless of what they "intended", they KNOW the current situation. It has been brought to their attention a great deal of times, and they have had plenty of opportunity to resolve the matter. If it upsets customers at this point, that's their fault, not the fault of the customers.

Tbh I'm not convinced at all that they're aware of what some crazy Americans think on one forum.

A lot of people all over WANT ridley but this is the only place I've seen people like you who are convinced he IS playable

 

[Cyberguy64]

It's not Nintendo's fault that we're hyped for something that might not happen, but the burden of transparency falls on them.

Besides, it's escalated from "Ridley could be a boss, but we're not spelling anything out." to "You want to know if Riley's in? Here, have Meta-Knight and Barney, lol."

It's like what happened with Bad Boxart Megaman in Namco Vs. Capcom. He was created as a lighthearted jab at Megaman's history, but since Megaman had been treated like crap until this reveal, including being shafted for MVC3 TWICE, fans everywhere took it as a gut punch and a huge middle finger to them and the franchise.

All Nintendo had to do to keep this from happening here was say "Oh, sorry. Ridley's just a stage hazard this time around. Better luck next time?" So, why haven't they?

Again, it's all about how we interpret it, not how it was meant.

 

[Skyblade12]

Tbh I'm not convinced at all that they're aware of what some crazy Americans think on one forum.

A lot of people all over WANT ridley but this is the only place I've seen people like you who are convinced he IS playable

You haven't hung around the twitter of any of the major Nintendo PR people, have you?

 

[Eisendrachen]

...Okay, that's it. @ Naglfarii officially has vapor for brains. Ignore button is now in use.

We know Ridley is in the game. We just don't know his ROLE in the game. At this point, in the absence of those three little words that could have covered their butts, the options are "Ridley is playable" or "somebody Screwed Up." Can we get back to the discussion of game mechanics instead of PR, please?

 

[Ridley_Prime]

What if we get a Ridley costume in bayonetta?

Humor me, how would that work?

Has anyone noticed how the scum of the universe has become more active with the release so close? I'm seeing them everywhere, booming with 'too big' and 'already confirmed as a stage hazard' kinds of arguments, attempting to bring Ridley supporters down before the game's release, really shameful, to tell the truth, do any of the other fanbases even have these kinds of detractors, being disgusting enough to actually fight against a character's well-deserved playable appearance?

I've mostly only seen 'em lately in threads/topics having to do with the "big 3", in which the other two usually get around as much detracting as Ridley. Hell, if the "K. Rool's not a relevant enemy who hasn't been in a game since DK 64" type of posts weren't enough, I saw someone say both him and Ridley were irrelevant now.

So the big question.

If Ridley is a stage boss...

For damage control, would it best for Sakurai to announce that he is a stage boss now or after the 3ds release?

In all honesty? If he had fully shown Ridley as a hazard when Pyrosphere was first revealed (what I would've done to stay consistent on how deconfirmed characters are elaborated on) or showed more than just a shadow in that direct (what kind of things Ridley does as a boss, etc.), a certain number of us would've moved on from it awhile ago, but Mr. Sakurai insists on stringing us along all the way.

*insert marketing arguments here and how Sakurai's supposedly infallible, etc.*

 

[Naglfarii]

It's not Nintendo's fault that we're hyped for something that might not happen, but the burden of transparency falls on them.

Besides, it's escalated from "Ridley could be a boss, but we're not spelling anything out." to "You want to know if Riley's in? Here, have Meta-Knight and Barney, lol."

It's like what happened with Bad Boxart Megaman in Namco Vs. Capcom. He was created as a lighthearted jab at Megaman's history, but since Megaman had been treated like crap until this reveal, including being shafted for MVC3 TWICE, fans everywhere took it as a gut punch and a huge middle finger to them and the franchise.

All Nintendo had to do to keep this from happening here was say "Oh, sorry. Ridley's just a stage hazard this time around. Better luck next time?" So, why haven't they?

Again, it's all about how we interpret it, not how it was meant.

Sorry but how you interpret it is your own fault. While they haven't spelled it out Nintendo has still been pretty clear with their implications.

Hoping for the best is understandable but if you see that direct and then EXPECT ridley to be playable, then there's no nice way to say it, you're being dumb

 

[SuperSegaSonicSS]

Maybe he shouldve but no one here can say with a straight face sakurai had ever suggested ridley was playable, and in fact he has only implied the opposite

Keyword, implied. Nothing was ever stated or shown that Ridley was either 100% a boss or 100% playable. In fact, these actions support Ridley being playable, as a newcomer, Ridley would get a trailer before being properly revealed in anything else. While a boss could get the treatment of being revealed through different means (Metal Face getting a similar treatment). Basically, there's things that support Ridley and detracts against him. There is, however, nothing proving he IS playable or ISN'T playable, until Sakurai does it himself.

