pezus said:
So the quality of the character is determined by the most recent game he's in? Like if we look at Mario after Mario Party comes out we can say he's not iconic because Mario Party was less than stellar? Lol, that is just ridiculous. Like I said, if they had only characters in mega-popular franchises they wouldn't have enough for a big fighting game. So, just like Nintendo they populate it with less popular characters that are still very recognizable by the respective fanbases. (for example, I had no idea who Ness or the Pikmin dude etc. were when I first played Smash). |
No, the quality is determined by their popularity and God of War Ascension showed that Kratos isn't as popular as he used to be. The same can be applied to Ratchet and Clank. Sly was never popular to begin with.
Mario games are affected by it too. Super Mario 3D World is the worst selling 3D mario of all time. That means that Mario is losing popularity. the thing is Mario had 30 years to build it's popularity and "iconic" status. Characters like Ratchet or Kratos still have ways to go in that regard so it's hard to call them "iconic". They can be considered "iconic" but they could have used other characters like Spyro or Crash as they are way more "iconic".
I am not talking about filling the game with big names but they could have selected better characters to make the roster. Spyro and Crash are way more suited to represent the Playstation brand than the poor choices that where chosen in the end.
"I've Underestimated the Horse Power from Mario Kart 8, I'll Never Doubt the WiiU's Engine Again"







