You get no Sympathy in a "Fire Emblem Discussion"

[Gingerbread Man]

since they're not going to spoil anything, I can see masked lucina being the alternate costume for marth

They're not worried about spoilers. Shiek and Zelda were spoilers. And smashbros is going to come out over a year after awakening's international release anyways.

 

[•Col•]

Guys, I've got it. Marth will be replaced in Smash 4 by 'Marth?'. He/She will play exactly as Marth did, but wear the mask and have the look from Awakening.. And it'll never be revealed in the game if it's actually Marth or Lucina or whoever.

EVERYBODY WINS.

 

[Croph]

I don't know about you, but Marth getting a Roy alt costume would be a huge slap in the face for me. Glad that ain't going to happen... right...?

Even Roy being clone-ish irks me (as if he does get in, I'm expecting him to be a semi-clone. Though, I guess I'm just keeping my expectations low). However, I do understand why... It's just that I'm not a fan of Roy's tipper. Never was, and even if they implant it right, I probably never will be. Come up with a more unique sword mechanic... or maybe something with fire? Anything, I don't care! I'd rather have Marth be the only one to have that sort of gimmick...

But yeah, these alt costume arguments... idk what to say really haha. Man, a FE character reveal can't come soon enough, huh?

 

[Jaedrik]

Matter of opinion.

Well yeah. It was in response to this after all:

It's more of a matter of semantic distinction, and further to what purpose should 'best' fulfill?

Today in philosophy class we talked about suffering. It was fun because Buddha. I pointed out some key things, and the class pretty much agreed with me that they do not speak of physical suffering, nor the magnanimous and altruistic suffering for others, both of which are not concerned with the self, and both of which can very well be noble and purposeful. In this way we demonstrated that not all 'suffering' is caused by human egocentrism, as the Buddha puts it, but it can be caused for human salvation. So, I'd like to say that Buddhists (most of them) have that hedonistic view that suffering is evil, their solution is to withdraw from the world through the eightfold path. Though they are not internally contradictory, it is incomplete and partial, though the methods are good for emptying oneself of the self (meditation, the religious practices), they do not serve to fill the self up with that magnanimosity, that love of others, and often serve as a mechanism through which the Devil and his minions ('evil') enter and fill the individual through demonic obsession or possession. I know that through suffering we can empty ourselves, offering ourselves to God, that we may be filled with his love and compassion, and that we may bring to other men The Good, so the means are not evil per se, and suffering is far from it.
Is it bad that I'm bad with examples?

Anyways, what is 'best'? Well, best is much like that silly semantic difference. In practical application, many often think the world an impure place which cannot reach any ideal state, they call themselves 'realists', to reconcile those things they often prefer to use best in a 'highest probable attainment' or 'good enough' so they may keep up with that positive language of 'best', or that they may have intrinsic justification to act well towards others. I think that is a useful view, but it is hollow and incomplete as to the purpose of the product, disregarding my other objections of a metaphysical order. The purpose of the product in economics is often measured in a pseudo-utilitarian way: What is the use value of the thing I am creating? What opportunity cost will occur from putting in alternate costumes over using those resources for balance and gameplay mechanics? Most of these things are out of our ability to predict, but I am prone to say that what is 'best' is a smooth blend of both, we certainly need gameplay, to what degree to build the trust and loyalty of customers do we need gameplay for? To what degree do we need to utilize more content producing methods to satisfy everyone (not just most or the majority) with costumes, that they will know we produce good products and that ours and future ones are worth their time and money? All these things, when considered from each other angle and place swapped, make a comprehensive map of what needs to be accomplished. It is an incredibly open ended question we posit then. 'Best', for our, the fans' and consumers', understanding, turns out to be something a little different.

It can just as easily be said the two can be separated, as they utilize different resources, one the art and modeling team, the other the design and balancing team. There is little to no conflict, but it is ultimately their purpose to cooperate to make whatever they can work, and whatever doesn't doesn't. In a managerial position, it is far more effective to let the people under you go at it while being engaged as a helper, this cuts down on bureaucracy and forms positive relationships and effective production capacity. To have clear outlines and plans that focus on the "win/win or no deal", as Covey puts it, between the branches of development, on the creative potential of the folks around, with clear consequences both good and bad as the product is produced, is a perfect ideal to what is 'best'. In a company, a team, a friendship in harmony, best is not the product, but the process, and come what may if they are in harmony it will be for the best. Best is no longer a question, but a quest.

