Why is recency considered important?

[BKupa666]

If you want to talk irony, Diddy Kong had been barely relevant for nine years before he was included in Brawl.

But...but...Toadstool Tour! Power Tennis! Sakurai totally looked to them when deciding on Diddy.

 

[Diddy Kong]

If you want to talk irony, Diddy Kong had been barely relevant for nine years before he was included in Brawl.

Not true. Mario sport games featured Diddy at least. He was also in Donkey Konga, DK: King of Swing and DK: Jungle Climber.

All these lesser apperances are still heaps more apperances than Sheik ever did. Also, he was at least actually playable. Unlike Sheik.

 

[FalKoopa]

@Diddy Kong

DEAL WITH IT

 

[Speculator]

Not true. Mario sport games featured Diddy at least. He was also in Donkey Konga, DK: King of Swing and DK: Jungle Climber.

All these lesser apperances are still heaps more apperances than Sheik ever did. Also, he was at least actually playable. Unlike Sheik.

Sheik has been playable in both Melee and Brawl. Why is it that they should not count, but sports spinoffs, music spinoffs and a Donkey-Kong themed Clu Clu Land are in your eyes perfectly legitimate? Especially considering that this is a Super Smash Bros game.

The answer is that relevancy isn't a major consideration. Not for Sheik, and certainly not for Diddy Kong. Your own username contradicts the very idea that a character needs to have been recently relevant to appear in SSB.

 

[Diddy Kong]

Diddy Kong Racing DS.

Release date: 2007.

 

[FalKoopa]

Actually, Sheik is very relevant.

 

[BKupa666]

Diddy Kong Racing DS.

Release date: 2007.

The Brawl roster was decided in 2005.

 

[Speculator]

Diddy Kong Racing DS.

Release date: 2007.

Oh well, if you're counting remakes, then surely Sheik is a shoe-in considering OOT3D.

 

[jaytalks]

Sheik isnt a good example, since Sheik is an extension of Zelda. Zelda has appeared with great frequency in the Zelda series. Her (Sheik's) return in Brawl is connected to Zelda being a playable character.