Super Smash Bros. Ultimate (Ridley Me This)

masofdas wrote:

Shouldn't be near SMASH in any form, with what just port on one system, what's the legacy, none.

The very first Super Smash Bros prominently featured Pikachu, who at that time had appeared in some obscure Game Boy games from an awkward, maybe Nintendo-owned second party.

Super Smash Bros Brawl featured Solid Snake, after Metal Gear had been eschewing Nintendo for years, even longer if you forget Twin Snakes, a remake that had such a limited print run its now a major collectors item.

We've also seen Sonic and Pac Man, not Nintendo characters, mostly famous for a legacy elsewhere.

Solaire is a beloved character from probably the most praised and discussed and significant game of the last decade. That game already has a legacy most franchises would kill for, which has survived every attempt by capitalism to dismantle it. That game will be gracing the same Nintendo console this Smash is appearing on.

This idea that Smash Bros is some Nintendo only sacred cow is ridiculous. More games with third-party characters than without have been released now. Also, Namco Bandai have been helping to make them, and they publish Dark Souls. There are plenty of arguments to say Solaire should be in there.

Do I think Solaire should be in Smash?

I literally could not care less.

Smash Brothers is the Ready Player One of Nintendo franchises. The whole appeal lies in the other things from which it draws. I love Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Pokemon, F-Zero, Fire Emblem and so on, but the appeal of seeing them all in one game has had diminishing returns. Smash Bros can't be the vanguard, primary, main pillar Nintendo franchise as its whole schtick is celebrating the rest of Nintendo. I actually wish we'd had a bigger gap between titles, for more stuff to appear that could then be represented. At the moment, this reminds me of a band who have only been active a couple of years bringing out a Greatest Hits album.

Also, for me Smash has always been a couch multiplayer party game. I find it too tedious t play solo and too chaotic to play as a serious fighting game (unless you turn everything off, in which case its barely smash any more and we're right back to tedious) so I'm not excited about this one in my current situation.

The rest of you are welcome to be excited, you do you, but don't shit on anyone else's dreams. It wouldn't hurt anyone if Solaire showed up, and it might make other people happy, so chill out. Go have a wank, eat a kit kat, whatever. Jeez.

Muss wrote:

Smash should always be primarily a celebration of Nintendo history, so I can see why third party appearances on Nintendo equipment being a mandatory requirement for some.

I suppose it only mildly annoys me if third part characters don't really otherwise appear on Nintendo machines. Cloud doesn't facilitate nintendo history, there are thousands of better candidates in the terms Balla describes. But I don't think his inclusion overshadows that Nintendo celebration which has always been in smash, it's more a treat for fans of Nintendo and square. As long as there aren't loads of characters like cloud, which there won't be, I'm not too fussed.

They're just fun wee crossovers at the end of it all & I'm sure they help Nintendo build a good relationship with those third parties as well.

Just expressing my views much like Balla what I would like from SMASH and who I would like to see from the 3rd party characters and that being ones with legacy and possibly some ties to Nintendo, with me being all for Cloud for instance but to me, Solaire doesn't make sense in any way.

If we were talking PlayStation All-Stars 2 then I would understand Solaire being in that with all 2 games on PS3 and all 3 games being on PS4 plus Demons and Bloodborne, that From has links to PlayStation with Solaire being that sort of face like Cloud is for FF.

The_Jaster wrote:

They're just fun wee crossovers at the end of it all...

Third-party bobbins:

I... don't really care either way about the Ice Climbers.  They appeared in an old, not-very-good game, and haven't come back.  I like the duo mechanic, but Rosalina is a thing, and there are more recent, more likely to reappear duos out there (I used to clamour for Twinrova).

at Zero's new Mario-franchise suggestions.  Waluigi before Paper Mario sir!  And if there's a Toad to be introduced, let it be Captain Toad.  I'd be quite happy to see Bowser Jr. leave to keep the franchise numbers down (and Dr. Mario, natch).  I do agree with all of Zero's removals, though, and I hope we get the Zelda/Sheik double back!  Pokémon Trainer/ZSSamus I can take or leave.  

Also, tangentially, these threads are some of my favourite on a forum!  So much rampant speculation, so many Nintendo characters drawn up from the archives.  It's all good stuff, and I think it contributes heavily to Smash being one of my favourite franchises. And that's before we discuss courses, items, edits to existing characters...

I did say I'm not a big fan of Cloud and there is better characters from FF but he's the face of the series and why he makes the most sense, if you're going to have a Square / Final Fantasy entry.

I want Rathian & Rathalos as fighters maybe even have them as an ice climbers replacement, I want the Ripley & a Xenomorph, I want Morph, Doc from back to the future and everything mentioned in this video.

I hear what you're all saying.

But

"More things" is better than "Fewer things". You don't have to eat things you don't like at an all you can eat buffet. With the exception of: Fire Emblem characters, Sonic's friends.

Well technically *pushes glasses up nose*:

The point is, once they've put in all my ten suggestions, K. Rool, Absol, Mega-Absol (not a clone), Grackler, Masofdas, and the Nintendo Switch as playable characters, there won't be time/room for any others.  So we'd best all just accept that these are the best choices.

Balladeer wrote:

[spoiler="Well technically *pushes glasses up nose*"]Masofdas

My final SMASH is preaching about the church of Kojima, dressed as Del Toro, shouting Wa Wii Wu We Wo due to the lack of Waluigi in SMASH.


I was thinking about the 3rd parties last night and I'm thinking more along the lines of companies that should be represented not games:

Capcom should have one which is Mega Man due to the lineage of NES.

Namco should get one which is Pac-Man as he's their mascot and he has a historic place in gaming.

Square Enix should maybe not Cloud but Final Fantasy is the biggest series from them and started on the NES.

