I told myself I wasn't going to come in, but,
I get what you're trying to say, but, these words don't best illustrate your point. Some of the greatest games of all time have their creators taking political stances and agenda's with their story - Every creator is going to at least try to show a different PoV in the world, period. The difference is, these agenda's are typically broken down to mean something bigger through weaving subtlety into the narrative. It's kinda up to the general population to be able to weave out narrative subtlety, or you're going to see more stuff that yells it in your face. The better words would be that the "Representation lacks nuance; it should be there, but to me, it sticks out like a sore thumb and here's why"
This leads me to a bigger point about the art style. 3D models are fine (not my cup of tea, but they can work) but there were no plans to make it look distinct from Smash or other Triple A artstyles, to my knowledge. It doesn't matter if the direction behind such was executed perfectly; it's hard to get people to pay attention when things still look the same. Then, there's the whole Sci-Fi thing; No More Heroes (since ya brought it up) was pretty focused on "Modern Wild West" and the look and feel behind that was awesome; While I admire the ambition of Icons: Combat Arena, they weren't able to sell me on Sci-Fi the way No More Heroes was focused on MWW; not to mention, No More Heroes did cel-shading (A different style of 3D!). Making stuff look different has downright saved games before - I don't think Cuphead would have met to the same praise had it looked like another 3D game.
While it's easier to harp on the Art Style than the Gameplay, especially since the latter is harder to get people riled up about (it's smash.),
this game here is an exhibit of aesthetic not being able to carry a game on it's own. It's easy for us to point out why things didn't go well, but I'm not really interested in that - I'm more interested in helping the next batch of people that decide to make another Platform Fighter. If there's a lesson to take from this wall of text, it's that 1) Have your Aesthetic sorted out, but 2) Don't rely on just Aesthetic; Aesthetic can take a game very far, but it can't carry.
(For the record, the only part I ever latched onto about Icons: Combat Arena was their 2016 panel at SSC, which made for a great business pitch. Beyond that, I'm very ambivalent about the game itself and almost every Platform Fighter. The only one that has caught my attention is Rivals of Aether.)
I disagree on two main points you brought up.
One of which I THOROUGHLY disagree with, which is the notion that because creators are trying to put their own perspective of the world into their work, it's therefore impossible or difficult to divorce political ideals and values and narrative, from their creative work. I'm not sure if this is what you were getting at, but I have seen this argument get brought up before in defense of the onset of more political narrative and agendas weaseling their way into videogames and other creative work.
As a creative myself, I will say "NO, that is most DEFITENITELY not the case" and honestly, I'd say it's very unprofessional of some to use their creative work as a platform to preach to the public about their own political values. That doesn't mean that some creative work shouldn't be explicitly political, or carry ideological or philosophical theme to it, of course not. In fact, works like Metal Gear Solid, Ghost in the Shell, Evangelion, and so forth, which are dense with social commentary, and philosopical intrigue are some of my favorites. But we should make a separation between something meant to entertain, and something meant to educate. A lot of more artistic work and literature, is made with the explicit purpose of self-expression. However, not all creative work is meant to be philosophical and "artistic." Some of it, a lot of it, purely exists to entertain. And outside of political satire or parody, it's very jarring to see such work used for the sake of trying to educate people on your own political values. It's as if the creator is taking the role of pariah full of great wisdom, and their values and ideology are infallible, and they're going to "educate us." That's how it comes across in some cases, especially in the instances where it simply does not belong. It's not the creator sharing their worldview, it's got a much stronger sense of arrogance and attempt to "change" tagged along with it. And it's really, REALLY irritating.
I think creatives should realize their role as entertainers and put their audience FIRST. At least that's how I personally treat my work. And I say this as someone who worked on a political satire for a while. I didn't write that to try and change people's values or worldview to align with mine. I catered that to a specific audience in order to entertain them. I ALWAYS put my audience first when I create, not myself, no matter what I make, I'm very conscious of WHO I'm making it for.
