Eternal phoenix Fire
Smash Hero
Over the time I have been here,numerous amounts of people have made suggestions on which character they would like to take place in brawl,and alot of them give a very detailed argument about why the character would be good,i.e. character stat. and descriptions etc.
But in a majority of argument,I keep seeing everyone name these conditions(Rather assumptions) on character inclusion,and include a "Sakurai Said X" in their sentence.Here are a few assumptions that I have categorized from most used to least used,and there are 3primary categories:
Category #1 The Franchise argument: 3/5 Updated,New Argument type in Biased opinions section.
3/7 Updated,New Arument type in Sakurai Said section.
5/8 Updated,New Argument type in Biased opinions section.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Argument type 1: Comparison to recent character development models:
Even since the first trailer at E3 2006,people have made a very haphazard assumption on character inclusions based on their character models,mostly in particular ; Link.
Ever since we have first discovered that Link uses his Twilight Princess outfit,and assumption was made."A Majority of characters that will be included in brawl will reflect the most modern game within the franchise".As thought,everyone thought that the character franchises reflected the game,but the truth is that it doesn't.
Super Smash bros is a franchise that collects various all-star characters from various franchises from time gaps all over inorder to deliver one of the most,spontanious,non sensical fighting games in existance.That brings me to my question,when has smash bros ever made sense.
The game really shouldn't have to make sense as long as you enjoy it,and that is what I
believe.
Argument Type 2: Modernization theory
Since everyone thinks that a character is being"Modernized",that character's moves and inclusion chances should reflect the characters modern franchises.This thoery is highly unethical and reflects nothing on game development.
If this theory were to come to light,that would mean characters such Pit,Ice Climbers,and G & W don't have a place in brawl due to the lack of modern referances,but in truth,a huge majority of characters in Super Smash Bros are not based on moder referances.Because if that were the case,Mario wouldn't have his cape or any fighting moves,Peach wouldn't be able to float or pluck turnips,and Ness,IC's,G&W,and Pit wouldn't even exist in worse case scenario.
On YouTube,CrappyCaptureDevice has made a series of Videos that bases each characters moves,and all of them,are not from modern referances.
Mario's for example illustrates some of his moves based on his games like Super Mario 64,and Super Mario World.If you are interested in his other videos,you can click his user name and look through more of them,some of them are brief though
Even though some of the characters moves are made up,they still are reflected based on their roots.If Mario's attack moves were"Modernized" All we would see are sports related attacks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Category #2 The "Sakurai said" theory
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Argument type 1: Sakurai says"X character has a chance because he said that he isn't including characters based of'popularity'".
Ok,correct me if I'm wrong,but isn't Super Smash Bros. a game for Nintendo ALL-STAR characters? If so,then what kind of idotic character like Happy Mask Salesman,9-volt,Gimmick,
or even worse...Rayman rabbits have place in a game for all star characters?Even though opinionated in the eyes of many,you cannot deny the stupidy of the characters insignificant place in the game.
Over time,these characters have been considred to be"WTF" characters.Charaters that bare no significance towards the franchise or the franchise they take place in.If you are going to include something like a stupid mask salesmen,why don't you include other insignificant generic characters,like Shy Guy,or a Boo.
In my opinion,these characters have no place other than an enemy in a generic Mario spin off,or a sports game.But not in a game that has made such a heavy impact.
Even though it may be biased on my part,I really know nothing of the development,but I know for a fact,that Brawl isn't a game made for generic characters,and the popularity argument is invalid.When he states popularity it is towards more modern referances,not to the point in which insignificant characters can just be allowed in the game.
Argument type 2: Sakirai said"X 3rd party character can be included in brawl if he/she has been on a Nintendo consol previously,so in theory,the more games the gigher the chance"
I really am confused about this argument..I have no clue who/when this was stated,because this is pure crap.Some of you say that X xharacter can be included because X character has been in (Insert #) or games on a consol,so that increases their chances even further.