SEGA should have Sonic due to the whole Console War and the historic significance of the character.

Konami now I'm not sure who but I do think back to Konami on the NES and of course Ultra but much like Cloud, I don't know if Snake is the best fit and Konami own Bomberman which to me fits better then Snake but he's more of a Hudson character.

Ubisoft, the only company outside Japan I think could get a spot as Ubisoft do have this relationship with Nintendo and sure it's not always been the best but they have had ago unlike an Activision with Rayman fitting in rather well.

Oh oh oh another that should be in it is Jason Statham.

I object to this on grounds of hair. An average Nintendo mammalian character has more hair. Wouldn’t fit.

He has the legacy going for him though.

I don't think it would be much of a stretch to say that Smash Bros. is my favourite Nintendo series of all time. It could very well be my most played game of all time - I've sunk over 500 hours into the 3DS version trying to be as good as I can be with each character on the roster. I love it as a chaotic multiplayer party fighting game with items, limbs and swords flying everywhere. I love it with items off as a platform fighting game with no focus on execution (outside of Ryu) and a bigger emphasis on spacing and movement. I love it for being a love letter to Nintendo and in recent years to Japanese gaming as a whole with representatives from Capcom, Konami and Namco showing up. And because of how much I love this game series, I trust that we're going to get a cracking roster. I like the cast in Smash 4, but I'm going to fully embrace any changes we get to the roster. I know Sakurai and the gang will nail it.

Drunkalilly wrote:

Smash Brothers is the Ready Player One of Nintendo franchises.

Hard disagree with this statement. I'd say Smash is more akin to The Avengers. I get the same thrill in seeing Spidey chatting with Starlord as I do seeing Fox smashing the hell out of Mario. I think the fervor with which the Internet - and a lot of us, mind - goes mad over Smash demonstrates that it's much more than a shallow "look at this reference! wow!" experience than something like Ready Player One. I can't wait for this game, regardless if it's new or a port.

If I was in charge of the roster, here are the changes I'd make:

DELETE:

Come on down!:

Seen some talk and it was brought up on NVC but what if SMASH on Switch is a game as a service game which keeps people paying for the online and playing SMASH plus could use SMASH to promote other games lets say Metroid Prime 4 is upcoming then Nintendo announces Ridley for SMASH.

What does, Game as a Service, actually mean? It seems to be in vogue as a term for online games these days, but it's a really vague phrase that often seems to be used in lieu of talking about lame practices like microtransactions or lot boxes.

They compared to Overwatch, as in we would get a roster of fighters then new ones would continue to drop along with stages and Nintendo would build on it for basically the end of the Switch.

Most games as service games do have those possibly negative things, where on NVC they thought that in Nintendo's case it would be used to get people to pay for online and I guess could sell costumes for Mii's like in SMASH4.

Nah I wouldn't like that at all, just give me a properly finished game and stick to doing the dlc they've been getting so right with their recent online focused games.

I'm with Jas on that one - they've shown before that they'll use DLC for promoting an upcoming title like you're suggesting Mas when they brought out Corrin, and I'd much prefer they kept it that way rather drip-releasing a roster half the size of Smash 4's.

Sure it's just a thought and seen a few talks about it not just on NVC as Evolving Games (What BAFTA are calling Games as Service) is popular and seems most want to get in on the act with Rainbow Six and Overwatch being the standouts.

With SMASH being the most logical game from Nintendo that would suit the model and Splatoon has shown that Nintendo can do that in a way.

I don't think it works with fighting games. SFV tried a similar model and you can see it's not been well received. A more traditional DLC model works perfectly for fighters and Smash should stay on that path.

Might it have worked had there been more to SFV at launch? I’m not suggesting that Smash should go that way - more genuine curiosity.

I was going to say, I don't think the character dlc model was the issue as much as a sparse game with server issues that people had packed in long before the dlc started dropping.

Also not sure comparing those models to Siege is fair, Siege follows the same model that SFV did and I think at this stage in the games life it's kind of a detriment as it's putting me off going back to it.

SMASH could easily launch with 30+ characters and 15 stages with most modes but Nintendo supports the game with free characters and stages for the foreseeable future.

Bloody hate the idea of Games As Service in general, especially with games where the character you choose makes a difference.  One of the reasons why I never picked up ARMS.  It's partly a principle matter, but it's mostly just that I like having everything out of the box and playing through it in my own time.  

JayMoyles wrote:

I don't think it would be much of a stretch to say that Smash Bros. is my favourite Nintendo series of all time. It could very well be my most played game of all time - I've sunk over 500 hours into the 3DS version trying to be as good as I can be with each character on the roster. I love it as a chaotic multiplayer party fighting game with items, limbs and swords flying everywhere. I love it with items off as a platform fighting game with no focus on execution (outside of Ryu) and a bigger emphasis on spacing and movement. I love it for being a love letter to Nintendo and in recent years to Japanese gaming as a whole with representatives from Capcom, Konami and Namco showing up. And because of how much I love this game series, I trust that we're going to get a cracking roster. I like the cast in Smash 4, but I'm going to fully embrace any changes we get to the roster. I know Sakurai and the gang will nail it.

Drunkalilly wrote:

Smash Brothers is the Ready Player One of Nintendo franchises.

Hard disagree with this statement. I'd say Smash is more akin to The Avengers. I get the same thrill in seeing Spidey chatting with Starlord as I do seeing Fox smashing the hell out of Mario. I think the fervor with which the Internet - and a lot of us, mind - goes mad over Smash demonstrates that it's much more than a shallow "look at this reference! wow!" experience than something like Ready Player One. I can't wait for this game, regardless if it's new or a port.

I bloody love all of this. Not sure it's my favourite franchise, but it's certainly up there.  No MH characters until Nintendo machines get World though.