It doesn't end there, though, one cannot develop those outlines required for the efficient cooperation of the branches without a clear understanding of what is to be accomplished. This can only come from something that is firm, grounded, permanent, and shared between every individual within the process, they must have a principle that guides them. To say what that is, we can assume it be 'to provide the best gameplay', or 'to provide the best content', but I am more inclined to angle higher (forgive the pun). What is best is to provide the best game in all its indistinguishable parts with what they have and what they offer. It is difficult to estimate the principles of a higher order from there.
I don't know what to characterize it as, it's neither practical-utilitarian, or ideal-metaphysical, but isn't that what the philosophy of game design is all about? The supposed balance between 'art' and 'science'? Are not art and science both merely branches of philosophy? Certainly, then here under the heading of game design, art is science, and the ideal is the practical, and what 'best' is is the unquantified, yet qualified process that is, to my great hope, being realized as we speak.

 

[jaytalks]

One thing on Shii Fit Trainer/ Hii Fit Trainer:
I think it's a mistake to label Hii Fit Trainer as an alternate costume (the same goes with Wario's yellow and purple look). If the mechanic is just like in Brawl where it give Wii Fit Trainer 10 costumes basically like it did for Wario, it really isn't an alternate costume in the sense we are talking. WFT would just happens to have more costumes than everyone else.

If Hii Fit Trainer is something we download or unlock, then I can see call it an alternate costume. But if it's something that is an option out of the box (or whenever WFT is unlocked), then it really isn't an alternate costume. HFT and SFT both equally make up Wii Fit Trainer. Just like both Warios are equally Wario. One has to be a default because defaults exist and things like FMV of course.

This differs from the approach to Lucina and Marth if Lucina was a costume. In order for the Lucina outfit to work, the character name would have to change for it to be Lucina (or they could go the really awkward UMVC3 route and have it literally just be a costume). But in any case, it would hard for me to imagine that feature being available upon intial release, especially considering Sakurai's comments. If it was made either by free download later of paid DLC, then it would be an alternate costume.

Alternate character costumes, to me, are a step down from clones. I don't mind some clones (like the Star Fox crew), but they aren't desirable. Alternate character costumes can strip away the originality of a characters. Lucina probably isn't the best example, considering her swords style can be easily made similar to Marth's. A good example of an alternate character costume gone wrong is the "Mega Man X" costumes for Zero in UMVC3. It's fun fanservice, but it's also a blatant reminder that Mega Man for some reason isn't available in UMVC3. MMX fans are just thinking about the type of different moveset he could have offered in the game, rather than him being reduced to the Z saber and Zero's voice. If anyone thinks a MM costume would be reasonable compensation for not having a Mega Man in a VS game, then they are crazy.

On the "best":
There are different opinions on what make something best, because we all have different viewpoints and different tastes. That's why we all have different favorite games and different best games ever. I usually don't understand the point of saying something is an opinion on a thread, because a good discussion general involves on some level competing opinions of other people. It's why people have differing views, and thus why discussion his happening in the first place.

I do think there is a best that is trying to be achieved by game designers that is shared among the top video game companies. It's that gameplay comes before an other element of design. It's associated especially with Nintendo game designers, who focus mainly on gameplay, often to the detriment of those espouse a video game's story. While consumers may choose to purchase a game for another reason, this is the area as a game designer you have the most control over. It's also the element that defines the product, in terms of genre, and in terms of what you can do in the art form of gaming that can't be done in any other art form.

 

[Al-kīmiyā']

Well yeah. It was in response to this after all:

You could say the same thing to that. I do think that gameplay is more important than characters in creating the best game. Playstation ASBR focused on the characters, and now that franchise is dead. This seems to be presented as some kind of evidence to support your point of view, but one game hardly proves anything about what is best in a fighting game.

Talking about characters, not character costumes. Hence I didn't say alternate costumes. I never said costumes would take significant development or anything of the sort, so there was nothing to ceded. I was talking about them taking away focus (to be more clear, in terms of the fan response), not development time. Taking away focus only from what you want the focus to be.