In reality,it really doesn't matter how many games X character were in on X consol,because there are NO MINIMAL OR MAXIMUM REQUIERMENTS,ONLY A SINGLE REQUIERMENT!!!!
I believe this theory arose when quite some time ago,but Sakurai is developing the game on his terms,and we really don't know what he is doing right now,so how can we assume that he is including characters based on what we have said,even though we have not tooken any part in the games current development(And will not in the future).
Every character that meets the requierment has a chance,despite if it was a mere cameo,or if he/she had his/her own game,it doesn't alter anything.He is building this game in his own vision,not based on how each developer has helped Nintendo fatten their wallets.
Argument type 3:Sakurai Said"X character will be removed based on use and popularity among the general populas".
As we all know,Sakurai said that characters will be revamped and a few of them removed.But the arguments and speculations from this all seem to be more personally biased,and directed towards the tournament community.
For Example,people say that Marth will be removed because he was an unknown character,and assume that Sakurai will replace him with a character more well known around the world rather than Japan.
But Marth is the most important character in the Fire Emblem franchise,he was the first lord and appeared in Fire Emblem 1 & 3 for the NES(Famicom).And thanks to his popularity in melee,it struck the curiousity of gamers around the world,and caused the series to be imported world wide.On top of that,he is the most popular lord in Fire Emblem history.
This theory is also in tie with the Modernization theory,that a character doesn't deserve to stay if X character has not been in recent games.Even though i'm about to go there with the Pit theory,it may by generic,but very true.And that can speak with a majority of the SSBM cast.
Besides,a majority of modern characters suck anyway.Can you imagine Luigi with that vaccume?=P (This also brings me to my next argument)
Argument type 4: X characters will be balanced:
So according to this theory,people believe that certain characters will be broken down,and other improved.
The Number 1 character in this spot is Fox,based of of his shine.Sure,in the tournament community it is veiwed as a deadly moved,but is often over rated in the eyes of one who is less skilled.The effect of the shine was an intentional effect,and it was not in Nintendo's intention to make the move broken and abused.The shine was reccognized,and was put in intentionally(First evidence due to the fact that on Falco's all-star trophy states that the reflector is his quickest attack).
I have been to tournaments,and I must say that when you actually play against a good opponent,you cannot go shine crazy with Fox(With Fox that is. ; )).you cannot execute rapid infinates,shine spikes,or 0%-Death combo attacks.
Most people claim that it is easy because they have most likely watched professional players which gave the impression that it is an easy technique to grasp.The shine may be powerful,but in the hands of someone who doesn't know how to play with Fox,it is pointless.
A Fox with great Mindgames that doesn't use the shine can beat a Fox that doesn't use them in theory.The shine is nothing more than a "small push",and i'm preety sure that it just won't be removed considering that game isn't based heavily on the tournament community(Even though it still may be possible that they are aware of the tournament community,it just isn't exploited)
So,to balance a game doesn't mean to improve the weak,and break the strong.Why not just improve the rest to the point in which each character has a distinct advantage.take sheek for example,she may not have a shine,but her needles and move priorities allow her to play on evenly.I don't think that it would be difficult to adjust the priotities of moves to give characters even a slight advantage.^^
Also...DON'T NERF MARTH!!!! >: (
New!! 3/7Argument type 5:The clone removal theory
Ever since Sakurai mentioned something about characters being "revamped",an assumption towards clones characters were made in terms of them saying that they should be removed due to lack of inovation,hard work,or overall creativity.
My question is simple ; who ever said that clones were going to be removed from brawl in the first place?Sure,there will be some character removals,but one shouldn't assume that clones will cease to exist within the game just because they share moves.In smash bros,alot of characters share the same moves,just as Samus and Falcon did(And still do)in the original Super Smash Bros.
Just to break the confusion,the definition of"Revamp" is listed here.
