- Oct 1, 2016
The problem I have with characters being "significant" to video game history is that determining whether or not a character is "significant" enough to be in the game is completely subjective. There is no official guideline or status quo to decide if a fourth part character meets the level of "significance" that needs to be set if they're going to be in the game at all. Whereas it's a hundred times simpler to simple follow by the rules already set: If they're from a video game/related media (mii channel/gyromite seem to be the exceptions), they count. If they're not (Manga, TV show, literally someone's OC, etc.), they have no chance.
There's no way to make a rule for that. It varies on a case by case basis, and yes, while they're some subjectiveness to it, there's some for any character you'd want to see in Smash. Just go to any topic and you'll see people argue about whether Waluigi, Geno, Toad, or Bayou Billy is an important enough character to get in... and if they are important, are they important enough to Nintendo... and does being important to Nintendo even matter.
With that said, it's still a lot easier to make the arguement for some characters over others.
James Bond? The guy MADE the 64 and put out one of Nintendo best selling games.
Popeye? The very inspiration for Mario.
Sailor Moon? ...ummm...
Any rules we make as to who is allowed Nintendo is just going to break whenever they feel like anyway.
Characters have to be on Nintendo... until Solid Snake.
Okay, let's change that. Characters have to be important to Nintendo... until Cloud Strife.
Okay, but you can only have one third party character per company... then comes Ryu.