"Spreading yourself thin" includes other things besides characters such as Brawl's SSE mode. He dropped it because it took too much development time or whatnot and impacted the characters. I'm just taking the guy at his word and restating what he said. That's why I quoted him up there. You can choose not to believe him; it won't change the amount of characters we have in the game. I do think larger amount of character make it more difficult. Developer's have a finite amount of time based on how much time the publisher gives them. He says he wants less characters so he can better balance them basically, given the time he has before he releases. That's his choice, vision, and projections as a developer; its his game. I don't know where you're going with this. It's his game, so I shouldn't have an opinion about how it should be? Are you saying I shouldn't have an opinion if it won't change the game?

The thing is, the whole argument against a lot of characters is embedded in fighting game history. What's the last fighting game to have 35 characters (we'll go by slots in Brawl) and be strongly balanced? I really don't know of any. What's the last really balanced fighting game? Virtua Fighter 5 or Persona 4 Arena? We have maybe 20 characters for VF5 and 15 for Persona 4 Arena. Capcom has been trying to balance Street Fighter 4 for years (along with all their new character additions). There isnt really a model for balancing that many characters, not to mention other fighters are essentially building on the same formula and still havent gotten it. 2D fighters all stem from SF2, 3D fighters stem from VF, and the Vs Series stems from X-Men vs Street Fighter. They are building off the work of multiple developers and teams over the last 20 years and they still haven't perfected. Smash is the single successful series entry in battle royal fighting game genre. So it's really only coming from one source in terms of development. There's nothing logically impossible about having a large roster of balanced characters. I see no reason I shouldn't desire it.

Again, I keep saying it but I'll put it more clearly. I'm not trying to "win" or even have an argument. I'm just stating what I think Sakurai's opinion/line of thinking, and thus the unlikelihood of what you're suggesting. Of course I would love to have all my wanted characters in the game, and that would probably exceed Sakurai's "limit" for characters. But that's not going to happen, and in terms of my (limited) understanding of game development, it doesn't make sense to have such high expectations for any developer. I was never arguing about what's likely. If you thought I was, then we've been wasting our time. :3

To go back to the original topic, alternate costumes do not affect gameplay in any serious way. Gameplay is what drives sales most for any game, and it's what the developer has the most control over. Alternate costumes aren't desirable because they are lower than the lowliest of clones. I think there is merit in a creator not taking the quick cash grab of alternate costumes. It might cost them a quick buck, but there is something to be said about integrity against the "easy" DLC based culture of gaming we live in. People don't buy fighting games for alternate costumes, so if I wouldn't worry about them if I was Sakurai. I see no merit in not doing something that would please the fans. That it would "not affect gameplay in any serious way" and be "quick" and "easy" just convinces me further that it should be done.

 

[kikaru]

I don't know about you, but Marth getting a Roy alt costume would be a huge slap in the face for me. Glad that ain't going to happen... right...?

This essentially what I mean, pasting an actual character and treating them as nothing more than an alternate costume, without a better way to put it, is a slap in the face for both characters involved. This is completely different from giving Luigi a purple color scheme, having Peach wear Daisy or Rosalina's dress, or giving Marth a mask as you're still playing as Luigi, Peach, and Marth no matter which way you slice it. These types of costumes are paying homage to other characters that aren't playable in the game while actually pasting Waluigi, Dasiy, Rosalina, and Lucina as simply alternate character swaps doesn't do those characters justice should they have been playable otherwise.

 

[BluePikmin11]

This essentially what I mean, pasting an actual character and treating them as nothing more than an alternate costume, without a better way to put it, is a slap in the face for both characters involved. This is completely different from giving Luigi a purple color scheme, having Peach wear Daisy or Rosalina's dress, or giving Marth a mask as you're still playing as Luigi, Peach, and Marth no matter which way you slice it. These types of costumes are paying homage to other characters that aren't playable in the game while actually pasting Waluigi, Dasiy, Rosalina, and Lucina as simply alternate character swaps doesn't do those characters justice should they have been playable otherwise.

This is pretty much why I hate alt. costumes idea as a whole. Some characters deserve to be their own playable character.

 

[IsmaR]

Guys, I've got it. Marth will be replaced in Smash 4 by 'Marth?'. He/She will play exactly as Marth did, but wear the mask and have the look from Awakening.. And it'll never be revealed in the game if it's actually Marth or Lucina or whoever.

EVERYBODY WINS.

Not good enough. They need to be named Martha.

 

[jaytalks]

This seems to be presented as some kind of evidence to support your point of view, but one game hardly proves anything about what is best in a fighting game.

The history of fighting games proves that more characters = less balance. If you can't see that then I don't know what I what to tell you. I just PSASBR as the opposite side of the equation, as the extreme version of the game. The game focused on characters rather than making a fun game. Successful and balanced fighting games are a mix of roster size, characters, and gameplay.