Contrary to popular belief,I do not think that clones will be removed from brawl,and even still,we have no solid evidence that they will.The problem is that everyone thinks that clones were unintentional,or put in because of tight schedules,or an otherwise lack of effort.But Clones were put in for one of several reasons:
1.During the time of the final character development,all established characters and moves are in the final testing,but even during the final development stage,the amount of characters finished are still minimal.So some developers decide to add clones to the games to be fillers for certain characters that couldn't be implemented into the game.
Even though clone characters have the same moveset,their moves and hit boxes have been edited to have diffirent prioriteis and knockback.Which is also a general reason to keep them.Even though the animation of a move changes,it's priorities vary.Even if a move have a diffirent animation,it wouldn't matter because if the move had the same effect,why would the animation of the move matter.
Move Priority>Animation.
2.Planning for characters in usually a difficult task,and alot of ideas are thrown out of the window during the development of those characters.But as we all know,not all intended things actually happen in the development process,and according to theory,characters such as Mach Rider and Baloon Kid were actually going to take place in brawl.When you think about it,why would they have the theme song for mach rider and baloon fighter in the game?And why would Mach Riders trophy have such a detailed model?
But such characters didn't make it in the game due to unknown technical problems,so clone characters are put in place of the characters that were never finished.Even though people wonder why they didn't make those characters clones insted of the current ones? It could be possible that they wanted to keep the characters for possible future development.....Who knows?But most of these characters that were supposed to be in the game during the beta version of the game,only to be replaced as a filler.THANKS TO LORD_DEATHBORNE FOR THIS INFORMATION ON MACH RIDER AND BALOON KID,YOU ROCK MAN!! ;D
Another thing I also wonder is why everyone is bashing clones so much now?It seems as if ever since Sakurai made that announcement,clones seem to put a bad taste in everyones mouths.Before then,clone characters were popular,and were well established in melee,and some of them more loved than the original chraracters(Mostly Falco,Doc,and Ganon).
I for one would be happy if clones were in brawl,and I honestly don't see why they have been rejected so swiftly without an explination.
From my opinion..do I think clones will make a come back in brawl? As long as there are fillers,absolutely.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Category #3 Biased opinions
----------------------------------------------------------------
Argument type 1: X characters moves should be based on modern referances:
Lol,I really don't even need to make a comment on this,a majority of us on these forums have played modern games,and have generally made our opinions on them.A majority of us say that they are crap(True enough).Even though some games that are modern are very well done and can reflect a character perfectly(Twilight Princess),others fail to deliver the same charm.
I believe historical rferances are more intuitive and fun than modern referances,because without them,we wouldn't have modern referances.
Argument type 2: X character just sucks:
I believe this is used the most around here.The no just no,or the X character sucks kthxbai method are commonly used.And I will say this to you personally...I wish you were aborted at birth. >: P
New!! 3/5Argument type 3: The Minority Argument:
The main status of Super Smash Bros. is of course for all star characters.But,the definition of 'All-Star' doesn't seem to be well defined umong the populas we call SWF.And all-star is:
A variation on this term is used to show that an individual has been honored to be chosen ahead of his or her peers within a certain geographical or other limitation. Hence, All State and All District denotes someone chosen as a top performer within their state or district, respectively.
Source-Wiki
In smash,it can be defined as characters that have played important roles in games,despite meeting specific requierments.Most people may believe that all-star characters should be in brawl,but only if specific requierments are made towards:
1.Popularity of character.
2.Leadership function.
3.Overall performance in the franchise X character(s)
4.A level of recognition that specifies leadership of the character(This is more game specific).
But,I still believe that if a character has played a very important role in it's franchise,why not include X character?
Most of this comes from the Fire Emblem character argument,which requiers each Fire Emblem character included must be of a lord stature,Such as Marth or Sigurd.But in Fire Emblem,there are plenty of characters that have played important roles,despite being a lord or not.Even in the upcoming Fire Emblem game,
.
A character may have leadership rights,and that makes a character important,but even still,all characters who are important aren't leaders,and to deny a character based on lack of recognition is simply as put...biased.
New!! 5/8 Argument type 4: X character cannot fight because of givin limitations.