And honestly, this is the exact same philosophy you see in a lot of Japanese media. Very rarely do you see social critique and commentary on contemporary politics make its way into Japanese videogames and media. Meanwhile, the west seems OBSESSED with trying to shove politics into everything, and then using the "As an artist, I can't separate my values and worldview from my work" yes you can. You most definitely can, and as a professional, you often SHOULD. If I'm gonna make a manga about martial arts and fantasy, I'm not gonna shove in commentary about our political climate, it doesn't belong. People aren't tuning into that sort of stuff to hear people prattle on about let's say, the refugee crisis, or feminism. People just wanna see characters with magical powers beat each other up. You know, have a little respect for the people tuning into your content. Not everyone is gonna share the same political views as you, don't preach to them. Share your worldview, sure, but don't preach. Anyway, this isn't related to Icons in any specific way, but I can think of a VERY large number of games and such where I've seen this issue crop up, and what you said rung similarly. If it's not what you were getting on about, I apologize.
The second point I disagree with is what you said about art style.
Perhaps I'm biased when it comes to this, as I personally place a LOT of value on visual aesthetic. But I disagree with the notion that art style and aesthetic can't carry a game. Where I've in fact seen the opposite be the case MANY times. Hell, I've personally bought many games, like Muramasa the Demon Blade, and Odin Sphere, purely because of the aesthetic alone. Art is your STRONGEST marketing tool. For any product really it's what gives it that unique identity. And that first impression really really counts. People make up their minds rather quick on things, and if the aesthetic is something that makes people shy away in some way, 9/10 times, you're gonna be fighting an uphill battle. Personally, I always argued that Wavedash Games greatly undervalued the importance of having an APPEALING aesthetic. Something that drew people in. I see people all the time become avid fans of something because they become really attached to the design of a specific character. Hell, there's an entire internet culture built around the worship of "waifus" and people drop TONS of money on merch and even digital merch of their favorite female characters. Regardless of how **** a game might be. And yes, sex plays a huge role in this. Sex sells. It's the oldest rule in marketing. How someone could willingly ignore this because of their left-wing political values is honestly baffling. Had the Icons female cast at least been attractive waifubait, you'd have at least begun to build somewhat of a fanbase who'd pour money into it just to have their favorite waifu and all her ingame costumes and sexy merch. You know, both League of Legends and Overwatch, which Icons was trying so hard to copy, both of them were priivy to this, and made extensive use of sex appeal to draw people in. Characters like Ahri, Sona, Diva, Tracer, Mercy, Widowmaker, etc... These were intentionally designed to sexy and attractive to get people's attention, and "seduce" them in. The argument was often made on the Icons subreddit that "not every game needs those things" I'd say, all things considered, that all fighting games most certainly do, because it's already a very niche genre with heavy competition, you need every tool and trick at your disposal to get people to gravitate toward you. DBFZ isn't as big as it as cause of the DB licence. There have been DB games made, fighting games too, made since the dawn of gaming. DBFZ is as big as it is, cause the game is goddamn gorgeous to look at, and secondly, it's mechanically sound and balanced. But it's the visuals that really pulled that casual audience in. You look at the reaction videos for the DBFZ E3 reveal, and most people aren't going "finally a competitive Dragonball game!!" They're going "OMG IT LOOKS JUST LIKE THE ANIME!!"
I do agree that there's a lot people can learn from Icons' failures. Fans of platform fighters especially. Three things I would personally highlight:
1. Be original, and experiment with the mechanics (and especially movesets, good lord!), don't just copy Melee. Melee already exists, make something NEW and ORIGINAL. Think "how can I put my own spin on things?" "what hasn't been done yet?" Look at other genres, and combine ideas from them. Build many prototypes, and play around with a variety of different concepts that could bring a fresh new spin to things before starting properly. Platform fighters are a lot more than just Smash Clones.
2. Have a very strong and identifying visual aesthetic (hire good artists with a lot of creativity, and give them FREEDOM to create - make sure they're familiar with design for fighting games, different genres require different design approaches). Don't underestimate the value of a strong visual aesthetic.
3. Leave the politics out of your videogames. Don't limit your creativity to suit certain political values, and don't cast your net too wide either. Study your target audience, CATER to that audience first, and not anyone else.