why ppl dont want sheik in ssbb

[Zone]

How do you give her the ability to break seals in smash? Can she attack through shields??

and how do you fight with precognition?


That description fails to give any specific examples worth mentioning as potential moves... that description just phails in general...

We aren't talking 100% about Smash Read the discussion we are simply talking between OoT Zelda and TP Zelda and How they are reincarnates. No one's talking about Smash moves here.

 

[The_Corax_King]

That's how this discussion started... What moves Zelda should have...


If you aren't discussing smash take it to another topic then... This is about Sheik's inclusion in Brawl...

 

[SiD]

That's how this discussion started... What moves Zelda should have...


If you aren't discussing smash take it to another topic then... This is about Sheik's inclusion in Brawl...

Screw you, it is relevant to Sheik being in Brawl if you would read. And correct me if I'm wrong, but you want Sheik in Brawl don't you? So why argue with people on the same side as you?

 

[Zone]

That's how this discussion started... What moves Zelda should have...


If you aren't discussing smash take it to another topic then... This is about Sheik's inclusion in Brawl...

That's the original discussion yes. But then it branched into Reincarnations of Zelda to Zelda. We didn't say what moves Zelda should have, you can already tell she has pretty much the same moveset. most people were talking about how Shiek can't be with TP Zelda and blah blah. U get the point.

It branched off into another discussion. AKA all about reincarnation, and how Link from Ocarina of time and other games had his spin slash move. and he ranomly knows it in TP like right at the start. w/o really training the technique like people would normally go through.

So My point wasn't made to any sort of Smash relativity. just the sense that if Link can remember/know **** he knew in another Era, why can't Zelda.

 

[The_Corax_King]

What is the point of discussing what they did in other games if it doesnt pertain the original topic. That topic being Sheik in Brawl...


Anyway... we are arguing over stupid stuff... Lyn is an assist D:

 

[Zone]

What is the point of discussing what they did in other games if it doesnt pertain the original topic. That topic being Sheik in Brawl...


Anyway... we are arguing over stupid stuff... Lyn is an assist D:

Because if you start from scratch.

People arguing Shiek be in Brawl say:
Zelda has old moves from OoT so why can't shiek be in. Hence other games.


People arguing against shiek in brawl are saying:
Zelda in TP is different from Zelda in OoT and such.

Then the pple arguing sheik be in brawl responded with:
Well she is a reincarnation, so she's still the same person. meaning she could be shiek.


Blah blah more details randomly all over the place and u ended up where we were. STill talking about how shiek can be or not be in brawl based off OoT and TP Zelda's comparisons.

Edit: So it does pertain to shiek being in brawl from a logical debate over how it can/can't work. because of where the Zelda series is going.

 

[SiD]

What is the point of discussing what they did in other games if it doesnt pertain the original topic. That topic being Sheik in Brawl...


Anyway... we are arguing over stupid stuff... Lyn is an assist D:

It does pertain to that. Some people say that TP Zelda shouldn't be able to transform into Sheik, so it is very relevent.

Definitely moreso than Lyn is an assist. Hypocrite.

 

[The_Corax_King]

lol... I thought you would like my blatent hypocrisy... oh well

The reason this started was because I said something about the wiki article and how it didnt offer a good idea for zelda's moves... you said you weren't talking about smash...

now you say you are...

 

[Zone]

lol... I thought you would like my blatent hypocrisy... oh well

The reason this started was because I said something about the wiki article and how it didnt offer a good idea for zelda's moves... you said you weren't talking about smash...

now you say you are...

The fact that Zelda can or cannot keep moves/spells she knew from previous games like link can wasn't related to smash directly.

Just indirectly.

Basically you thought I ment SMash moves. when I ment just Zelda OoT and Zelda TP, compared to Link OoT and Link TP. Which was part of the argument for the big picture of the thread.

 

[The_Corax_King]

I guess I see what you are saying now...

I'm just in a trollish mood today...

 

[SiD]

Okay, we've spent a page justifying why were off topic, I think we've actually crossed the threshold now. I have nothing to add right now, but hopefully someone else can get us back on track?

 

[Zone]

I guess I see what you are saying now...

I'm just in a trollish mood today...

lol np. I'm not upset or anything. Glad I could clear up the point I was making.

 

[The_Corax_King]

Okay, we've spent a page justifying why were off topic, I think we've actually crossed the threshold now. I have nothing to add right now, but hopefully someone else can get us back on track?

back on track.. hmmm


Hopefully the Zelda Special Moves update is coming soon to clear up this massive argument...

 

[Phillip Chanter]

What's funny to me is: People only complain about characters like Sheik because people who use those characters often use them so they can exploit glitches. Wavedashing and shinesparking... whatever those kids call those glitches.

I'm honestly glad Ganon and Sheik are being reconsidered for Brawl right now, it means better gameplay from those two fighters, and the chances of players playing them like cheap-***** will be very rare.

 

[SiD]

What's funny to me is: People only complain about characters like Sheik because people who use those characters often use them so they can exploit glitches. Wavedashing and shinesparking... whatever those kids call those glitches.

I'm honestly glad Ganon and Sheik are being reconsidered for Brawl right now, it means better gameplay from those two fighters, and the chances of players playing them like cheap-***** will be very rare.

??
????

Do you even play the game? Every character can wavedash, and Sheik cannont use the shine, or shinespike.

 

[blueriku]

either way we can only base our opinions of sheiks moves from brawl, but when it all comes down to it we wont even know if few or all of her moves will have different properties. so claiming sheik should not be in brawl is ridiculous because for all we know sheik could be change to where she is mid of even low tier even though i doubt that would happen. we still have no basis to go off of other than melee how sheik will be like in the next smash, but i guess we will see what sheik will be like but my prediction is that she will be toned down, actually thats what i want so it would be a lot challenging to sheik players like me and perhaps we can even be more flashy or something and ppl can stop crying about her brokeness

 

[bluebomber22]

Hopefully the Zelda Special Moves update is coming soon to clear up this massive argument...