This is one of the things that just set me off,and often confuse me.A majority of people on the forums think that X character(s) cannot fight simply because of the characters limitations via franchise.
The character that is a victim of this assumption the most is Sonic.In a majority of Sonics games(Well,almost all of them)they consist of running at high speeds and using the spin dash technique,this causes people to think that his fighting abilities are minimal to non-existant.
Well,quite some time ago,a game named"Sonic Battle" was released for the GBA.The game illustrated Sonic and other characters from the Sonic franchise fighting in a 4 player Smash Bros. esque game.The characters fighting styles reflected perfectly on their suited style,and the sprite and animation for each character was smooth and well regulated.The characters in the game were still just the same as you can remember them,and at the same time brought something new to the table.This game is only an example of what game designers can do with"Creative Control".
When you reflect upon these things and think about it,what characters in the Smash Bros. Franchise were actually able to fight before the games release?Fox,Falco,Bowser,Beach,Ice Climbers,Yoshi,Donkey Kong,Mr. Game & Watch etc. All of these characters were previouslt unable to fight until the game designers used their imaginations,and took creative control over the characters.
Even for those characters that were able to fight,they had alot of limitations in regaurds of their ability to fight,so that had to be tweaked to an extent.Even if a character can fight,that doesn't mean that the character had variety in it's fighting style.All characters requiere creative control,even those who can fight to some extent.
This is game designing,you can do anything,even if it is beyond your limitations,you can make nothing into something.
Have faith in the team people. ; )
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
So all and all,we really know nothing about brawl,so can we stop using these opinions against each other?
I may seem like a hypocrite,but I am still sticking to the fact the insignificant characters(Not to be confused with the good WTF characters like G&W,but the WTF characters that are insignificant) have no place in brawl,considering that there are WAY more fantastic characters such as Baloon Fighter and Mach Rider.
There are more arguments that I have yet to list.Who knows,I just might update the topic once in a while(If i don't procrastinate.=P).But for the moment,I think that it is safe to say that we shouldn't jump at eachothers throats for a few stupid opinions.
Let's leave the decisions to the professionals,ok?
But in a majority of argument,I keep seeing everyone name these conditions(Rather assumptions) on character inclusion,and include a "Sakurai Said X" in their sentence.Here are a few assumptions that I have categorized from most used to least used,and there are 3primary categories:
Category #1 The Franchise argument: 3/5 Updated,New Argument type in Biased opinions section.
3/7 Updated,New Arument type in Sakurai Said section.
5/8 Updated,New Argument type in Biased opinions section.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Argument type 1: Comparison to recent character development models:
Even since the first trailer at E3 2006,people have made a very haphazard assumption on character inclusions based on their character models,mostly in particular ; Link.
Ever since we have first discovered that Link uses his Twilight Princess outfit,and assumption was made."A Majority of characters that will be included in brawl will reflect the most modern game within the franchise".As thought,everyone thought that the character franchises reflected the game,but the truth is that it doesn't.
Super Smash bros is a franchise that collects various all-star characters from various franchises from time gaps all over inorder to deliver one of the most,spontanious,non sensical fighting games in existance.That brings me to my question,when has smash bros ever made sense.
The game really shouldn't have to make sense as long as you enjoy it,and that is what I
believe.
Argument Type 2: Modernization theory
Since everyone thinks that a character is being"Modernized",that character's moves and inclusion chances should reflect the characters modern franchises.This thoery is highly unethical and reflects nothing on game development.
If this theory were to come to light,that would mean characters such Pit,Ice Climbers,and G & W don't have a place in brawl due to the lack of modern referances,but in truth,a huge majority of characters in Super Smash Bros are not based on moder referances.Because if that were the case,Mario wouldn't have his cape or any fighting moves,Peach wouldn't be able to float or pluck turnips,and Ness,IC's,G&W,and Pit wouldn't even exist in worse case scenario.
On YouTube,CrappyCaptureDevice has made a series of Videos that bases each characters moves,and all of them,are not from modern referances.