Taking away focus only from what you want the focus to be.

Taking away focus on what Sakurai wants to game to be on. My logic comes from his quotes.

I don't know where you're going with this. It's his game, so I shouldn't have an opinion about how it should be? Are you saying I shouldn't have an opinion if it won't change the game?

It seems to me that you don't understand that there is in fact a limited amount of time and resources when it comes to developing a game. And that the director of the game said what I'm saying. That's why I'm saying it. It's not a flippant opinion that I'm stating.

There's nothing logically impossible about having a large roster of balanced characters. I see no reason I shouldn't desire it.

Given what we know about the game's time and resources and release date, on some level, a large (depending on what you mean) roster of balanced characters is logically impossible.

I was never arguing about what's likely. If you thought I was, then we've been wasting our time. :3

Well, not exactly. But on some level we arguing two different things. From what I understand (on characters), what you are saying is why can't I desire things in my head and post those opinions on a thread. But what I'm saying is that you shouldn't have irrational expectations on game design because of what historically we have seen from other fighting games, Sakurai, and this series.
On one level, there is a philosophical argument about an individual having the autonomy to do what he or she desires. But when said desires involve what is "logically possible" or "logically impossible," that's when desire needs to meet rationality on some level, because you brought in logic. So given what we know about the game's resources, time of development, and success in terms of balance, there's actually a rational and logical argument to be made that a larger amount of balanced characters is logically impossible.

I see no merit in not doing something that would please the fans. That it would "not affect gameplay in any serious way" and be "quick" and "easy" just convinces me further that it should be done.

It really wouldn't please fans though. I would just look at the MMX costume of Zero in UMVC3; there aren't really that many Mega Man fans that would be pleased on the outcome. It really was a slap in the face to a company that historically has let the Blue Bomber down.


Lucina fans won't be satisfied with an alternate costume. They will keep demanding her as a character for the next installment. And if you don't think Lucina fans have staying power (which I would disagree), switch out Lucina and put Dixie Kong as a Diddy Kong costume there instead. Same outcome of not really pleased fans. Paid alternate DLC costumes in SF4 and UMVC3 hasn't exactly made Capcom exactly a fan favorite. There are plenty of other missteps, but fans really aren't that grateful for the costumes, because they had to pay for it.


DLC alternate costumes as fan service would be like putting a Adam West cameo in the Dark Knight. It would please fans of the 60s TV show and great fan service, but it would disrupt from the story Christopher Nolan was trying to tell. Making quick and easy costumes would disrupt what Sakurai is trying to saying about the value of the Nintendo All Stars in the game. You're not an All Star if you're replaceable, and in addition that would speak negatively on both Lucina and Marth as characters, and the FE series as a whole. Smash isn't just about characters fighting, it's about characters fighting in their unique and different gameplay styles. That's why fans really aren't fond of clones. Alternate costumes would be a step below clones.

 

[Sid-cada]

I see no merit in not doing something that would please the fans. That it would "not affect gameplay in any serious way" and be "quick" and "easy" just convinces me further that it should be done.

Let me ask you a few questions: Would you accept a Little Mac move set with him fighting like a dirty cheater? Ridley acting like a cute puppy? An emotionless Palutena?

When people ask for a character, they just don't want them playable. They want the traits that endeared them to the character in the first place: Little Mac's ability to take on others honestly and cleanly yet stronger than him, Ridley's awesome ferociousness, or Palutena's humorous yet (mostly) harmless trolling.

Look at the number of people complaining about Captain Gannon and wish he had a move set more closely related to his home games. How people want Ness and Lucas to use PSI attacks they actually used. Heck, I myself am a little annoyed at how Meta Knight is out of character for having the Dimensional Cape!

The problem with alternate costumes is that typically, they don't do the one who is the costume justice to their own self. They lack the traits that people wanted out of them in the first place. People want the genuine article, not some distorted stereotype. Just ask how any Mega Man fan feels about how he is portrayed in Street Fighter X Tekken (Hint - this is where Bad Boxart Mega Man comes from).

You assume that simply including the character would please fans. I kind of doubt that case. If you don't, I guess that we have very different ideas of what people want out of the roster.

 

[Al-kīmiyā']

Let me ask you a few questions: Would you accept a Little Mac move set with him fighting like a dirty cheater? Ridley acting like a cute puppy? An emotionless Palutena?