Sadly that wont stop the argument cuz even if all of zelda's special moves are shown and she doesnt have the transformation, people will just say she has a seperate slot now. Unless Sakurai explicitly confirms or deconfirms her we wont know until the game's release

 

[adumbrodeus]

You're operating under the assumpting that those attacks are actually still considered OoT attacks. Link has basically the same moveset as he had from Melee, but they got a TP revamp. Notice the lack of that old, dinky boomerang since TP Link never had it?

Once the connection is made, it takes more then renaming to lose the connection, unless she actually used them in the new game (which she didn't), it takes concrete changes in the attacks themselves, like what's occurring with Link's moves, since Link used them in TP, the moves are being retooled to fit how he used them. This could not happen with Zelda since she never used them in TP, however it was established that they were based on OOT abilities by their naming, and once that occurs the style becomes associated.

Changing the name does not break the connection anymore.

Yes, we've seen Zelda use an attack that looks like Din's Fire. That doesn't mean they still call it that. I could very easily see them simply calling that attack something else (hell, "Zelda's Fire" would work fine), especially since that attack in Melee didn't even work the same way it does in OoT. Her attacks, so far, are indeed Melee based, but there's no evidence to suggest that they're still OoT based.

See above.

She can. I'm just saying that it would bother me.

Fair enough, but it certainly doesn't bother me, I prefer them maintaining connection with my favorite Zelda game, especially considering how important it was to the series.

As I said in the very post you quoted, I acknowledge that there are actual Sheik fans out there, but you can't tell me that group of people is actually big enough for Sheik to return on that merit alone. Too many people want Sheik back because "she's my main! I would suck without her!"

I don't have to, you made the assertion that Sheik doesn't have enough real fans to merit a return.

I certainly suspect it strongly, but if you wish to assert her unworthiness, you need to prove that her fanbase is based on her power, otherwise it's an assumed neutral fanbase, just like every other charecter would be assumed, any assumptions other then that would fall under the availability heuristic.

Your assertion about her fanbase requires proof, so prove it, please.

I'm not hating on Sheik because there's anything specifically wrong with her; I'm hating on her because she's just as important as all the other non-Triforce characters. She's gained popularity based on her performance in Melee. A glorified extra, if you will.

But, Sheik is NOT a non-tri-force character. She is the alter-ego of Zelda, far from a glorified extra. I sincerly doubt that melee is the only reason she is popular as well, why would they have even bothered to include the alter-ego if that was the case.

This seems like a good idea, but I trulyl think that people would vote "I really DO like Sheik!" just because they know that's the option favoring her for a reappearance in Brawl. That's not me being biased, just honest. I would not expect accurate results from a poll like that.

That's where you have to learn to phrase the question properly, and it's doubtful that this will have any effect on whether or not she appears in Brawl, it's for the discussion, as an attempt to prove your point. Since it lacks a direct connection, it's doubtful people's positions will be influenced by it.

Anyways, by your estimation plenty of people are willing to say basically, "I want Sheik for her moves", why not in a poll then?

The fact is, without being able to prove it to you since I'm not so anal about citing the posts I read, I've seen more comments about "Sheik's my main, I love her in Melee. She can't leave!" than any other character. The amount of "Sheik's interesting and I've always loved her. Ever since Ocarina of Time" posts are few and far between in my experience. Although, again, I do acknowledge that true fans exist. But that can be said about any character.

Which, without concrete statistics is just an example of the availability heuristic, it may be right, and it might not, but people have a mental tendency to look for things that prove their point, thus not remember things that disprove it.

Furthermore, you have to consider the sample size, even if the majority of Sheik players like her because of her moveset, she could very well have a larger audience of true fans then most of the other charecters because she has a larger overall fanbase (hypothetically speaking of course, I do not know her fanbase's size).

I was talking more about Melee in that paragraph, and what a travesty I felt the Sheik situation was. I never said that she would be exactly the same way in Brawl. That's NOT the reason I want her (at least) separated from Zelda.

And it is annoying, but it was part of a post composed of anti-sheik for melee sentiment, and thus must be taken as part of the argument. If not, then it is merely irrelevant, though the clarifacation is appreciated.

I never said they wouldn't. In fact, I'm quite hoping for changes (specifically, both of their down-B's).

The assumption going around and implied is that if Sheik gets in, she'll be just as overpowered this time around, the odds of which are astronomical.

Not a fact, don't state it like one. She was important to OoT's plot to about the same degree that any of the sages were. I don't see many people pulling for Princess Ruto for Brawl.

Zelda was as important to OoT's plot as any of the sages????

True. That game is now about a decade old, though. Let's stop clinging to the past, shall we?

NEVER!

But seriously, smash includes plenty of past charecters, and I have yet to see a Zelda game that equals OoT. Even if one did, it still deserves reference, because, not only is it a great game but a landmark one.

No. Ocarina of Time was the benchmark. Sheik just happened to be there.

That's the way the world works, charactors, actors, alter-egos, people, writers, muscicians, whatever, generally become important because of connections to something that was important.

Why only Sheik? It was just the game she comes from right? Sheik didn't even had that big of a role in OoT at all, it was still Zelda after all and we want Zelda to represent all Zelda's in Brawl right? Well than they'd do better with giving her the Light Arrows, since she atleast had them in 2 games and it represents the latest 2 3D Zelda games, the Wind Waker and Twilight Princess while a Sheik transformation only represents Ocarina of Time.

Exactly, something specifically to reference to Ocarina. Plus, it was an interesting mechanic, albeit, transformation times could've dealt with a decrease.

