Why is moveset discourse a thing when it's clear Smash is going to keep movesets the same (and is better off that way)?

[Quillion]

I've noticed it flare up again with Echoes of Wisdom generating calls/expectations for Zelda to have a Tri-rod based moveset. So I'm finally making it a thread.

I'm targeting this both at people who WANT movesets to be changed and EXPECT movesets to be changed. Neither are good ideas, and it's all because it's nothing but people wanting the "next new gimmick" to be represented in Smash, when Smash has always focused on representing the core, longstanding elements of a character in the movesets and leaving the "gimmicks" to light references or non-character representation at most.

And it's better off that way. Even the many source series from which Smash draws from discard these gimmicks when they serve their purpose, maintaining the longstanding elements first and giving them a new gimmick to distinguish each sequel.

(Though once again, I'll admit my understanding (but not agreement) towards Ganondorf consistently being portrayed as a sword wielder in canon after OoT while Smash severely downplays that at most. But that's still no reason to apply a "bad representation" criticism to the whole cast.)

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

I think Smash fans don't actually want "updated" movesets, they want movesets that represent the games they like best, but - like a lot of Smash discourse - are afraid of being seen as "biased" so they create a weird "objective" excuse. A lot of calls for Wario's moveset, from a strictly timeline perspective, "regress" him to represent a inactive series; Mario's hammer is a popular request despite only being used in easily the least popular recurring Mario sub-series and the oldest Mario games; getting rid of Mario's cape is highly demanded despite SMW being one of the best preserved Mario games, wheras FLUDD's origin Sunshine is one of the worst-preserved; removing Bowser Jr. from his clown car comes up a lot despite that becoming his thing following Smash 3DS; people ask for Pac-Man's moveset to be reworked to represent Pac-Man World of all things, instead of the original Pac-Man games literally everyone has played and still plays.

 

[LiveStudioAudience]

Smash speculation, whether rational or not, lives off of what if questions and movesets fit right into that. Even fighters largely seen as balanced and well representing their series are not immune to fans simply wondering if they could function just as well with something different. Once you throw in those that aren't fond of certain functions and parts of the fandom just not pleased with how fighters come across and the speculation/hope for different moves becomes an inevitability regardless of its impracticality.

 

[Perkilator]

Because like it or not, keeping movesets the same forever just makes them tired, especially considering that Ganondorf has been bottom tier for three games in a row. And it’s not like meaningful changes that retain a character’s core play style is a case of having your cake and eating it too.

 

[psb123]

It’s also good to keep in mind that not every instance of someone talking about the idea is necessarily discourse.

Sometimes people just explore the idea as a “what-if?” and don’t have any glaring issues with the movesets staying as they are now.

 

[Oracle Link]

I've noticed it flare up again with Echoes of Wisdom generating calls/expectations for Zelda to have a Tri-rod based moveset. So I'm finally making it a thread.

I'm targeting this both at people who WANT movesets to be changed and EXPECT movesets to be changed. Neither are good ideas, and it's all because it's nothing but people wanting the "next new gimmick" to be represented in Smash, when Smash has always focused on representing the core, longstanding elements of a character in the movesets and leaving the "gimmicks" to light references or non-character representation at most.

And it's better off that way. Even the many source series from which Smash draws from discard these gimmicks when they serve their purpose, maintaining the longstanding elements first and giving them a new gimmick to distinguish each sequel.

(Though once again, I'll admit my understanding (but not agreement) towards Ganondorf consistently being portrayed as a sword wielder in canon after OoT while Smash severely downplays that at most. But that's still no reason to apply a "bad representation" criticism to the whole cast.)

I mean when it comes to zelda i said that the trirod should just be used to summon the Pantom (or darknut) for the downspecial!
However i do want the singular zelda to be small (toon and toy) in the next game!