Mario's for example illustrates some of his moves based on his games like Super Mario 64,and Super Mario World.If you are interested in his other videos,you can click his user name and look through more of them,some of them are brief though
Even though some of the characters moves are made up,they still are reflected based on their roots.If Mario's attack moves were"Modernized" All we would see are sports related attacks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Category #2 The "Sakurai said" theory
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Argument type 1: Sakurai says"X character has a chance because he said that he isn't including characters based of'popularity'".
Ok,correct me if I'm wrong,but isn't Super Smash Bros. a game for Nintendo ALL-STAR characters? If so,then what kind of idotic character like Happy Mask Salesman,9-volt,Gimmick,
or even worse...Rayman rabbits have place in a game for all star characters?Even though opinionated in the eyes of many,you cannot deny the stupidy of the characters insignificant place in the game.
Over time,these characters have been considred to be"WTF" characters.Charaters that bare no significance towards the franchise or the franchise they take place in.If you are going to include something like a stupid mask salesmen,why don't you include other insignificant generic characters,like Shy Guy,or a Boo.
In my opinion,these characters have no place other than an enemy in a generic Mario spin off,or a sports game.But not in a game that has made such a heavy impact.
Even though it may be biased on my part,I really know nothing of the development,but I know for a fact,that Brawl isn't a game made for generic characters,and the popularity argument is invalid.When he states popularity it is towards more modern referances,not to the point in which insignificant characters can just be allowed in the game.
Argument type 2: Sakirai said"X 3rd party character can be included in brawl if he/she has been on a Nintendo consol previously,so in theory,the more games the gigher the chance"
I really am confused about this argument..I have no clue who/when this was stated,because this is pure crap.Some of you say that X xharacter can be included because X character has been in (Insert #) or games on a consol,so that increases their chances even further.
In reality,it really doesn't matter how many games X character were in on X consol,because there are NO MINIMAL OR MAXIMUM REQUIERMENTS,ONLY A SINGLE REQUIERMENT!!!!
I believe this theory arose when quite some time ago,but Sakurai is developing the game on his terms,and we really don't know what he is doing right now,so how can we assume that he is including characters based on what we have said,even though we have not tooken any part in the games current development(And will not in the future).
Every character that meets the requierment has a chance,despite if it was a mere cameo,or if he/she had his/her own game,it doesn't alter anything.He is building this game in his own vision,not based on how each developer has helped Nintendo fatten their wallets.
Argument type 3:Sakurai Said"X character will be removed based on use and popularity among the general populas".
As we all know,Sakurai said that characters will be revamped and a few of them removed.But the arguments and speculations from this all seem to be more personally biased,and directed towards the tournament community.
For Example,people say that Marth will be removed because he was an unknown character,and assume that Sakurai will replace him with a character more well known around the world rather than Japan.
But Marth is the most important character in the Fire Emblem franchise,he was the first lord and appeared in Fire Emblem 1 & 3 for the NES(Famicom).And thanks to his popularity in melee,it struck the curiousity of gamers around the world,and caused the series to be imported world wide.On top of that,he is the most popular lord in Fire Emblem history.
This theory is also in tie with the Modernization theory,that a character doesn't deserve to stay if X character has not been in recent games.Even though i'm about to go there with the Pit theory,it may by generic,but very true.And that can speak with a majority of the SSBM cast.
Besides,a majority of modern characters suck anyway.Can you imagine Luigi with that vaccume?=P (This also brings me to my next argument)
Argument type 4: X characters will be balanced:
So according to this theory,people believe that certain characters will be broken down,and other improved.
The Number 1 character in this spot is Fox,based of of his shine.Sure,in the tournament community it is veiwed as a deadly moved,but is often over rated in the eyes of one who is less skilled.The effect of the shine was an intentional effect,and it was not in Nintendo's intention to make the move broken and abused.The shine was reccognized,and was put in intentionally(First evidence due to the fact that on Falco's all-star trophy states that the reflector is his quickest attack).