When people ask for a character, they just don't want them playable. They want the traits that endeared them to the character in the first place: Little Mac's ability to take on others honestly and cleanly yet stronger than him, Ridley's awesome ferociousness, or Palutena's humorous yet (mostly) harmless trolling.

Look at the number of people complaining about Captain Gannon and wish he had a move set more closely related to his home games. How people want Ness and Lucas to use PSI attacks they actually used. Heck, I myself am a little annoyed at how Meta Knight is out of character for having the Dimensional Cape!

The problem with alternate costumes is that typically, they don't do the one who is the costume justice to their own self. They lack the traits that people wanted out of them in the first place. People want the genuine article, not some distorted stereotype. Just ask how any Mega Man fan feels about how he is portrayed in Street Fighter X Tekken (Hint - this is where Bad Boxart Mega Man comes from).

You assume that simply including the character would please fans. I kind of doubt that case. If you don't, I guess that we have very different ideas of what people want out of the roster. I agree with you. I'm only advocating for alternate character costumes when the characters use identical or nearly identical moves in their games. I prefer alternate character costumes to clones, because I think that a large roster full of clones is disingenuous.

 

[Al-kīmiyā']

The history of fighting games proves that more characters = less balance. If you can't see that then I don't know what I what to tell you. I just PSASBR as the opposite side of the equation, as the extreme version of the game. The game focused on characters rather than making a fun game. Successful and balanced fighting games are a mix of roster size, characters, and gameplay.


Taking away focus on what Sakurai wants to game to be on. My logic comes from his quotes.


It seems to me that you don't understand that there is in fact a limited amount of time and resources when it comes to developing a game. And that the director of the game said what I'm saying. That's why I'm saying it. It's not a flippant opinion that I'm stating.


Given what we know about the game's time and resources and release date, on some level, a large (depending on what you mean) roster of balanced characters is logically impossible.


Well, not exactly. But on some level we arguing two different things. From what I understand (on characters), what you are saying is why can't I desire things in my head and post those opinions on a thread. But what I'm saying is that you shouldn't have irrational expectations on game design because of what historically we have seen from other fighting games, Sakurai, and this series.
On one level, there is a philosophical argument about an individual having the autonomy to do what he or she desires. But when said desires involve what is "logically possible" or "logically impossible," that's when desire needs to meet rationality on some level, because you brought in logic. So given what we know about the game's resources, time of development, and success in terms of balance, there's actually a rational and logical argument to be made that a larger amount of balanced characters is logically impossible.

You still seem stuck on the idea of what is realistic to expect. Look at my signature. That's not what I'm talking about. I have only been saying (or at least meaning) things that I want and giving reasons why they are good. I agree with you that a large roster of characters that is balanced is not realistic to expect. On that point, however, I think that I got off-topic. Forget a large roster of characters. A smaller roster with alternate characters costumes would be just as balanced as a smaller roster without them. The costumes don't change the game balance.


DLC alternate costumes as fan service would be like putting a Adam West cameo in the Dark Knight. It would please fans of the 60s TV show and great fan service, but it would disrupt from the story Christopher Nolan was trying to tell. Making quick and easy costumes would disrupt what Sakurai is trying to saying about the value of the Nintendo All Stars in the game.
Again, this is Sakurai's (probably) idea of what the game should be about. I personally don't care if a character isn't an "all star."

 

[FlareHabanero]

...and all this resentment because of Lucina? Wow, you people are pathetic.

 

[kikaru]

...and all this resentment because of Lucina? Wow, you people are pathetic.

I feel that it would imply that if Lucina and Marth were interchangeable characters it suggests that Lucina has nothing to differentiate herself from Marth which I believe is complete and utter nonsense.

 

[jaytalks]

I see no merit in not doing something that would please the fans. That it would "not affect gameplay in any serious way" and be "quick" and "easy" just convinces me further that it should be done.

My argument against character costumes was never about balance. I just made an offhand point regarding characters, so we did get side tracked.

The point you're making doesn't make sense because it wouldn't please fans. Every indication, from the smash community response to clones, to DLC alternate costumes in other series, to a direct parallel of situations with Mega Man X as a Zero costume in UMVC3. It wouldn't please fans and they will still demanding her the next game. Hence, they really wouldn't be satisfied.

