Snoorlax said:
NightlyPoe said:
It's not a cliche, it's a reason. And the reason doesn't go away with time. I mean, the Chicago Bulls stubbornly refuse to give me a contract to be their center because I'm short. They've known it for ages, but that doesn't make it a cliche. I'd prefer to keep the roster to video game characters. Expanding to 3rd party was fine because it just felt like all the more of an all-star event.
I mean, a part of mean wants the Hulk to be in the game (because... get it?), but opening up Smash to everything just makes it too big.
|
AngryLittleAlchemist pretty much already told you most of what i wanted to say. But here is one somewhat hypocritical point you made it was initially just Nintendo characters then they expanded to 3rd party which you're okay with. It doesn't matter if it feels more all star or not, that's not what it originally was and honestly Goku joining the game wouldn't change anything about Smash as a game.
Simpleton said:
Smash never excluded third party characters. The only reasons Snake and Sonic didn't make it into Melee was due to time. Smash 4 just expanded on the third parties as much as the rest of the roster was expanded.
On the other hand, the fact that characters need to originate from video games has always been a rule.
|
I think this has always been an unwritten rule that the fans take way too serious even more than Nintendo themselves, much like the Zelda timeline.
Nobody would've asked for Solid Snake back then despite him being a videogame character because most people predicted he wouldn't fit in Smash and he's from an M rated series. Nintendo, however, decided to add Snake themselves and changed fans' perception of who or what can join Smash... Pretty much anyone. With Smash 4 we were given the oportunity to vote for any character and Bayonetta, a third party highly sexualized character, (supposedly) won the ballot.
I know that Sakurai discussed the topic sometime ago but Goku would actually be way more fitting than both Snake and Bayonetta in Smash not to mention how he destroys both of them in popularity despite not being a videogame character.
Dravenet7 said:
I don't have a lot of time on my hands but I will at least applaud you for readily and consistently debating others on the topic without getting letting it get too crazy. With that said, a lot of your points which has been made, by a lot of people are pretty much wrong. The R.O.B + what smash is supposed to be thing especially, but I'll detail that later if I have time.
Anyway Goku is not a video game character is more than an argument or reason, it is a fact. If you find a fact cliché well you do you. I'll go beyond that reason (except in 3-4 points you made that need (I'll post put an asterisk (*) there )
1 - Being the most requested has never been good enough to get into Smash (including the Smash ballot)
2 - Goku's anime aesthetic fits perfectly in Smash <> not really; ultimately this is just differing opinions though.
3* - Moot point. Almost all non-collabs are based on source manga material with either fluff elements or experiences which are considered non canon. non canon things are important to note because they generally don't matter towards the story of DB, where even with Nintendo games, silly spinoffs and junk are actually kept in their story. Fluff in DB is irrelevant fluff that ultimately is never carried over. The reason that the 90 games using manga adaption is because it is literally reusing the same story over and over and well you get the point. I'm not going to much further on this because I assume you get the gist.
4 * See previous
5 - This somewhat contradicts your of bringing up 90+ games. Also this is irrelevant, as the only character brought due to the fact that he was a fighting game character was Ryu, the most iconic fighting game character of all time.
6 - I don't really want to debate this point. You can have it.
7 - *******************************************************************
Now why is it ok for you to use the fact that he is not a video game character as a valid reason, but when others do it in contrast its somehow cliché? Reason is completely null on your part, but it gives me an opportunity to use to say this for your final point:
8 - * I would want a video game character, which Goku is not.
|
Finally someone who's actually open for a debate.
1 - According to the Smash Ballot, Bayonetta won with most votes. That's one but even before Smash 4 there were Ballots going on in Japan only which made Nintendo include both Marth and Roy late in development of Melee because of their popularity and were actually going to stay Japan exlcusive... So being the most requested can be good enough to convince Nintendo especially if were talking about 3rd party characters which are not too problematic and unrealistic to make possible.