Even Mario has a modernised moveset now. And that's saying pretty much, seeing as the Zelda franchise is more known for it's changes than Mario. Almost every Zelda game which isn't a direct sequel takes place in a whole different time and place and features new characters and places and even new weapons (Gale Boomerand for example). That's why I think that Zelda represents OoT enough with Din's Fire, Nayru's Love and Faore's Wind already and doesn't need Sheik to even represent OoT more.

Not quite, some Zelda storylines are connected, some aren't, at least not directly, the question of whether it's the same world is always an interesting one. But might point is, if Sheik is a liked character in her own right, why not include her, especially since she's already in melee.

I'm not a fan of rooster removals anyway.

I thought I mentoined that I once doubted the possibility that Marth will be out aswell, but after seeing more and more of Ike I think it could easly go either way. True, Marth is insanely populair in Japan, and thanks to Melee even internationally.

But it ISN'T true that Ike can't be compared to Marth! Ike comes from the first 3D Fire Emblem, Path of Ridiance which brought back a lot of classic elements to the franchise. PoR is populair in the West AND Japan and the game even has a direct sequel already out in Japan coming soon in the U.S and Europe.

Sure Marth is the first Lord, and that's saying quite something I agree but Ike's deffinatly not as unimportant as you give him credit to. But still, Ike has a lot of similairities to Marth. I don't say he can't be unique - cause I know he can I've played PoR a lot. Still, Marth might have a few changes in his moveset aswell...

Fair enough, but I've seen how Japanese fans get about Marth, he's developed a large enough fanbase that I highly doubt his removal now that he's in.

Atleast she was playable and appeared in more games than Sheik. Besides, Metroid has fewer really important characters to choose from. Who else besides Ridley do you honestly expect to be in?? Prime isn't as loved internationally, and the Hunters aren't playable character worthy, just maybe AT's.

You won't hear me say that Zero Suit Samus really deserved her place in Brawl, but I accept her better than Sheik.

On the other hand, I have no qualms about Zero Suit Samus appearing, especially since she's a transformation of Samus, which is how it should be.

Sure, but still seeing Mr. Game & Watch playable for the second time wouldn't really be half as suprising as it was in Melee. I'm sure the Game & Watch era will be represented somehow, but I just don't see Mr. Game & Watch playable again, maybe he'll become an Assist Thropy?

Surprising no. But a bow to the origins of nintendo, yes.

Actually, I'd hate the idea of Lucario replacing Mewtwo and I fully agree with you there however it doesn't mean the possibility is there, much like there's the possibility Zero Suit Samus and Wario replace Sheik and Mr. Game & Watch. Lucario replacing Mewtwo is just... a little less likely.

Anything is possible.

Ehm, wouldn't I be supporting the Japanese by saying Lucas would replace Ness? As far as I know, Mother 3 was only released in Japan, while Earthbound also got released in the U.S. True, cause I live in Europe I never officially could play Earthbound, but that's where ROMs are for. =) Besides, if Mother 3 was released on the N64, Sakurai already would've replaced Ness for Lucas as he apperantly told the Japanese on the Melee Dojo website.

Apparently? Do you have the exact location where this was stated on the Dojo site? Cause, I need a bit more then your say-so to believe this.

I highly doubt that this is the case, the earlier Mother games were quite popular, and established Ness in the popular consciousness.

Well I can't add anything to that, but I still think Sheik as a character doesn't deserves to come back.

And you're welcome to that opinion, I just disagree.

From my understanding Zelda is a different person each game? Correct me if I'm wrong.
There isn't a different Samus each game. That's really the only point I was making.

Besides I still don't know where u get ur facts that Shiek is more important than Zero Suit Samus. *Shrugs*

It varies, some are, some aren't.

The reason Sheik is under fire is because she's not an all-star. Zelda is, of course, but we've already got her. Sheik is not a vital piece of the Zelda franchise.

But Sheik IS Zelda, just a reference to a specific incarnation of Zelda.

This is all true. Admittedly, the "TP Zelda transforming into Sheik" thing is really more of an annoyance than an actual problem or impossibility. Sakurai could certainly do it; nothing's stopping him. That would just really bother a lot of people, including myself.

And there are plenty of people that are not bothered by this, and enjoy them keeping them reference.

. . . It's really not my style to be this blunt, but that's absolutely moronic. They didn't call Zelda in Melee "Ocarina of Time Zelda", did they?

No, because Zelda in melee was also representative of previous games, but most strongly is tied to Ocarina of time thematically. That was sort of the point he was making.

Sadly that wont stop the argument cuz even if all of zelda's special moves are shown and she doesnt have the transformation, people will just say she has a seperate slot now. Unless Sakurai explicitly confirms or deconfirms her we wont know until the game's release

Seperate charecter?

Blah, Sheik is only important as a Zelda alter-ego, making her a separate character defeats the point.

 

[Drake3]

I don't even know what those two are arguing about anymore, but it's turning into uneccessarily long posts.

Why not just include Sheik (seperate) to represent OoT and Zelda to represent TP?

 

[Deleted member]

sheik is cool.

I hope marth doesn't come back.

 

[adumbrodeus]

sheik is cool.

Yes.

I hope marth doesn't come back.

BLASPHEMY!!!!!

And again, not much chance of that, with Ike there you might as well include Peach and not Mario.

 

[2007]

sheik is cool.

I hope marth doesn't come back.

Yes, and yes. w00t.
(though I think I might like Zelda more because everyone and their dogs, cats, and flying cows like Sheik)

 

[garbage]

Earlier on in the thread, doubts of Sheik being in the game were a result of no presence of Sheik in Twilight Princess. But if you think about it, have we seen an Earthbound game for __ years? An F-Zero game? How about a Game & Watch game? Ice climbers?