But on Lucina: With the context of their canon appearances(i.e. FE1,3,11,12 for Marth and FE13 for Lucina) , the two actually use different sword styles.
This:

The idea they actually fight the same would be like saying Little Mac fights like Super Macho Man or Don Flamenco. Essentially it's because they utilize they same attacking method (for this example, it's boxing). It's especially surprising considering the fact that FE has really limited attacks within the game, but Lucina still has a very unique sword style.

Admittedly, there is more ground to stand on because Marth uses Lucina's style in FE13, but that's more of the case of a cheap costume DLC. Marth uses Lucina style because his model is basically a hair swap (not a head swap, a hair swap). They even designed a new outfit so it makes sense. They did this for all the DLC lords or main characters through out the series, using the game's models for the avatar instead of actually taking the time to make real designs. But it is more emblematic (no pun intended) of Intelligent System's laziness and need for a quick cash grab, than showing Marth's sword style.

...and all this resentment because of Lucina? Wow, you people are pathetic.

It's not really about Lucina if you actually followed the discussion. Lucina is just what connects it to the thread. I'm just having discussion with another smasher about game design and stuff. It's not that big a deal. Discussions happen on a discussion thread. Every time a discussion happens on a thread that you can't participate in or don't want to participate in, you feel the need to get frustrated or angry about something.

 

[Gingerbread Man]

With too many costumes. Characters stop being characters and become movesets instead. I don't think sakurai wants that.

I know I don't.

 

[Al-kīmiyā']

It might boil down to an aesthetic choice or a principle for me. I view alternate character costumes as an alternative to clones. I hate seeing a roster full of clones. I would be more pleasing to my sensibilities if clones were simply costume swaps. Even if their physics are slightly altered, I think having separate slots for clones is dishonest.

As for whether or not people like costume swaps, just look at Brawl Vault. Apparently a lot of people like them. Naturally most of them probably would rather their costumes get in as real characters, but they accept that that is unlikely. Costume swaps are the only way they're getting in, because they are relatively easy to do, especially given the difficulties in adding slots to hacked Brawl. I also don't think that a character getting in one game as a costume swap entails that they won't get in as a separate character slot in another game. That only makes sense if one follows the logic that the developers care more about pleasing the previous game's owner's fondness (if it exists) for using the character with the old moveset. I think most people - on this board, at least - hope that they do not feel that way. As evidence, see the demand for a decloned Ganondorf: most people want him more or less overhauled.

 

[jaytalks]

I would prefer clones to costumes, as clones at least have some semblance of uniqueness for the characters. They are also aren't unprecedented, having appeared in two iterations of Smash. Some clones even make sense, like the Star Fox clones.

With Brawl Vault, I would say that's more indicative of the user based hacking that comes with video games than the popularity of costumes. The users who partake in hacked costumes generally do so because they are part of that community anyway. Virtually every video game has hacks of this nature, within days of their release. Street Fighter 4 has similar hacks. There's this really cool Iron Man GTA V Hack for example. And these hacks are a reaction to the character's exclusion in Brawl, whether it's natural for a character like Goku, or disappointing with a character like Waluigi. However, it's also important to note that many of these hacks also attempt to give characters a sense of uniqueness, making them more akin to clones. To keep it on topic, there's a particular Lucina hack that has a lot of time put into it for example:
Lucina vs Marth

Also, I don't have figures but my guess is that this is a very small community in relation to the ten million people who bought Brawl.

 

[Al-kīmiyā']

I also prefer that clones be differentiated when it makes sense. I just would prefer that even clones with different physics, if they still have the same moveset, be grouped as costume swaps, to prevent "padding" the roster.

 

[Curious Villager]

Can someone explain to me what exactly makes an alternate costume clone more appealing than a roster clone?

 

[Swamp Sensei]

Can someone explain to me what exactly makes an alternate costume clone more appealing to a roster clone?

Because people have an unjust hatred against clones...

 

[Curious Villager]

Because people have an unjust hatred against clones...

Soo.... what you are saying is... They want to see the clones as alternate costumes so they can at least pretend they don't exist...? :/

 

[Swamp Sensei]

Soo.... what you are saying is... They want to see the clones as alternate costumes so they can at least pretend they don't exist...? :/

Pretty much.

 

[Frostwraith]

Gameplay-wise, there's zero difference between having the same clone as a costume or as a character slot, so it's pretty much a double standard.