2 - I think he fits better than both Snake and Bayonetta both of which aim for a realistic aesthetic whereas Goku has always been stylized anime or cell shaded much like most Nintendo characters.
3 - Yes, they mostly just retell the same story of the manga however if you've played any of the modern Dragon Ball Z games released between 2000 - 2018 they are full of what if's and their own storylines which kept the interest in the series healthy and that's the key here. It's not the story but DBZ's crazy popularity that kept pushing out more games and kept the series alive after it long ended in '97. The interest in DBZ has never slowed down that's why over 90 games have been made because it's a beast of a series and actually has a list of great games.
4 - *sees previous*
5 - Sure, not all of his games were competitive fighting games but let's be real here the DBZ games that took off here in the West were Budokai and Tenkaichi which pumped out sequels every year. In Japan it was the Butouden series that pushed the DBZ fighting game genre and today we have Xenoverse and FighterZ both fighting games so it's legacy in fighting games have been around for a long time. DBZ games = Fighting games.
6 - fair enough
7 - Because if we're having a discussion about why a character should or should not join Smash you're going to have to back up your opinion with some good arguments which "not a videogame character" while in Goku's case a FACT, it's simply a weak and overplayed argument for the reasons that i've already stated.
-He's one of the most requested characters.
-He's been in over 90 video games.
-Rob is not a videogame character, he isn't.
BESIDES I should add that i'm not using this as a reason for him to join but to acknowledge the fact that he did not originate in videogames and this should actually be seen as an achievement for Smash Bros, Nintendo and anybody involved because Goku is not just "some anime guy" he's a national icon and a cultural and global phenomenom.
8 - Which is okay. Heck I'm still waiting for the day Krystal joins Smash!
Hynad said:
So originally, the Smash series was to be a brawler starring an all-star cast of Nintendo characters.
But with Brawl, they introduced guest characters from non-Nintendo IPs.
So I guess all the games since Brawl haven't been real Smash games. Since they don't follow the original intent for the series.
|
That's exactly how she wrote and Smash fans have been okay with this.
AngryLittleAlchemist said:
I honestly don't care that much. I'm mostly participating because I am amazed people can care so much. I'm usually all for all-out enthusiasm and excitement for video games of any kind, even if it means things get heated and debates start to unfold. But in this case, I just can't help but see the thread and question why people are still arguing? The only substantive arguments for Goku not being in Smash have been "it's a rule! it's a rule! he can't be in!", just like the only substantive arguments I see for him being in is "but he's in games! he's in games!" I guess you could say that I'm a hypocrite as I have contributed to the post count of the thread, but I've only done so because I see no reason why I should specifically rule out a character that, to someone who has no experience with Dragon Ball Z, seems to fit Smash pretty well. In cases like that, I usually defend the right for people to dream of a character being added, but I guess I am getting more disillusioned to it, since people would rather argue over it than list reasons why it would be cool. I just don't see the reason why Smash in particular needs to be fought about, in less than 6 months we will probably know all the characters in the game, and all of this will seem pointless. Granted, everything seems pointless in time, but this in particular is not up to us at all. It's up to the developers.
|
It is up to the fans if they can vote.
Bejito1983 said:
Smash Bros. is made to celebrate video games industry not video games as a derived product. If there is Goku, why not Naruto, Ichigo, Sailor Moon or Ken from Hokuto no Ken? Why just fictional characters? Why not Kobe Bryant from Kobe Bryant in NBA courtside? Why not Lionel Messi, who was in 50 games+? Why not John Madden?
|
Because Goku (or rather the Dragon Ball series') is the only character that can single handedly buy out most of Nintendo's library of IP's except for a few like Mario and Pokemon.
HoangNhatAnh said:
After Dragon Ball Super, many people will choose Vegeta or No.17 over Goku for sure
|
Vegeta has a small chance 17? Nahh
|
