By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - CONTROVERSIAL OPINION: Characters to Remove and Replace in The Next Smash Bros.

All the Fire Emblem ones except for Marth.



Around the Network
Kakadu18 said:
burninmylight said:

How well did that go for Street Fighter 3, Soul Calibur 5 and Mortal Kombat 10?

Mortal Kombat X sold 11mil copies, second best selling game in the franchise after MK11. Seems like it worked out for that game. It obviously didn't for the others.

I knew that was going to be the reply. Keep in mind that Netherealm Studios went right back in the other direction for MK11 by leaning heavily on a bunch of the classic characters for that game's story mode, even dropping two characters that were heavily featured in MK10's story mode from the base game entirely (the archer kid and Kenshi's son).



Azzanation said:

All the Fire Emblem ones except for Marth.

Not even Robin and the one from Three Houses? They're at least unique.



burninmylight said:
Azzanation said:

All the Fire Emblem ones except for Marth.

Not even Robin and the one from Three Houses? They're at least unique.

If they had to keep a second Fire Emblem character than Robin can stay for sure.



Azzanation said:
burninmylight said:

Not even Robin and the one from Three Houses? They're at least unique.

If they had to keep a second Fire Emblem character than Robin can stay for sure.

I think Byleth should stay since Three Houses is the best selling in the series.



Around the Network
PAOerfulone said:

Not including Echos, the final roster size for Smash Ultimate including DLC is 82.

I'd say you could cut that size in half and have a roster of 41, maybe 45-50. So somewhere between Brawl and 4's roster size, and still have a kick as Smash Bros. game with a lot of content and is much better balanced. All the effort and resources that would have gone into another character can now go into making another fighting mode, or more music tracks, or a single-player campaign that takes the best of Melee's Adventure Mode and Brawl's Subspace Emissary to give us something really awesome.

But regarding the characters and the roster specifically. Start with the original 12 and then go from there.

Edit: Looking at the roster and writing them down on an Excel list + doing some brainstorming... I think they could realistically cut Ultimate's roster down to at least 41 and then have 9 newcomers that haven't been in a Smash game before to take them up to 50 along with the new and different modes so that the game feels different and unique enough to stand on its own. And that's without counting the DLC they would inevitably do to add more fighters and keep interest going.

A lot of the 41 vets would have to be re-tooled a lot to justifying cutting half the roster. It takes a lot of work regardless but bringing back 41 veterans mostly unchanged and only 9 newcomers sounds very risky. 



Lifetime Sales Predictions 

Switch: 156 million (was 73, then 96, then 113 million, then 125 million, then 144 million, then 151 million)

PS5: 115 million (was 105 million) Xbox Series S/X: 48 million (was 60 million, then 67 million, then 57 million)

PS4: 120 mil (was 100 then 130 million, then 122 million) Xbox One: 51 mil (was 50 then 55 mil)

3DS: 75.5 mil (was 73, then 77 million)

"Let go your earthly tether, enter the void, empty and become wind." - Guru Laghima

Scizor would be sweet as fuck.

I love everything about this thread.



burninmylight said:
Slownenberg said:

Some of those characters the OP wants to cut are the coolest characters. Terrible idea to cut the coolest 3rd party characters.

I think next Smash should be something entirely different. No idea what that would be, but it just seems like it'd be weird to release another Smash in the exact same style after we already got Ultimate which feels impossible to top, and just continuing to add more characters doesn't seem like a good idea either.

Maybe on Switch 2 re-release Ultimate with updated graphics and all the DLC included - that'd be an easy way to sell 10 mil copies without much effort, but then start a whole new style of Smash with a new game. As Dulfite said, a new phase of Smash. But i don't know what direction that should take.

Hell, a crazy idea is to just incorporate Smash into Nintendo's Online Service as the final Smash game they ever make. It would make their online service a must have premier service and they could just keep adding characters, levels, story modes, etc to the game over time, without needing to keep trying to up the ante each generation compared with the previous game. It could be an ever-expanding Smash game, and throw in the seasons concept to keep it fresh every 6 months or something. I actually would like this more than them trying to reinvent the franchise and take it away from what we all love, or continuing to trying to just redo what they've already done but with more characters every gen.

As nice as that would be, never going to happen without either the price of the game being incorporated into a NSO subscription or it becoming another price tier. I mean, why make a great PR move and enrich the value of your online service when you can squeeze more money out of your customer's pockets?

This is the same company that thought it was a good idea to more than double the price of its subscription service to get access to poor emulations of a handful of 20-30 year old games.

yeah but I just don't see where they go from here other than the Smash Online concept.

Cuz otherwise the options are basically the totally change up the gameplay to give us something fresh, but then we don't have the Smash everyone loves, so at best they could just re-release Ultimate, as I mentioned, but they would get enormous criticism for that.

Or just keep doing the same thing we've always gotten, except after Ultimate there doesn't even seem to be a point to doing that cuz we literally already have the ultimate version of the Smash formula.

Or the third option is as some people are suggesting go back to basics and limit the content (characters/stages) but that would essentially be a downgrade and Nintendo would get torched for that.

The only non-online thing I could see being even remotely well received is if they basically gave us the same Smash Ultimate multiplayer but then vastly expanded the 'story mode', to something more like a huge action adventure game, but didn't they basically do that with Melee (if I'm remembering correctly) though on a smaller scale, so this could just be much larger and better I guess, worthy of a standalone game in itself. I dunno. Just feels like the series is going to be stuck between a rock and a hard place after Ultimate - it'll feel stale if it's the same, but if they change the gameplay everyone is going to miss the classic formula, and even if the story mode is made into a full on action adventure game it'll still just feel like the same thing over again but with a more fleshed out story mode, which they try to do every time anyway, but which might pass as an acceptable update one more time but then they'd really be stuck in this same situation after the next Smash.

A regularly updated Smash Online is the way out as I see it. Of course as you state, Nintendo is not one for giving premium services on their online content. But this could be a huge step to change that...maybe they will finally get really serious about Online, they are at least talking about online these days like they want to make improvements and invest a bunch of resorces to make it better. Like on Switch 2, have the whole retro games service (hopefully by that time NES, SNES, N64, Genesis, GB, GBA will all be on it, hell maybe even GC if I'm getting real wishful thinking) plus online play and cloud saves and all that jazz in a single tiered subscription for $60/year and with it Smash Online which comes out at launch. Wishful thinking perhaps, but that's all I can think of for where Smash should go from here.



CaptainExplosion said:




You want the furry bait that is ties directly into Star Fox's failure by turning it into the Nintendo's parallel to the Sonic IP? Hell naw.



CaptainExplosion said:
burninmylight said:

You want the furry bait that is ties directly into Star Fox's failure by turning it into the Nintendo's parallel to the Sonic IP? Hell naw.

Lots of people have been begging for her to be in Smash since Brawl, and she'd be a more interesting Star Fox rep than just tweaking Fox's mechanics again, which is the main reason Wolf was added to Brawl. Besides, they let Bayonetta in, and she's nothing but a sex symbol. Just sayin'.

Bayonetta isn't covered in fur and stars in games with good Metacritic scores that know their identity and stick to it. Krystal is a side character from the Sonic universe that somehow stumbled into a dimensional portal into the SF universe, and only serves to get Fox out of his Arwing, the last thing he should be doing in any game with the name Star Fox in it.

Those people wanting her in Smash just want the amiibo to add to their spank bank. They can just settle for a dakimakura and call it a day.