Smash came out 1st in January 1999. PS will come out 1st in Nov 2012. So 3 months. As I said people who did not play Nintendo probably only knew Mario.

My posts are pertaining to the topic at hand of course...

Nobody's suggesting that they're bad because they're new. This is generally a play on the old complaint that Sony has not cultivated enduring characters whose legacy has really held out for more than a generation. Which there is some validity to, as Sony could likely have more than one megahit franchise by now if they had cultivated some of the compelling stuff they had put together in the PS1 era. Or even in the PS2 era. Where's Dark Cloud 3?

And Fat Princess doesn't fit because she is more a MacGuffin instead of an actual character. Granted, Peach was a bit of a MacGuffin before she rolled out into the Mario Kart games (or Mario RPG), but she had at least something of a record of doing stuff before Melee. Fat Princess just... gets fat.

I honestly have no idea what the three months you're talking to refers to.

Unless wikipedia is wrong (which it is sometimes). Smash came out in Japan in January 1999. Pokemon came out sep 30 1998 (basically oct) in NA then 3 months later smash is out. So my original dispute was it would be improbable for pokemon to reach 30 mill before smash came out when 12m of its 30m came from NA (which only had 3 months to buy).

Why exactly are you using the Japanese launch date for Smash with the English release date for Pokemon?

Weezy man. You're a Nintendo fan. How many of those characters are actually known by the mainstream? I doubt that many would even be able to identify Samus.

Because Japan launch for Smash was its 1st launch, going by that people did not know the chars released before smash released. If PS released a few months ago in Japan then the whole character recognition thing would not work now, going by my original argument many posts ago.

Of that list I only knew Mario, Donkey Kong and Pikachu before I signed up to VGC. I never knew Mario had a gay lover, I never had a clue about Legend of Zelda other than the name of the franchise, I'd never heard of Metroid, I only knew of Pikachu from the cartoon series my kids watched, I didn't even know Pokemon was a game for a long time. I still don't know where Captain Falcon, Fox McCloud and Ness come from.

From the PS All-Stars roster published to date only Parapa the Rapper is an unknown to me.

It is a laughable roster, I can see why this game will bomb. No Lara Croft, Solid Snake, Crash Bandicoot, Spyro, Ezio, Cloud etc

But they can give us Big Daddy, an Evil version of Cole, Fat Princess from a crappy PSN game, Nariko who had one game then became irrelevant, a monkey from Ape Escape and a Toro that nobody knows.

Such a long discussion about which roster is more recognizable even though the answer is simple: Smash Bros has a more recognizable roster simply because the characters were featured in more popular games. There have been, what - 50 million Pokemon games sold this generation? And roughly 50 million mainline Mario games. Go out there and ask a person if they know Super Mario or Pokemon they'll all say yes (unless they lived under a really, really huge rock for the last 20 years. A rock the size of the moon).

I think having some universally appealing characters in a game like PSABR or Smash is enough to make people say the roster is great. It's a matter of perception.