I mean personnaly speaking ive always focused on the core elements the exceptions are charactes who a. have a classic self (champion link) or b have barely any other canon to pull from (Peach)

And even then i like to
1. have the core abilitys be the main focus
2. Have the character feel familiar (like me commonly giving Sheik/Impa a short Sheikah Weapon from BOTW/TOTK) to keep similar close ranged abilitys
3. Adjust moves to feel more true to the character (for example i think bowsers fire breath should be a fire ball)

So yes Most Movesets SHOULD be changed but your point stands pretty well!

I personally hated for example basing toon link on wind wakers weapons when the stuff he has now feels more true to him as a whole
or saying hey mario should have cappy everywhere
Heck i go so far as saying that i think the dinosaur capture is a worse final smash than mario finale because atleast mario finale feels like a general mario move and can be used in more contexts!

 

[Quillion]

Because like it or not, keeping movesets the same forever just makes them tired, especially considering that Ganondorf has been bottom tier for three games in a row. And it’s not like meaningful changes that retain a character’s core play style is a case of having your cake and eating it too.

But franchises are inherently tired because by their nature they need to maintain a status quo so that they have a sense of consistency instead of being a random mess of ideas. The source series are no exception, and Smash itself is no exception.

And retaining a character's core playstyle only goes so far until the animation isn't fun to watch, like Bowser's stupid dropkick replacing his headbutt f-Smash.

Smash speculation, whether rational or not, lives off of what if questions and movesets fit right into that. Even fighters largely seen as balanced and well representing their series are not immune to fans simply wondering if they could function just as well with something different. Once you throw in those that aren't fond of certain functions and parts of the fandom just not pleased with how fighters come across and the speculation/hope for different moves becomes an inevitability regardless of its impracticality.

It’s also good to keep in mind that not every instance of someone talking about the idea is necessarily discourse.

Sometimes people just explore the idea as a “what-if?” and don’t have any glaring issues with the movesets staying as they are now.

Even the "what-if" discussions enable a lot of stupidity because the moveset complainers use it as fuel to justify their irrational dislike of the characters' portrayals.

 

[Janx_uwu]

And retaining a character's core playstyle only goes so far until the animation isn't fun to watch, like Bowser's stupid dropkick replacing his headbutt f-Smash.

As a competitive Bowser main I think his dropkick is awesome, especially the funny feet invincibility. But I will say I never got the point of why they gave him a second dropkick in place of one of his only shell moves, back air.

In my opinion, characters should only be reworked if there is no other way to make them viable (or make them less dominant). For crying out loud, Overwatch has changed characters' entire classes before to make them better, or not as broken. I think Steve could use a rework if he comes back in the next Smash game, though I think Kazuya could get away with just a couple of nerfs, event though I don't like his moveset to begin with. Little Mac should get a rework, but K. Rool I honestly don't think is bad in this game, and really just needs a few faster moves to make it to the middle of mid-tier.

The one moveset change I am clamoring for is for Donkey Kong's Side B headbutt to be visually altered so he slams a barrel on the opponent to bury them/break their shield.

 

[Champion of Hyrule]

l don’t like full character reworks at all but changes/alterations to their moveset are really cool if they preserve the spirit of the original moveset wether they’re from a new game or not. It’s just fun to change up a new game a bit like that and I don’t agree with the assertion that nobody should be having discourse around moveset changes at all just because some people are extreme with it.

 

[Quillion]

As a competitive Bowser main I think his dropkick is awesome, especially the funny feet invincibility. But I will say I never got the point of why they gave him a second dropkick in place of one of his only shell moves, back air.

I just don't think Bowser should be a wrestler when being a monster who occasionally punches at most is much more fitting for his brutal design and character. If anything, the Bowser's Inside Story punch as an f-Smash would've worked much better (but the headbutt would still be best).

In my opinion, characters should only be reworked if there is no other way to make them viable (or make them less dominant). For crying out loud, Overwatch has changed characters' entire classes before to make them better, or not as broken. I think Steve could use a rework if he comes back in the next Smash game, though I think Kazuya could get away with just a couple of nerfs, event though I don't like his moveset to begin with. Little Mac should get a rework, but K. Rool I honestly don't think is bad in this game, and really just needs a few faster moves to make it to the middle of mid-tier.