Smash Bros. is all about getting every Nintendo character into the battle. And then some.

 

[Circus]

OK dude you are still not getting it, so what your trying to say is if sheik is in the game that zelda's OOT design has to also.

I never said that. In fact, I've stated more than once that Sheik having her own character slot, without Ocarina of Time Zelda, would be fine by me. Don't twist my words around just to help your own point. All I said was that TP Zelda turning into Sheik bothers me, and why. Nothing more. Don't put words in my mouth.

it is just an undated look. really if you think about it over all she is from TP, but ever since OOT most of the time if you think zelda, you think sheik.

No, I don't.

they are the same person whether zelda is from wind waker, the oracle series or alttp they are they same

Not according to the storyline of the game, no. They are all technically different "Zeldas".

yes it is true that sheik is from OOT but over all sheik is stuck to zelda you cant separate them that is like telling link he can use the master sword and now he has to use a fairy wand or something it just doesn't happen

That is not even close to being the same situation. Link uses the Master Sword in ever game—it's his signature weapon. Sheik is Zelda's alter ego for one game. It's not like taking away Link's sword, it's more like taking away his ocarina.

now im not saying that sheik exists in every game no she doesn't my point is that it does not matter zelda is going to represent zelda when you play brawl are you going to say amm man i wish they put links adventure zelda in this game no because zelda represents all zelda's so in a sense it does make sense that TP zelda from brawl can transform in to sheik because zelda is representing all zelda's

Where are you getting this "Zelda represents all Zeldas" information? I don't remember Sakurai mentioning that anywhere.

Besides, you only further help my point. If she is indeed supposed to represent all Zelda's, wouldn't it make A LOT more sense to give her more generic magic attacks rather than having her transform into a game-specific character? You contradict your point.

Once the connection is made, it takes more then renaming to lose the connection, unless she actually used them in the new game (which she didn't), it takes concrete changes in the attacks themselves, like what's occurring with Link's moves, since Link used them in TP, the moves are being retooled to fit how he used them. This could not happen with Zelda since she never used them in TP, however it was established that they were based on OOT abilities by their naming, and once that occurs the style becomes associated.

Changing the name does not break the connection anymore.

. . . You completely made that up out of no foundation. None of what you said is based on anything Sakurai said, nor any precedents from the previous games. Regardless, I'll make a rebuttal.

Link's Bow seems relatively unchanged from Melee to Brawl, yes? Yet, they bother to call it the "Hero's Bow" now, in reference to it's name in Twilight Princess. This automatically discounts your whole paragraph. There is absolutely nothing stopping Sakurai from changing the names of the attacks in order for them to suit Twilight Princess Zelda better, much like what he did with Link's bow. It's possible that may simply choose not to do so, but he certainly could do it. Don't make it sound like an impossibility.

Fair enough, but it certainly doesn't bother me, I prefer them maintaining connection with my favorite Zelda game, especially considering how important it was to the series.

Fair. I guess we'll agree to disagree. Moving on.

I don't have to, you made the assertion that Sheik doesn't have enough real fans to merit a return.

I certainly suspect it strongly, but if you wish to assert her unworthiness, you need to prove that her fanbase is based on her power, otherwise it's an assumed neutral fanbase, just like every other charecter would be assumed, any assumptions other then that would fall under the availability heuristic.

Your assertion about her fanbase requires proof, so prove it, please.

Fair enough. I'm far too lazy to go about and try and round up all the posts I've seen regarding Sheik's fans, so I'll leave this alone. The fact that you "suspect it strongly", just as I do, is enough for me. This isn't one of my points that I'm too adamant about to begin with.

But, Sheik is NOT a non-tri-force character. She is the alter-ego of Zelda, far from a glorified extra.

Yes, and we HAVE Zelda herself, therefor I feel that the "tri-force" status belongs solely to her in this instance. Sheik, herself, as her own character with a personality and abilities, is not a tri-force character. Zelda is. If Sheik is considered important purely because of her attachment to Zelda, then that does nothing but highlight how important Zelda herself is. If this is indeed the case, then Sheik would merely be using Zelda as a crutch, and I don't believe characters should get in for that reason. Sheik, and the qualities unique to her that make her different from Zelda, are not connected to the tri-force. Honestly, think about what I'm saying here, because you may be tempted to think this is a weak point. I can assure you, it's not.

I sincerly doubt that melee is the only reason she is popular as well, why would they have even bothered to include the alter-ego if that was the case.

Because it offered a unique gameplay mechanic—the transforming character. The creators thought they could create one unique character via Zelda's transformation into Sheik (and admittedly SOME people do use this feature in the innovative way that the creators had originally thought up), when in reality they basically made two characters who occupy the same character slot. Each without a down B move. Sheik's role in Melee, honestly, was just an example of the creators trying to be creative.

That's where you have to learn to phrase the question properly, and it's doubtful that this will have any effect on whether or not she appears in Brawl, it's for the discussion, as an attempt to prove your point. Since it lacks a direct connection, it's doubtful people's positions will be influenced by it.

Anyways, by your estimation plenty of people are willing to say basically, "I want Sheik for her moves", why not in a poll then?

People aren't stupid (well, not all of them). They know what a poll like that would be trying to prove. Now, I could be wrong. Everyone may just answer honestly, and there may still be more votes for "I just love Sheik". But in my gut, I feel that some people would choose that option purely because that's honestly a better reason to support a character. The reason I think people would be more inclined to do that in a poll than they would just posting on the boards is because the poll would actually keep track of this. You can have 230947 people say "I only like Sheik because she's top tier", and never be able to make a conclusion from it based on all the other posts on these boards because it's so much less organized. In a poll, people know that people are REALLY going to get a specific statistic out of it. In order to sway this statistic that the whole board would surely see, I think people would be inclined to just vote for the "better" answer, rather than the more accurate one.