Imagine that in Melee, Dr. Mario was selectable by selecting by choosing Mario then clicking on a special icon instead of occupying a slot on the roster, yet had the same tweaks as if he was a different character, such as moveset, displayed name and artwork. Regarding gameplay, what difference would it be, other than a different procedure of selecting the character?

 

[Curious Villager]

Pretty much.

Yah I'm just asking because I have a hard time understanding why people throw a hissy fit whenever characters like Toon Link and Roy have their own character slot but then are immediately ay-oh-kay with making them share the same spot with Link and Marth respectively as alternate costumes... especially when they have a number of gameplay differences for themselves, might as well not let them live in another character's shadow. It would be a slap in the face as others stated and it benefits no one really.

It really makes no difference because the clones would still exist and time and resources was still spend on them. But I guess that's just my opinion. :/

 

[Diddy Kong]

But Toon Link and Roy are actually quite good characters in their own right.

 

[Curious Villager]

Yeah I'm not saying that they are bad characters though as they are indeed good characters in their own right.

 

[jaytalks]

Clones as costumes instead of hiding the slots. That would be hiding clones, as if you are ashamed of them. Doesn't make sense to me. If you had clones in the game, you should own it. Additionally, players who casually pick up the game or play it with their friends would have no idea these characters exist. Big downside from the way I look at it. Sakurai and company would do so fans wouldn't accuse them of padding the roster, even though that's what they are totally doing in either case.

Falco and Dr. Mario have also been very great characters. I remember at Evo rooting for the guy that was playing as Dr. Mario.

I would have no problem with clones at the level of the Brawl differentiating (or semi-clones as we call it). I don't see why Sakurai and his team would try to hide his work.

 

[Diddy Kong]

Dr.Mario is still the weakest excuse for adding another character in ever I feel.

 

[Al-kīmiyā']

I think it's really dishonest counting a clone as part of the roster. Having them as a costume swap at least gives the character selection screen a more accurate size.

 

[Swamp Sensei]

I think it's really dishonest counting a clone as part of the roster. Having them as a costume swap at least gives the character selection screen a more accurate size.

Because Mario and Luigi play exactly the same and there is no difference other than appearance right?

 

[Diddy Kong]

Lucina and Chrom as Marth and Ike alternatives still looks neutral enough though. Taken of coarse Ike and Marth aren't changed much from their Brawl selfs.

If He Fit Trainer is actually different from Miss Fit, this has extreme good chances of happening. I could see Mr. Fit as heavier and stronger than Miss Fit, and likewise I picture Lucina and Chrom as faster and lighter than Marth and Ike. Perhaps just slightly though, but noticable enough to make a preference in style. Thing is, Wii Fit Trainer is a single name for the character, as where Land and Ware Wario in Brawl. Lucina and Chrom are not Marth and Ike, or well... Chrom couldn't pose as Ike without voice and name change. Lucina could just be, you know, 'Marth'.

Really, it doesn't make this easier in the slightest. Ike and Chrom are still in a sort of competition, and there's also Roy of coarse.

 

[Robert of Normandy]

Um...when you guys say having clones as an "alternate costume", do you mean as and EX-Mode? Because if you reduce a character to a costume, doesn't that defeat the purpose of a "clone"?

 

[Al-kīmiyā']

Because Mario and Luigi play exactly the same and there is no difference other than appearance right?

They're different sizes. That wouldn't just be a costume swap.

 

[Swamp Sensei]

They're different sizes. That wouldn't just be a costume swap.

And Link and Toon Link aren't?

 

[IsmaR]

Clone

This goes for both sides. All I can say is there is no "unjust" hate here.

 

[Al-kīmiyā']

And Link and Toon Link aren't?

Wtf are you talking about? When did I say Link and Toon Link should be alternate costumes? I said that clones should be alternate costumes, but I just assumed it was understood the limitations of that. I guess you haven't read the big list of alternate costumes thread.

 

[Swamp Sensei]

Wtf are you talking about? When did I say Link and Toon Link should be alternate costumes? I said that clones should be alternate costumes, but I just assumed it was understood the limitations of that. I guess you haven't read the big list of alternate costumes thread.

No. I have not.

Remember what happens when you assume!

 

[---]

Somehow I think trying to make compromises such as alternate costumes has only made FE talk harder and more pointless than it already was so I'm just going to be blunt in my opinion here:

Marth
Ike
Chrom/Roy

And Lucina (as "Marth?") to get a reference in Chrom's FS or as an alternate color for Marth or both.