Unpopular Smash Opinions (BE CIVIL)

[Champion of Hyrule]

Iterative sequels are dumb because they remove any reason to play the last game. Unless you're a doorstop collector, all you're left with is one less cake when you could have two.

I agree that I don’t like the mindset where people say the original game is obsolete once a sequel comes out. But at the same time, sequels that are “more of the same” of the original still have different level design and challenges to them. There’s a reason to go back to the original because it’s a different set of levels.

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

I agree that I don’t like the mindset where people say the original game is obsolete once a sequel comes out. But at the same time, sequels that are “more of the same” of the original still have different level design and challenges to them. There’s a reason to go back to the original because it’s a different set of levels.

I was referring pretty much exclusively to multiplayer or community-based games. I've never seen someone say that about a single player game.

 

[RileyXY1]

I agree that I don’t like the mindset where people say the original game is obsolete once a sequel comes out. But at the same time, sequels that are “more of the same” of the original still have different level design and challenges to them. There’s a reason to go back to the original because it’s a different set of levels.

This can also be seen in Smash. Each game has its own unique content so no game really replaces the last.

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

If "characters aren't just interchangable functions", then why does objective reasoning matter to MWs whatsoever? If "Decidueye should be in because he's an archer", shouldn't you be able to settle for Aloy, modern Lara Croft, or one of the many gaming iterations of Apollo (Cheetahman included)? If "Banjo should be in because he used to be a Nintendo character", why are Layton and Tetromino being overlooked? I don't think there's an inherent shame in wanting a character just because you like them, it's certainly preferable to trying to game Smash's status as a external-series-reviver/changer, hell most but not all of my MWs are just "I like the character" (Bubsy is my big one - I wouldn't accept Meowth in place of Bubsy because "slashing snarky cat" isn't really the idea, but I would accept Reznor in place of Rambi or Rayquaza in place of Onix since those are to some degree function picks based simply on "rhino body shape" or "giant snake body shape", with those specific characters being my cosmetic/character preferance, same with interchaning Goomba for someone like Motobug or non-bandana Waddle Dee as that pick is rooted in "More weak level 1 mooks" and Goomba being my character preferance from that selection), but I think it's dumb to claim reasons that aren't there and open yourself up to criticisms you simply do not have the means nor reason to respond to.

 

[fogbadge]

If "Banjo should be in because he used to be a Nintendo character", why are Layton and Tetromino being overlooked?

Layton has never been a nintendo character

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

Layton has never been a nintendo character

Not owned, but I certainly remember Layton getting the same prominence in Nintendo marketing materials at the height of his popularity that Banjo got when he was a Nintendo character - it's a Conker situation, distribution and some strange attribution in marketing. Maybe that was just a UK thing, I dunno.

 

[fogbadge]

Not owned, but I certainly remember Layton getting the same prominence in Nintendo marketing materials at the height of his popularity that Banjo got when he was a Nintendo character - it's a Conker situation, distribution and some strange attribution in marketing. Maybe that was just a UK thing, I dunno.

I'm well aware of that. but he was never owned by nintendo. unlike B&K or the wonderful 101

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

Sonic having two near-identical moves is terrible for Sonic, the speedy rushdown type, but for a more tactical, slow character it could be a really fun move concept.

Impossible to depend the Min Min approach of "one missing special" though.

 

[AlRex]

On the character/function thing, I think there’s a balance between it. It’s the “Nintendo and eventually some other video games” fighter, so that general field can hold some bearing, some could get in for function, some could get in for character, but also think about what said character has to offer and how to express it.

Characters matter to some degree, otherwise, why even bother with making a “dream match” fighting game about Nintendo characters, and not just the Dragon King prototype with the blank 3D models? (That itself could be potentially interesting if you had each of the other characters be different general shapes while retaining that sort of aesthetic, but that’s a different subject.)

That said, I’m completely for unconventional picks, from a “representation” standpoint and a “function” standpoint, as well. A lot of “safe” picks tread on some similar grounds to what’s already on the roster, aside from maybe a few. I guess I’m interested in “novelty” in some’s eyes, but I do like variety to a degree, distinction, sometimes name value, but prioritize the “names” and some obscure ones that substantially add. What that is is in the eye of the beholder.

 

[UserKev]

I'm still annoyed at Smash's first level and overworld theme inclusions as of late. I want Smash to go back to the more upbeat traditional theme style in Smash 64/Melee. Bomb-Omb battle field, Lost Woods, etc is so repetitive.

Hot take. Smash needs a decrease in the number of tracks. Having gone back and remembered how much tracks Sakurai implanted from King of Fighters, yeah. We really don't need all that. Less tracks would do more wonders. Smash really needs to get away from all this bloat.

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

I'm still annoyed at Smash's first level and overworld theme inclusions as of late. I want Smash to go back to the more upbeat traditional theme style in Smash 64/Melee. Bomb-Omb battle field, Lost Woods, etc is so repetitive.

Hot take. Smash needs a decrease in the number of tracks. Having gone back and remembered how much tracks Sakurai implanted from King of Fighters, yeah. We really don't need all that. Less tracks would do more wonders. Smash really needs to get away from all this bloat.

Even as Mr. Quality Over Quantity, I don't see how more songs is a bad thing. Perhaps less remixes and a focus on unmodified tracks could have some upsides, but I think song quantity is basically harmless, adds a welcome level of cosmetic customisation, and dud songs are welcome - I'm quite partial to 25M BGM myself. It's not like the musician making Animal Crossing Amiibo Festival Medley or whatever would have the same skill-set required to develop playable Waluigi or calculate balanced wavedash lengths.

 

[Nabbitfan730]

Enjoy your ewaste I guess? I really don't know how to respond, why would you want less options for engaging with a series.

A nonsensical correlation. How does getting more games = less options. It's not like time and memories from previous games were meaningless and will suddenly disappear. Moving on from certain games after getting your fill is normal

Should things never improve or what?

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

A nonsensical correlation. How does getting more games = less options. It's not like time and memories from previous games were meaningless and will suddenly disappear. Moving on from certain games after getting your fill is normal

Should things never improve or what?

You know I mean less options in the present day, right? Nothing about memories or nostalgia. If anything I'm talking about people who discovered a series with the latest iteration, not long-time fans. I grew up on 64, Melee, and Brawl concurrently and never had a particular preferance (though now I'm older I do)

 

[Nabbitfan730]

You know I mean less options in the present day, right? Nothing about memories or nostalgia. If anything I'm talking about people who discovered a series with the latest iteration, not long-time fans. I grew up on 64, Melee, and Brawl concurrently and never had a particular preferance (though now I'm older I do)

Nothing from stopping from going back from present day either but eventually i will get tired on same game and would like to move on. New fans going to back the classics will do out of curiosity of history/novelty factor regardless of being iterative.

All Smash games are iterative in many degrees but didn't stop from many going back. Heck, even i have went back to Brawl/S4 couple of times despite my preference to SSBU

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

Nothing from stopping from going back from present day either but eventually i will get tired on same game and would like to move on

If I had got burned out from a game and wanted to "move on", I'd just... find a different game. Not play "the same but more", hell I wouldn't even play a non-iterative s/prequel in that context. I'd go for a different genre outright.

 

[Nabbitfan730]

"the same but more"

If you see that way. *similar concepts but improved is my definition