This is just my personal feeling though. I didn't really bring it up to influence anyone else, merely to defend my own views.

Which, without concrete statistics is just an example of the availability heuristic, it may be right, and it might not, but people have a mental tendency to look for things that prove their point, thus not remember things that disprove it.

You know, that's true. The thing is, I don't have any kind of issue with Sheik, so I don't see any reason for my brain to ignore the "I like Sheik" posts. My opinion on Sheik's fanbase is based entirely off of what I've seen, not the other way around. Still, what you say is valid. I don't have any actual proof.

Furthermore, you have to consider the sample size, even if the majority of Sheik players like her because of her moveset, she could very well have a larger audience of true fans then most of the other charecters because she has a larger overall fanbase (hypothetically speaking of course, I do not know her fanbase's size).

True enough, an experiment will always be more accurate with a larger sample size than a small one. However, since the sample size that I do have is the only one I have to base things on, it's the one I go by. At least until it's proven false.

You make a good point that Sheik could actually have a ridiculously large fanbase, and I just don't know it. However, with that same point, you could say that Bidoof (Pokemon) has more true blue fans than Mario himself. We don't know that it doesn't. Does this justify the inclusion of a character as lame an undeserving as Bidoof? In general, I suppose this whole point I've been trying to make is rather moot (yeah, I said "rather moot". Aren't I fancy?). I'm happy to drop it.

And it is annoying, but it was part of a post composed of anti-sheik for melee sentiment, and thus must be taken as part of the argument. If not, then it is merely irrelevant, though the clarifacation is appreciated.

Point taken.

The assumption going around and implied is that if Sheik gets in, she'll be just as overpowered this time around, the odds of which are astronomical.

Well then, I can assure you I'm under no such assumption.

Zelda was as important to OoT's plot as any of the sages????

Zelda herself was clearly more important, but Sheik was not. If you think that Zelda and Sheik are absolutely interchangeable (and I would have to believe you do, based on your name choice here), then what is the point of Sheik being in Brawl at all if we've already got Zelda? If they're 100% the same person, then isn't Sheik already in Brawl by association with Zelda?

NEVER!

But seriously, smash includes plenty of past charecters, and I have yet to see a Zelda game that equals OoT. Even if one did, it still deserves reference, because, not only is it a great game but a landmark one.

I admire your fanboyism (no really, not a joke), but OoT's "landmarkness" if you will, is subjective. It's certainly a widely held belief, but it's just that—a belief. OoT isn't, as far as relation to the game's overall plot and purpose, anymore important than Twilight Princess. Nor any other Zelda installment, for that matter.

OoT is a great game, but it's not the only one. I may be alone in this opinion, but I really think OoT now deserves to be considered "a (very) fond memory" rather than "THE Zelda game". But that's really more my opinion on the Zelda franchise as a whole than my views on Sheik in Brawl, sorry for the digression.

That's the way the world works, charactors, actors, alter-egos, people, writers, muscicians, whatever, generally become important because of connections to something that was important.

And that's fair, but it brings me back to my point about characters like Ruto and Saria. They both had pretty significant roles in that game as well. In fact, on par with Sheik's significance if you ask me. What about Sheik, as a character, without the fact that she's technically Zelda, makes her more important than them? What about Sheik's personality or specific characteristics or impact on the franchise makes her more deserving than a character like Princess Ruto? They both only appeared in the one game, they have the same amount of real fighting experience ("none", basically), and they both help the story to unfold in the way that allows Link to defeat Ganondorf.

Ultimately, the inclusion will not effect me. Sheik could be in the game and I'll still buy Brawl. And love it. In fact, if Sheik is at least not attached to Zelda, I won't be bothered in the slightest. My main qualm, personally, is simply Zelda turning into Sheik. It would just not work out in my head. Giga Bowser bothers me enough, I don't need a character that I really like getting the same, drastically un-canon treatment. The rest of the points I bring up are mostly me just being defensive and argumentative. Because, I guess I find that fun. When it comes down to it, I'm just hoping for something to happen that could just as likely not.

[/end ridiculously long, unreadable wall-o-text]

 

[Zone]

People aren't stupid (well, not all of them). They know what a poll like that would be trying to prove. Now, I could be wrong. Everyone may just answer honestly, and there may still be more votes for "I just love Sheik". But in my gut, I feel that some people would choose that option purely because that's honestly a better reason to support a character. The reason I think people would be more inclined to do that in a poll than they would just posting on the boards is because the poll would actually keep track of this. You can have 230947 people say "I only like Sheik because she's top tier", and never be able to make a conclusion from it based on all the other posts on these boards because it's so much less organized. In a poll, people know that people are REALLY going to get a specific statistic out of it. In order to sway this statistic that the whole board would surely see, I think people would be inclined to just vote for the "better" answer, rather than the more accurate one.

Good point. It's called the Hawthorne affect guys. People vote, what they think the people want to see, or what they want to see. OF course there will be honest polls as you said. But for the most part a poll like that made. is to try and prove something, so people are going to try and make their "Proof" Win.

 

[Jackal478]

Wanna know why we think she should be nerfed? cuz we're tired of noobs like you actually being hard with her.

 

[SiD]

I admire your fanboyism (no really, not a joke), but OoT's "landmarkness" if you will, is subjective. It's certainly a widely held belief, but it's just that—a belief. OoT isn't, as far as relation to the game's overall plot and purpose, anymore important than Twilight Princess. Nor any other Zelda installment, for that matter.

