What does it mean to “Deserve” to be in Smash?

[jamesster445]

You probably hear this line a lot. “X character deserves to be in Smash”. But no one ever explains what they mean by that. Some time ago on Twitter, a post made a call asking for people to post the characters that they thought deserved to be in Smash. But if you checked the replies no one actually explained what made their characters deserving of their potential roster spot. Sounds to me like people are just imposing what they want, which would be fine if it did not come across as so entitled. But I think there is a discussion to be had about what is “deserving”. So the question I pose is simple, What makes a character deserving in Smash? You’re free to use characters for specific examples to prove your point but that’s not really what I’m looking for.

This is mostly for research purposes.
Please be civil and let me know if this topic is in the wrong forum.

 

[Swamp Sensei]

It doesn't mean much of anything.

It's a relative term people use to prop characters they do like up and to knock characters they don't like down.

The relativity has made the term lose all meaning.

 

[cosmicB]

There's not really a concise answer here because something as subjective as "deserve" is going to be absolutely smothered in biases. Like, what do you think should be a good metric for who "deserves" to be in? Fan demand? Source material popularity? Legacy?

Smash means different things to different people. For some it's a celebration of gaming as a whole. For others, it's a celebration of Nintendo that will sometimes bring in guests from elsewhere. Some people want these massive iconic legends like Master Chief and Sora as a means to greatly expand the cross-over, while others put their focus on lesser known characters that a consistent fanbase has solidified around like Geno.

Personally speaking, I'm on the side of large scale cross-over expansion, but not necessarily only in the sense of things like sales, but things like legacy and influence in gaming. I have little connection to Fatal Fury/KoF, but I saw Terry as basically the perfect pack, acting as a representative not only of his game and being one of the reasons Smash exists in the first place, but of his entire company as well. Not everyone needs to be part of some massive AAA franchise to be "deserving" imo, but I do think their affect on gaming as a whole should be regularly felt even if some may not be aware of said effects.

That's just me though.

 

[fogbadge]

well i would have said that someone who "deserves" to be in smash is someone who just made sense for what smash is. of course as smash changes what it is so it would be hard to stick to. initially in its form as a cross over of nintendo franchises i would say characters who are major nintendo all stars like toad, dixie, tom nook etc would be deserving and character from long running series or majorly popular series like golden sun and advance wars deserve a character. however sakurai has said that now smash is meant to be about all of gaming which i suppose means you could argue any video game character is deserving of a spot now from the incredibly awesome to the down right dreadful. in short what smash bros is has evolved and "deserving" to be in smash is probably not in sakurai's mindset

of course thats just the way i see it

 

[jamesster445]

It doesn't mean much of anything.

It's a relative term people use to prop characters they don't like up and to knock characters they don't like down.

The relativity has made the term lose all meaning.

I feel like this is the real answer but I want to give the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Rohanx17]

We pretty much cleared up the list of "deserves" type characters by brawl. At this point it's just a buzzword for disingenuous debating

 

[DanganZilla5]

The fact is, there isn't going to one specific definition of "deserving". How would you even classify this? By fan demand? General popularity? Influence in the industry?

But to answer your question, personally I sometimes use this term for characters who often have something significant going for them. For example:

• Isaac: For the long-standing fan demand that stood the test of time despite the fact that Golden Sun hasn't gotten a game in a long time. Not to mention the series is great.
• Crash Bandicoot: For being a character who is iconic, highly requested, popular in both the East and West, and overall he just makes a lot of sense and feels missing from the roster.
• Lara Croft: For being arguably the most iconic female character not playable yet (aside from maybe Chun Li). She is popular and Tomb Raider was a notable part of the mid to late 90s era.

But as you can see, even when I only use 3 characters as examples, I used a variety of different criteria when determining their level of "deserving-ness". In addition, these points can also be used for many other characters. You can even ask "Exactly how much of this criteria would a character need to fulfill to be considered deserving?" The short answer is: Who knows. Ultimately my definition of deserving is going to be different from other people.

The point is, it's not a good gauge for anything since different characters will be seen as deserving or not deserving by different people. I would just recommend not putting much stock into the phrase, especially when it's often used to elevate someone's favorite characters above others.

 

[SharkLord]

Bandana Waddle Dee, Reimu Hakurei, Klonoa, Isaac, Sol Badguy, Dante, and quite a few others are deserving because I want them. Everyone I don't care about can go rot, regardless of how deserving they actually are.

 

[Perkilator]

Everyone I want is deserving of a slot.

Unless I suddenly don't want them anymore, because nobody deserves it if I don't want them.

 

[kaithehedgefox]

Spoiler: Update on my opinions and behavior

PSA: Please ignore all my post and topics that were created before the COVID-19 pandemic. My opinions and thoughts have had major changes since the pandemic initiated. My behavior has now improved and I will not cause anymore trouble from now on.

All my posts from before the pandemic are now all outdated.

My definition of "deserving" means, "A character is worth adding to the roster". However, a character can only deserve to be playable under certain circumstances/conditions. They are different for 1st and 3rd party characrers.

 

[Cutie Gwen]

I feel like this is the real answer but I want to give the benefit of the doubt.

Considering the amount of people I saw who screamed that Terry, a character from a company who's legacy includes heavily inspiring Smash from 64 all the way to Ultimate, that benefit of the doubt is wasted