 

[Iddis]

I just realized Sofar with the Trophy theory we've got
Palutena(Newcomer) & Dark Pit(Clone)
Robin(Newcomer) & Lucina(Clone)
Could this Mean:
???(Newcomer) & Impa(Clone)
This is just a trend I noticed.

Ridley(Newcomer) & Roidley(Clone)

Spoiler

I couldn't resist it was to BIG of an opportunity to miss

 

[Naglfarii]

Keyword, implied. Nothing was ever stated or shown that Ridley was either 100% a boss or 100% playable. In fact, these actions support Ridley being playable, as a newcomer, Ridley would get a trailer before being properly revealed in anything else. While a boss could get the treatment of being revealed through different means (Metal Face getting a similar treatment). Basically, there's things that support Ridley and detracts against him. There is, however, nothing proving he IS playable or ISN'T playable, until Sakurai does it himself.

No kidding. But when Nintendo implies he's a boss, you can't say Nintendo is untrustworthy if he then turns out to be a boss. How simple and obvious is that?

 

[SimonBarSinister]

Let me point both of you to this post again.




It DOESN'T MATTER what Nintendo's "intention" with the tease was. ALL that matters is how it was interpreted. Marketing is a job focused around manipulating customer's feelings. The means by which you do this is largely irrelevant. The end result is what matters. If you upset a large portion of customers right before a major product release, THAT IS BAD MARKETING, and it is SOLELY the fault of your marketing team.

Regardless of what they "intended", they KNOW the current situation. It has been brought to their attention a great deal of times, and they have had plenty of opportunity to resolve the matter. If it upsets customers at this point, that's their fault, not the fault of the customers.

So, what were they marketing Ridley as? a boss? Or a playable character?

 

[Deleted member]

Sorry but how you interpret it is your own fault. While they haven't spelled it out Nintendo has still been pretty clear with their implications.

Hoping for the best is understandable but if you see that direct and then EXPECT ridley to be playable, then there's no nice way to say it, you're being dumb

Hey now, let's not start calling people dumb because they expect one of the most requested characters in the west to be revealed before the game is released.(And no, nintendo is not being clear on ridley's fate as of now.)

 

[Skyblade12]

So, what were they marketing Ridley as? a boss? Or a playable character?

It doesn't matter (As a playable character, of course.). It is utterly irrelevant. They could market Ridley to be a life size inflatable balloon. But if your customers draw an incorrect conclusion about your products from that marketing, you had better fix it, or suffer upset customers.

 

[Cyberguy64]

Sorry but how you interpret it is your own fault. While they haven't spelled it out Nintendo has still been pretty clear with their implications.

Hoping for the best is understandable but if you see that direct and then EXPECT ridley to be playable, then there's no nice way to say it, you're being dumb

NO, YOU'RE DUMB!

I'm sorry. I thought we'd switched to childish insult mode.

They've been about as clear as a brick wall. A shadow that animates like a playable character, only two indirect references, period, over the course of two years imply that Ridley has some special role. And recent taunts from PR departments make it clear that Nintendo knows that Ridley is wanted, and, as said REPEATEDLY over the course of this thread, to ignore the desire for Ridley being playable means that Nintendo's PR department is crap, they're intentionally out to crush the hopes of Ridley fans, or they've got something BIG in store for us. Those are the only logical options.

But go ahead. Keep insulting MY intelligence.

 

[Skyblade12]

NO, YOU'RE DUMB!

I'm sorry. I thought we'd switched to childish insult mode.

They've been about as clear as a brick wall. A shadow that animates like a playable character, only two indirect references, period, over the course of two years imply that Ridley has some special role. And recent taunts from PR departments make it clear that Nintendo knows that Ridley is wanted, and, as said REPEATEDLY over the course of this thread, to ignore the desire for Ridley being playable means that Nintendo's PR department is crap, they're intentionally out to crush the hopes of Ridley fans, or they've got something BIG in store for us. Those are the only logical options.

But go ahead. Keep insulting MY intelligence.

To be fair, @ Eisendrachen insulted his intelligence first (vapor for brains comment). We should keep away from the insults if we expect our detractors to do likewise, and keep this thread open, and a good place to post.

Ridley's wings can propel him through the vacuum of space. I'm pretty sure that when you have the power to push yourself through literal void, your actual weight becomes meaningless to your flight capabilities.

Actually, if he can propel himself through the (not quite) vacuum of space with winged propulsion, he must weigh next to nothing.

However, I believe only Meta-Ridley did that, and he could very well have had a propulsion system installed.

 

[Naglfarii]

NO, YOU'RE DUMB!

I'm sorry. I thought we'd switched to childish insult mode.