OoT is a great game, but it's not the only one. I may be alone in this opinion, but I really think OoT now deserves to be considered "a (very) fond memory" rather than "THE Zelda game". But that's really more my opinion on the Zelda franchise as a whole than my views on Sheik in Brawl, sorry for the digression.

Actually, it is more important. Even besides the fact that it is widely considered the best transition to 3D ever and the basis of 3D adventure games today, it is much more important story wise.

Why you ask? Because chronologically, it takes place before any of the other games. It's true. Most of the Zelda games take place in one cohesive ongoing storyline, with many years inbetween. One theory is that the timeline splits at some point, because of certain discrepancies, but if you search the internet you can find out that OoT is the first. And you probably already know that TP takes place X years later. WW takes place I think around 100 years after OoT. It's all relative to that one game.

I believe it says in WW that the Hero of time is always reincarnated when he is needed. Therefore, it is safe to assume the same about Zelda. So, they may be different people in the sense they have lived different lives, but spiritually they are all the same Zelda, as predetermined by destiny.


And, Sheik is connected to the triforce as much as Zelda is. Why? Because she can only transform throught the power of the triforce of wisdom. They may be the same person, but it's not just a cosmetic change. They have different strengths, different abilities. In order to fully represent Zelda, you need to have sheik in as well.




Also, Jackal, don't be a troll. I don't even know what you mean by "being hard with her", but any good player can fight a Sheik the same as any other character. Regardless, this is a thread about her inclusion, not about nerfing her.

 

[Jackal478]

sorry, wasn't trying to troll

aside from that, why shouldn't she be in?

she is an awesome character in alot of ways and she does deserve her own spot on the roster, but any smasher and their mother knows that Sheik is the only reason most players choose Zelda...

 

[SiD]

sorry, wasn't trying to troll

aside from that, why shouldn't she be in?

she is an awesome character in alot of ways and she does deserve her own spot on the roster, but any smasher and their mother knows that Sheik is the only reason most players choose Zelda...

Exactly. Which is why I think they should each be good vs certain characters at certain percents, or have a faster switch time and have some combos with both characters.

Point being, making them work in conjunction would be totally awesome, albeit hard to do.

 

[tafutureboy]

Wanna know why we think she should be nerfed? cuz we're tired of noobs like you actually being hard with her.

I know....i think all characters should have their strengths and weaknesses
Ganondorf is slow but powerful
link is strong but his attacks are slow (leaving him opem)
Mr G&W...well you get the point

But Zelda was good but shiek was fast strong had good attacks and everything.......plus she wa an opening character...at least make people work to get her, him...whatever

lastley i think if shiek does return make her seperate from Zelda...we dont really need characters being 2 seperate characters (cough ice climber)also i dont want the ice climbers to return(just ranting away...

 

[The_Corax_King]

god **** quit with the essay length multiquotes... you dont have to refute EVERY person's post...

 

[SiD]

god **** quit with the essay length multiquotes... you dont have to refute EVERY person's post...

But some of us want to hear what he says, you don't have to read it after all.

 

[blueriku]

I never said that. In fact, I've stated more than once that Sheik having her own character slot, without Ocarina of Time Zelda, would be fine by me. Don't twist my words around just to help your own point. All I said was that TP Zelda turning into Sheik bothers me, and why. Nothing more. Don't put words in my mouth.

no i dont mean to twist your words around but the main point is that tp zelda turning to
sheik would not be a big deal


No, I don't.


i didnt mean every single person think that but most ppl that played OOT does


Not according to the storyline of the game, no. They are all technically different "Zeldas".

i know that in fact i probably know a lot more about zelda than you do, when i said that i meant it as a representation of zelda in general i know zelda and link are not the same but the over all character that they represent is in a genral term

That is not even close to being the same situation. Link uses the Master Sword in ever game—it's his signature weapon. Sheik is Zelda's alter ego for one game. It's not like taking away Link's sword, it's more like taking away his ocarina.

that was just an example and also he does not use the master sword in link awakening, OOS, OOA, four sword, four sword adventures and the mininsh cap, majoras mask and even in LOZ and AOL soyea...he doesnt use the master sword in every game. although using the orcarina would of beena better example.

Where are you getting this "Zelda represents all Zeldas" information? I don't remember Sakurai mentioning that anywhere.

no, but zelda is zelda if sakurai didnt want to have zelda represent all zeldas then he would
of made it that zelda used only tp attcaks like light arrows and light magic but instead she use OOT magic and might even turn into sheik. thats not in tp so why would she have those move if zelda is sapposed to represent TP zelda ?

Besides, you only further help my point. If she is indeed supposed to represent all Zelda's, wouldn't it make A LOT more sense to give her more generic magic attacks rather than having her transform into a game-specific character? You contradict your point.

not really she can have a lot of mixed attacks that other zeldas had that does not mean one bit that her attacks need to be generic. so i dont think i contradicted myself she can have a lot of different zelda's traits and attacks.


. . . You completely made that up out of no foundation. None of what you said is based on anything Sakurai said, nor any precedents from the previous games. Regardless, I'll make a rebuttal.

Link's Bow seems relatively unchanged from Melee to Brawl, yes? Yet, they bother to call it the "Hero's Bow" now, in reference to it's name in Twilight Princess. This automatically discounts your whole paragraph. There is absolutely nothing stopping Sakurai from changing the names of the attacks in order for them to suit Twilight Princess Zelda better, much like what he did with Link's bow. It's possible that may simply choose not to do so, but he certainly could do it. Don't make it sound like an impossibility.


if you really want to have a solid source to go off of, then it would be Eiji aonuma or even shigeru miyamoto himself its ultimately up to them what zelda or link can do and what those attacks are named yea so if sakurai wants to rename zeldas attaks he can, but it would eventually have to go though aonuma or mr miyamoto. but as of link had his attacks they are way to easy to rename since he does those attaks in pretty much every game of zelda the only difference is that they are fitted to twilight such as his boomerang or his bombs.