I have been to tournaments,and I must say that when you actually play against a good opponent,you cannot go shine crazy with Fox(With Fox that is. ; )).you cannot execute rapid infinates,shine spikes,or 0%-Death combo attacks.
Most people claim that it is easy because they have most likely watched professional players which gave the impression that it is an easy technique to grasp.The shine may be powerful,but in the hands of someone who doesn't know how to play with Fox,it is pointless.
A Fox with great Mindgames that doesn't use the shine can beat a Fox that doesn't use them in theory.The shine is nothing more than a "small push",and i'm preety sure that it just won't be removed considering that game isn't based heavily on the tournament community(Even though it still may be possible that they are aware of the tournament community,it just isn't exploited)
So,to balance a game doesn't mean to improve the weak,and break the strong.Why not just improve the rest to the point in which each character has a distinct advantage.take sheek for example,she may not have a shine,but her needles and move priorities allow her to play on evenly.I don't think that it would be difficult to adjust the priotities of moves to give characters even a slight advantage.^^
Also...DON'T NERF MARTH!!!! >: (
New!! 3/7Argument type 5:The clone removal theory
Ever since Sakurai mentioned something about characters being "revamped",an assumption towards clones characters were made in terms of them saying that they should be removed due to lack of inovation,hard work,or overall creativity.
My question is simple ; who ever said that clones were going to be removed from brawl in the first place?Sure,there will be some character removals,but one shouldn't assume that clones will cease to exist within the game just because they share moves.In smash bros,alot of characters share the same moves,just as Samus and Falcon did(And still do)in the original Super Smash Bros.
Just to break the confusion,the definition of"Revamp" is listed here.
Contrary to popular belief,I do not think that clones will be removed from brawl,and even still,we have no solid evidence that they will.The problem is that everyone thinks that clones were unintentional,or put in because of tight schedules,or an otherwise lack of effort.But Clones were put in for one of several reasons:
1.During the time of the final character development,all established characters and moves are in the final testing,but even during the final development stage,the amount of characters finished are still minimal.So some developers decide to add clones to the games to be fillers for certain characters that couldn't be implemented into the game.
Even though clone characters have the same moveset,their moves and hit boxes have been edited to have diffirent prioriteis and knockback.Which is also a general reason to keep them.Even though the animation of a move changes,it's priorities vary.Even if a move have a diffirent animation,it wouldn't matter because if the move had the same effect,why would the animation of the move matter.
Move Priority>Animation.
2.Planning for characters in usually a difficult task,and alot of ideas are thrown out of the window during the development of those characters.But as we all know,not all intended things actually happen in the development process,and according to theory,characters such as Mach Rider and Baloon Kid were actually going to take place in brawl.When you think about it,why would they have the theme song for mach rider and baloon fighter in the game?And why would Mach Riders trophy have such a detailed model?
But such characters didn't make it in the game due to unknown technical problems,so clone characters are put in place of the characters that were never finished.Even though people wonder why they didn't make those characters clones insted of the current ones? It could be possible that they wanted to keep the characters for possible future development.....Who knows?But most of these characters that were supposed to be in the game during the beta version of the game,only to be replaced as a filler.THANKS TO LORD_DEATHBORNE FOR THIS INFORMATION ON MACH RIDER AND BALOON KID,YOU ROCK MAN!! ;D
Another thing I also wonder is why everyone is bashing clones so much now?It seems as if ever since Sakurai made that announcement,clones seem to put a bad taste in everyones mouths.Before then,clone characters were popular,and were well established in melee,and some of them more loved than the original chraracters(Mostly Falco,Doc,and Ganon).
I for one would be happy if clones were in brawl,and I honestly don't see why they have been rejected so swiftly without an explination.
From my opinion..do I think clones will make a come back in brawl? As long as there are fillers,absolutely.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Category #3 Biased opinions
----------------------------------------------------------------
Argument type 1: X characters moves should be based on modern referances:
Lol,I really don't even need to make a comment on this,a majority of us on these forums have played modern games,and have generally made our opinions on them.A majority of us say that they are crap(True enough).Even though some games that are modern are very well done and can reflect a character perfectly(Twilight Princess),others fail to deliver the same charm.