They've been about as clear as a brick wall. A shadow that animates like a playable character, only two indirect references, period, over the course of two years imply that Ridley has some special role. And recent taunts from PR departments make it clear that Nintendo knows that Ridley is wanted, and, as said REPEATEDLY over the course of this thread, to ignore the desire for Ridley being playable means that Nintendo's PR department is crap, they're intentionally out to crush the hopes of Ridley fans, or they've got something BIG in store for us. Those are the only logical options.

But go ahead. Keep insulting MY intelligence.

Or maybe bill trinen just was being playful because he can't give any real answers, obviously.

I'm not saying that the direct couldn't possibly be a red herring. But it's not very likely and the implications of the direct were clear. You just don't like them so you pretend it wasn't clear

 

[IsmaR]

Hoping for the best is understandable but if you see that direct and then EXPECT ridley to be playable, then there's no nice way to say it, you're being dumb

Opinions are opinions, but there's probably a reason there's no "nice way" to say that.

Both sides need to chill. Leave personal insults/callouts out of it.

 

[RidleyDX]

I've mostly only seen 'em lately in threads/topics having to do with the "big 3", in which the other two usually get around as much detracting as Ridley. Hell, if the "K. Rool's not a relevant enemy who hasn't been in a game since DK 64" type of posts weren't enough, I saw someone say both him and Ridley were irrelevant now.

I just don't how adding two badass villains, both with unique moveset potential, and that would help two severely underrepresented franchise's, would be a undesirable thing. Did I mention there both highly requested?

Ah well people are entitled to their opinions

 

[SimonBarSinister]

It doesn't matter (As a playable character, of course.). It is utterly irrelevant. They could market Ridley to be a life size inflatable balloon. But if your customers draw an incorrect conclusion about your products from that marketing, you had better fix it, or suffer upset customers.

Oh? And what sort of incorrect conclusion are we talking about here?

 

[SuperSegaSonicSS]

Liking how clear it was or not, Nintendo had no trouble telling us who's not playable and who is. Except Ridley. You know, the exception to everything.

 

[SchAlternate]

Cripes, when I saw in my alerts that IsmaR posted here, I thought for sure this thread got closed again.

I swear to god you guys, easy with these discussions.

 

[Skyblade12]

Or maybe bill trinen just was being playful because he can't give any real answers, obviously.

Which can be interpreted as mocking customers, and can fall directly under the "actions that reflect poorly on the company" line in any employment contract, regardless of whether he is on the job or not.

I'm not saying that the direct couldn't possibly be a red herring. But it's not very likely and the implications of the direct were clear. You just don't like them so you pretend it wasn't clear

Chrom's status as a Final Smash was clear. They clarified it with a direct statement.

Prince Sablé's status as an Assist Trophy was clear. They clarified it with a direct statement.

Ridley's status as a Stage Boss was clear. They clarified it with a direct statement.


One of these things is not like the others...

 

[Naglfarii]

Liking how clear it was or not, Nintendo had no trouble telling us who's not playable and who is. Except Ridley. You know, the exception to everything.

Maybe that means something but I wouldn't bet on it. You can't apply hard rules to the way Nintendo talks about smash bros

 

[Skyblade12]

Maybe that means something but I wouldn't bet on it. You can't apply hard rules to the way Nintendo talks about smash bros

You can apply hard rules to the way corporate marketing teams work. You can also apply hard rules to how large groups of people act and respond to marketing or known perceptions.

There are entire college majors based around Marketing and Sociology, if you are interested in learning these.

 

[Naglfarii]

Which can be interpreted as mocking customers, and can fall directly under the "actions that reflect poorly on the company" line in any employment contract, regardless of whether he is on the job or not.



Chrom's status as a Final Smash was clear. They clarified it with a direct statement.

Prince Sablé's status as an Assist Trophy was clear. They clarified it with a direct statement.

Ridley's status as a Stage Boss was clear. They clarified it with a direct statement.


One of these things is not like the others...

If you consider that mocking you then you need some perspective. maybe you should just take a week off from smash entirely or something

 

[SmilingMad]

Oh? And what sort of incorrect conclusion are we talking about here?

The possible incorrect conclusion that Ridley is playable of course.

 

[SuperSegaSonicSS]

Maybe that means something but I wouldn't bet on it. You can't apply hard rules to the way Nintendo talks about smash bros

I'm not really saying that. I just wish out of all the deconfirmed characters we seen Sakurai done to, Ridley wasn't the odd one out. Why Ridley, out of all characters, get the short end of the stick when getting a proper deconfirmation. Why, Sakurai?

 

[Irarius]

2h to the next pic of the day? hope its more ammo for ridley and not against him

 

[Thor_Hammerschlag]

The possible incorrect conclusion that Ridley is playable of course.

This common human behavior is called optimism.

 

[Skyblade12]

If you consider that mocking you then you need some perspective. maybe you should just take a week off from smash entirely or something

If you think it can't be interpreted as mocking, you need to Google "fired for tweet". Because people have been fired for a lot less.