Yes, and we HAVE Zelda herself, therefor I feel that the "tri-force" status belongs solely to her in this instance. Sheik, herself, as her own character with a personality and abilities, is not a tri-force character. Zelda is. If Sheik is considered important purely because of her attachment to Zelda, then that does nothing but highlight how important Zelda herself is. If this is indeed the case, then Sheik would merely be using Zelda as a crutch, and I don't believe characters should get in for that reason. Sheik, and the qualities unique to her that make her different from Zelda, are not connected to the tri-force. Honestly, think about what I'm saying here, because you may be tempted to think this is a weak point. I can assure you, it's not.


actually sheik's personality is not that different from zelda herself the only main difference in personality is that sheik is very distant and never get close to anyone, but zelda does get close to link and sheik (since she is zelda) can use the triforce and has in the game.


Because it offered a unique gameplay mechanic—the transforming character. The creators thought they could create one unique character via Zelda's transformation into Sheik (and admittedly SOME people do use this feature in the innovative way that the creators had originally thought up), when in reality they basically made two characters who occupy the same character slot. Each without a down B move. Sheik's role in Melee, honestly, was just an example of the creators trying to be creative.


fair enough ill agree to that.....

 

[SiD]

Blueriku, I literally can't understand your post. I don't know if you forgot to quote certain things, but it is such a jumlbed incohesive mess, I have no idea what you just said.

 

[blueriku]

I never said that. In fact, I've stated more than once that Sheik having her own character slot, without Ocarina of Time Zelda, would be fine by me. Don't twist my words around just to help your own point. All I said was that TP Zelda turning into Sheik bothers me, and why. Nothing more. Don't put words in my mouth.

no i dont mean to twist your words around but the main point is that tp zelda turning to
sheik would not be a big deal

No, I don't.

i didnt mean every single person think that but most ppl that played OOT does

Not according to the storyline of the game, no. They are all technically different "Zeldas".

i know that in fact i probably know a lot more about zelda than you do, when i said that i meant it as a representation of zelda in general i know zelda and link are not the same but the over all character that they represent is in a genral term


That is not even close to being the same situation. Link uses the Master Sword in ever game—it's his signature weapon. Sheik is Zelda's alter ego for one game. It's not like taking away Link's sword, it's more like taking away his ocarina.

that was just an example and also he does not use the master sword in link awakening, OOS, OOA, four sword, four sword adventures and the mininsh cap, majoras mask and even in LOZ and AOL soyea...he doesnt use the master sword in every game. although using the orcarina would of beena better example.


Where are you getting this "Zelda represents all Zeldas" information? I don't remember Sakurai mentioning that anywhere.

no, but zelda is zelda if sakurai didnt want to have zelda represent all zeldas then he would
of made it that zelda used only tp attcaks like light arrows and light magic but instead she use OOT magic and might even turn into sheik. thats not in tp so why would she have those move if zelda is sapposed to represent TP zelda ?

Besides, you only further help my point. If she is indeed supposed to represent all Zelda's, wouldn't it make A LOT more sense to give her more generic magic attacks rather than having her transform into a game-specific character? You contradict your point.

not really she can have a lot of mixed attacks that other zeldas had that does not mean one bit that her attacks need to be generic. so i dont think i contradicted myself she can have a lot of different zelda's traits and attacks.

. . . You completely made that up out of no foundation. None of what you said is based on anything Sakurai said, nor any precedents from the previous games. Regardless, I'll make a rebuttal.


Link's Bow seems relatively unchanged from Melee to Brawl, yes? Yet, they bother to call it the "Hero's Bow" now, in reference to it's name in Twilight Princess. This automatically discounts your whole paragraph. There is absolutely nothing stopping Sakurai from changing the names of the attacks in order for them to suit Twilight Princess Zelda better, much like what he did with Link's bow. It's possible that may simply choose not to do so, but he certainly could do it. Don't make it sound like an impossibility.

f you really want to have a solid source to go off of, then it would be Eiji aonuma or even shigeru miyamoto himself its ultimately up to them what zelda or link can do and what those attacks are named yea so if sakurai wants to rename zeldas attaks he can, but it would eventually have to go though aonuma or mr miyamoto. but as of link had his attacks they are way to easy to rename since he does those attaks in pretty much every game of zelda the only difference is that they are fitted to twilight such as his boomerang or his bombs.







Fair enough. I'm far too lazy to go about and try and round up all the posts I've seen regarding Sheik's fans, so I'll leave this alone. The fact that you "suspect it strongly", just as I do, is enough for me. This isn't one of my points that I'm too adamant about to begin with.


Yes, and we HAVE Zelda herself, therefor I feel that the "tri-force" status belongs solely to her in this instance. Sheik, herself, as her own character with a personality and abilities, is not a tri-force character. Zelda is. If Sheik is considered important purely because of her attachment to Zelda, then that does nothing but highlight how important Zelda herself is. If this is indeed the case, then Sheik would merely be using Zelda as a crutch, and I don't believe characters should get in for that reason. Sheik, and the qualities unique to her that make her different from Zelda, are not connected to the tri-force. Honestly, think about what I'm saying here, because you may be tempted to think this is a weak point. I can assure you, it's not.

actually sheik's personality is not that different from zelda herself the only main difference in personality is that sheik is very distant and never get close to anyone, but zelda does get close to link and sheik (since she is zelda) can use the triforce and has in the game.


Because it offered a unique gameplay mechanic—the transforming character. The creators thought they could create one unique character via Zelda's transformation into Sheik (and admittedly SOME people do use this feature in the innovative way that the creators had originally thought up), when in reality they basically made two characters who occupy the same character slot. Each without a down B move. Sheik's role in Melee, honestly, was just an example of the creators trying to be creative.

fair enough ill agree to that.....