That's all good. I'd rather the characters who are super-gimmicky get reworked into something more accessible like you do. Many of the recent characters (esp the DLC ones) are way too obsessed with bringing in the home games' mechanics wholesale instead of pragmatically adapting them to the Smash environment.

The one moveset change I am clamoring for is for Donkey Kong's Side B headbutt to be visually altered so he slams a barrel on the opponent to bury them/break their shield.

That's actually a good compromise with retaining DK's moveset as opposed to giving him a projectile that would ruin his playstyle.

l don’t like full character reworks at all but changes/alterations to their moveset are really cool if they preserve the spirit of the original moveset wether they’re from a new game or not. It’s just fun to change up a new game a bit like that and I don’t agree with the assertion that nobody should be having discourse around moveset changes at all just because some people are extreme with it.

Fair enough, but even small changes can feel glaringly "of its time" even if they preserve the original spirit.

 

[Kirbeh]

Because some players are unsatisfied with some characters current move sets and are of the opinion that they could do with some changes? Much like it's your opinion that existing kits shouldn't be touched.

I could ask why you made this question into a thread when the answer was pretty obvious, but the answer to that is obvious too:

It's a public forum and users are allowed to discuss whatever they want so long as it pertains to Smash (not counting social threads and the like of course.)

It's not even that I think there's anything wrong with wanting characters to remain as they are, but you often tend to frame your arguments in ways that come off as disingenuous to be perfectly frank.

There are definitely people that primarily want characters updated for the sake of squeezing lots of references or just to represent a particular modern portrayal but there are far more stances regarding move set changes than just those and even if you disagree with all of them there's nothing inherently wrong with these discussions.

If you're tired of a particular subject that's fine but you can't expect people to just adhere to your opinion, especially when you're so dismissive of theirs.

 

[Oddball]

Because people just like to talk about things. Everyone has ideas. They aren't always good, but it''s fun to imagine and share.

 

[Guynamednelson]

Because no matter how much you go LALALA NOT LISTENING GANONDORF IS FINE ACKSHUALLY, he isn't.

Even ignoring him being a Falcon clone and his eternal bottom tier status...what's the point of him having his slow-ass up tilt when it basically does the same thing as Warlock Punch, just with less utility as the result of being a tilt rather than a special move? Even Project M, a mod which partially caters to people who don't want Falcondorf, made the move more like Falcon's up tilt, because it has more utility that way.

 

[Quillion]

Because some players are unsatisfied with some characters current move sets and are of the opinion that they could do with some changes? Much like it's your opinion that existing kits shouldn't be touched.

I could ask why you made this question into a thread when the answer was pretty obvious, but the answer to that is obvious too:

It's a public forum and users are allowed to discuss whatever they want so long as it pertains to Smash (not counting social threads and the like of course.)

It's not even that I think there's anything wrong with wanting characters to remain as they are, but you often tend to frame your arguments in ways that come off as disingenuous to be perfectly frank.

There are definitely people that primarily want characters updated for the sake of squeezing lots of references or just to represent a particular modern portrayal but there are far more stances regarding move set changes than just those and even if you disagree with all of them there's nothing inherently wrong with these discussions.

If you're tired of a particular subject that's fine but you can't expect people to just adhere to your opinion, especially when you're so dismissive of theirs.

I'm just so burned out by all the moveset discourse, the specific Ganondorf discourse, and especially with Bowser's Smash 4-on animation changes that I guess I've grown averse to any moveset change now (at least those that aren't extremely minimal and are largely limited to animation). Perhaps part of it is also resignation to how Smash prefers the longstanding character traits to represent in movesets rather than "new gimmick abilities" (yes I still know Ganondorf and Zelda are exceptions).

 

[Guynamednelson]

I'm just so burned out by all the moveset discourse, the specific Ganondorf discourse

Then stop making so many threads about how you think Ganondorf's moveset is/was fine.