I believe historical rferances are more intuitive and fun than modern referances,because without them,we wouldn't have modern referances.
Argument type 2: X character just sucks:
I believe this is used the most around here.The no just no,or the X character sucks kthxbai method are commonly used.And I will say this to you personally...I wish you were aborted at birth. >: P
New!! 3/5Argument type 3: The Minority Argument:
The main status of Super Smash Bros. is of course for all star characters.But,the definition of 'All-Star' doesn't seem to be well defined umong the populas we call SWF.And all-star is:
A variation on this term is used to show that an individual has been honored to be chosen ahead of his or her peers within a certain geographical or other limitation. Hence, All State and All District denotes someone chosen as a top performer within their state or district, respectively.
Source-Wiki
In smash,it can be defined as characters that have played important roles in games,despite meeting specific requierments.Most people may believe that all-star characters should be in brawl,but only if specific requierments are made towards:
1.Popularity of character.
2.Leadership function.
3.Overall performance in the franchise X character(s)
4.A level of recognition that specifies leadership of the character(This is more game specific).
But,I still believe that if a character has played a very important role in it's franchise,why not include X character?
Most of this comes from the Fire Emblem character argument,which requiers each Fire Emblem character included must be of a lord stature,Such as Marth or Sigurd.But in Fire Emblem,there are plenty of characters that have played important roles,despite being a lord or not.Even in the upcoming Fire Emblem game,
The main character in it is from the previous game in the franchise,during that time,that character was not a lord
A character may have leadership rights,and that makes a character important,but even still,all characters who are important aren't leaders,and to deny a character based on lack of recognition is simply as put...biased.
New!! 5/8 Argument type 4: X character cannot fight because of givin limitations.
This is one of the things that just set me off,and often confuse me.A majority of people on the forums think that X character(s) cannot fight simply because of the characters limitations via franchise.
The character that is a victim of this assumption the most is Sonic.In a majority of Sonics games(Well,almost all of them)they consist of running at high speeds and using the spin dash technique,this causes people to think that his fighting abilities are minimal to non-existant.
Well,quite some time ago,a game named"Sonic Battle" was released for the GBA.The game illustrated Sonic and other characters from the Sonic franchise fighting in a 4 player Smash Bros. esque game.The characters fighting styles reflected perfectly on their suited style,and the sprite and animation for each character was smooth and well regulated.The characters in the game were still just the same as you can remember them,and at the same time brought something new to the table.This game is only an example of what game designers can do with"Creative Control".
When you reflect upon these things and think about it,what characters in the Smash Bros. Franchise were actually able to fight before the games release?Fox,Falco,Bowser,Beach,Ice Climbers,Yoshi,Donkey Kong,Mr. Game & Watch etc. All of these characters were previouslt unable to fight until the game designers used their imaginations,and took creative control over the characters.
Even for those characters that were able to fight,they had alot of limitations in regaurds of their ability to fight,so that had to be tweaked to an extent.Even if a character can fight,that doesn't mean that the character had variety in it's fighting style.All characters requiere creative control,even those who can fight to some extent.
This is game designing,you can do anything,even if it is beyond your limitations,you can make nothing into something.
Have faith in the team people. ; )
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
So all and all,we really know nothing about brawl,so can we stop using these opinions against each other?
I may seem like a hypocrite,but I am still sticking to the fact the insignificant characters(Not to be confused with the good WTF characters like G&W,but the WTF characters that are insignificant) have no place in brawl,considering that there are WAY more fantastic characters such as Baloon Fighter and Mach Rider.
There are more arguments that I have yet to list.Who knows,I just might update the topic once in a while(If i don't procrastinate.=P).But for the moment,I think that it is safe to say that we shouldn't jump at eachothers throats for a few stupid opinions.
Let's leave the decisions to the professionals,ok?