 

[SiD]

Dude, are you serious? You posted that same thing again, still the same level of unreadability.

 

[blueriku]

Dude, are you serious? You posted that same thing again, still the same level of unreadability.

sorry i messed up my comp is being really stupid ill post again ok, i hope this works....

 

[blueriku]

I never said that. In fact, I've stated more than once that Sheik having her own character slot, without Ocarina of Time Zelda, would be fine by me. Don't twist my words around just to help your own point. All I said was that TP Zelda turning into Sheik bothers me, and why. Nothing more. Don't put words in my mouth.

no i dont mean to twist your words around but the main point is that tp zelda turning to
sheik would not be a big deal

No, I don't.

i didnt mean every single person think that but most ppl that played OOT does

Not according to the storyline of the game, no. They are all technically different "Zeldas".

i know that in fact i probably know a lot more about zelda than you do, when i said that i meant it as a representation of zelda in general i know zelda and link are not the same but the over all character that they represent is in a genral term

That is not even close to being the same situation. Link uses the Master Sword in ever game—it's his signature weapon. Sheik is Zelda's alter ego for one game. It's not like taking away Link's sword, it's more like taking away his ocarina.

that was just an example and also he does not use the master sword in link awakening, OOS, OOA, four sword, four sword adventures and the mininsh cap, majoras mask and even in LOZ and AOL soyea...he doesnt use the master sword in every game. although using the orcarina would of been a better example.

Where are you getting this "Zelda represents all Zeldas" information? I don't remember Sakurai mentioning that anywhere.

no, but zelda is zelda if sakurai didnt want to have zelda represent all zeldas then he would
of made it that zelda used only tp attcaks like light arrows and light magic but instead she use OOT magic and might even turn into sheik. thats not in tp so why would she have those move if zelda is sapposed to represent TP zelda ?

Besides, you only further help my point. If she is indeed supposed to represent all Zelda's, wouldn't it make A LOT more sense to give her more generic magic attacks rather than having her transform into a game-specific character? You contradict your point.

not really she can have a lot of mixed attacks that other zeldas had that does not mean one bit that her attacks need to be generic. so i dont think i contradicted myself she can have a lot of different zelda's traits and attacks.

. . . You completely made that up out of no foundation. None of what you said is based on anything Sakurai said, nor any precedents from the previous games. Regardless, I'll make a rebuttal.

Link's Bow seems relatively unchanged from Melee to Brawl, yes? Yet, they bother to call it the "Hero's Bow" now, in reference to it's name in Twilight Princess. This automatically discounts your whole paragraph. There is absolutely nothing stopping Sakurai from changing the names of the attacks in order for them to suit Twilight Princess Zelda better, much like what he did with Link's bow. It's possible that may simply choose not to do so, but he certainly could do it. Don't make it sound like an impossibility.

Fair enough. I'm far too lazy to go about and try and round up all the posts I've seen regarding Sheik's fans, so I'll leave this alone. The fact that you "suspect it strongly", just as I do, is enough for me. This isn't one of my points that I'm too adamant about to begin with.

Yes, and we HAVE Zelda herself, therefor I feel that the "tri-force" status belongs solely to her in this instance. Sheik, herself, as her own character with a personality and abilities, is not a tri-force character. Zelda is. If Sheik is considered important purely because of her attachment to Zelda, then that does nothing but highlight how important Zelda herself is. If this is indeed the case, then Sheik would merely be using Zelda as a crutch, and I don't believe characters should get in for that reason. Sheik, and the qualities unique to her that make her different from Zelda, are not connected to the tri-force. Honestly, think about what I'm saying here, because you may be tempted to think this is a weak point. I can assure you, it's not.

Because it offered a unique gameplay mechanic—the transforming character. The creators thought they could create one unique character via Zelda's transformation into Sheik (and admittedly SOME people do use this feature in the innovative way that the creators had originally thought up), when in reality they basically made two characters who occupy the same character slot. Each without a down B move. Sheik's role in Melee, honestly, was just an example of the creators trying to be creative.

actually sheik's personality is not that different from zelda herself the only main difference in personality is that sheik is very distant and never get close to anyone, but zelda does get close to link and sheik (since she is zelda) can use the triforce and has in the game.





ok sorry for my last post my comp was being gay and some how that happened

 

[Hydde]

Ok guys, what do you think about this:

lets first of all separate sheik form zelda in Brawl................. Zelda will have her own slot and a brand new down B move.

Then to include sheik, we gave her a new slot too, but since sheik and zelda are one and cannot be separated, what we do here is to change sheik for Zelda´s sheikah babysitter in Ocarina of time (dont remember the name). She can inherit all the Sheik moves while being a different character and leave zelda alone.

I know , that sheikah master is even less important than sheik, but who cares,,, at least we will not have that weird issue of having 2 zeldas in one game. She can even have new moves and still have the essence of a sheika!

 

[dynamic_entry]

Ok guys, what do you think about this:

lets first of all separate sheik form zelda in Brawl................. Zelda will have her own slot and a brand new down B move.

Then to include sheik, we gave her a new slot too, but since sheik and zelda are one and cannot be separated, what we do here is to change sheik for Zelda´s sheikah babysitter in Ocarina of time (dont remember the name). She can inherit all the Sheik moves while being a different character and leave zelda alone.

I know , that sheikah master is even less important than sheik, but who cares,,, at least we will not have that weird issue of having 2 zeldas in one game. She can even have new moves and still have the essence of a sheika!

you want to put IMPA in brawl?!?!?!?!?!?????

im not a fan......

if link can have adult and young versions, and mario can have doctor and plumber versions, why not give zelda ninja and sage versions?