Super Smash Bros. is Done With New Characters

[Sonic Doctor]

I agree with the turning multiple characters into skins. It gives room to bring old characters back, keep the ones we have and maybe add a couple or three more.

...Konami themselves don't have a clue regarding how to handle their stable franchises like Contra or Castlevania.

Konami knows what it is doing with Castlevania. Lords of Shadow was the reboot/breath of fresh air that the series needed.

As much as I love the Castlevania series, with the way things were going before LoS, it wasn't hard to see how the whole series was starting to look a little samey. They may change characters, abilities and weapons, but it always seemed to come down to:

1.)Enter castle.
2.)Kill a few re-skins of old enemies from other iterations, very few new ones.
3.)Kill returning bosses with a couple or so new bosses.
4.)Find Dracula.
5.)Kill Dracula.

I saw the ending of LoS coming a mile away(but not when/setting it took place), but the journey getting there was a blast.

If Symphony of the Night didn't exist, Lords of Shadow would be in my #1 spot on my list of favorite Castlevania games. Basically, they finally brought the series into the 3D realm in a way that didn't suck.

I can't wait for the next game in this reboot story.

 

[jollybarracuda]

I definitely look forward to seeing a more balanced Smash Bros. game. Of course, I know balance has never really been a focus of party games, but why not? If they can make a great party fighting game with balanced characters and a ~35 character selection, I'd say that's sounding pretty awesome; especially if they aim to remove the clone characters (and the concept of having clone characters just being skins sounds extremely awesome).

 

[karloss01]

A nintendo game balanced?


seriously, balance is not on the list when i think Nintendo.

 

[chadachada123]

As long as they keep Toon Link and Lucario, I don't give a damn what they keep or pull or swap.

Mewtwo was distinct enough that it could absolutely be a separate character from Lucario, with a few tweaks at least.

They should also get rid of Pokemon Trainer and just have the three individual Pokemon as their own characters.

For an example of character tweaking to make clone characters control differently, take a look at Project M, an indie mod that gives a bunch of Brawl characters new moves and physics and playstyles. It makes Toon Link play very differently from Link, for one thing, and gives Lucario a new combo system and replaces its counter.

Edit: Oh yeah, "balance"? Coming from the developers that added trips into Brawl specifically to keep it from getting too competitive? Yeah, okay.

 

[Bassik]

Balance?

Ever played the Brawl drinking game?
-4 players, 25 lives. Pick a nice moving level like Mushroomy Kingdom.
-Only items are explosives, containers and smash balls. Lots of them.
-You die, you take a drink.

 

[Elementary - Dear Watson]

To be honest I would just be happier with more relevant and better skins... Not just palette swaps, actual costumes from other games, and maybe some actual new costumes? I'd be happy then... (Sutomisation is key! )

 

[Marter]

Fans aren't on a clock to meet deadlines.
The quality of their work is limited only by their patience (core programming notwithstanding).

Once the ability to make core changes to the gameplay became available, it did not take long for a much more balanced "version" of the game to become available. Sure, it wasn't perfect, but it was much improved and only took a few months once they figured out how to do it.

Games get delayed all the time, and I'm sure if they finished it and decided to push back its release date a couple of months just to work on balancing it, they could do it fairly easily.

 

[Dreamfiller]

For all that is holy; Ridley.

 

[monkey_man]

Or you know, you could stop re-releasing the same game over and over again and come up with a new gameplay or style or something. Then again it's Nintendo, so I strongly doubt that'll happen soon.

Oh goddamnit, I fucking hate comments like this. I'm not saying that Nintendo's games are always developed to make cornerstones of innovation. But seriously, look at the massive creativity in Super Mario Galaxy, Pikmin, Skyward Sword and Smash Bros compared to the CoD series, or any bloody series for that matter. What do you expect Nintendo to do? Make Mario into a third person adventure game? Completely seperating it from its roots. Or make Super Smash Bros into another generic fighter with complicated button combinations?

o_o Dude, it was a sarcastically posted comment, I had no intention of causing anger, it's just that it's getting kinda stale, rereleasing the same game over and over again, surely this will come to an end one day? Just for the sake of sanity? [And I do believe there already have been 3d/third person mario's, and Mario's an adventure game, so what's your point?]

oh dear oh dear. Anyway, I never really liked brawl that much, it's a bit of a clusterf*ck. I just hope it'll be an original one, just for the sake of the internets. I still doubt that though, a change of scenery isn't much of a sequel, more of an add-on if you ask me.
And my comment was directed to all of the cloned games from today, not just Brawl, it was just an example for me to rant about what I believe is wrong with the gaming industry.
This is exactly why I delete most of my posts before actually posting them, they have a tendency to blow up. Captcha: zombie prom, oh great, now we've got that as well. brilliant.

You've really got high hopes for damn sequels don't you. Name five games that have come out the past ten years that are sequels made by the same company that are basically completely different games set in the same universe. And no, Fallout 3 doesn't count because it was made by Bethesda, not Interplay. Go on... do it.

By your logic Half Life 2 should be an add on because hey, it's just a change of scenery and a new story. I mean, they even kept the same shooting mechanic as always and kept the puzzle/FPS gameplay. Same with Mass Effect 2 and 3, and Skyrim. They should all be add-ons because they keep the same gameplay, don't they? Heck, Mass Effect 2 and 3 are in the same storyline! What the fuck were Bioware thinking! I guess we can't even play Assasins Creed 3, or Rome Total War 2 because they're actually making an add on seem like a sequel. What is up with developers these days, really I think we should demand that every single sequel be in a completely different genre with the characters from the first game slapped on! New IPs for that sort of stuff... bah. Heck, why do we even have genres anyway? Doom should of been an add on for Wolfenstein because it's still shooting enemies through maze like levels! I think every single new game should invent their own genre!

That is what you sound like to me.

but that is wrong, Half life 2 plays different from halflife one, and it follows from half life one. It has completely different graphics, updated weapons and enemies. You can't tell me that the storyline is bad. Skyrim also has a completely different graphic style, the story and lore have changed, and a new combat mechanic (dual wielding)
I disaprove of games like brawl, because it's basically the same game. Oh sure, a few differences are made in combat to fine tune it, but it has a flimsy story to connect the heroes you can play as, and it's really not important which character you play as. Same goes for CoD, the single player isn't interesting anymore, it's just who can kill the most idiots with as much yelling as possible. There are some good sequals, say Bioshock, God of War 2 and 3, Rayman 2 and 3 and whatever follows, Killzone 2, Littlebigplanet 2. They feel like new games in a different setting, or an expansion upon the first storyline, so that the universe may be explored more. They are not the same game with 10 new characters. But every game boils down to the original if you say it crudely enough.

Besides, didn't you get the point? I don't like brawl as a game, and I don't want to continue talking about this. I'm not looking to ignite a flamewar on the internet. Again.

 

[Alar]

Bzz-nn-wha-huh-BWAH?!

But... but...! What about Megaman? And all the other various awesome characters they could add? NINTENDO, WHYYYY?! Q_Q

I love it when someone on the development team of a major game actually has no idea why people like their games. As cute as this is, it is also really scary because it is the first sign of a lackluster sequel. So tell me this: if it has the same cast as the wii version, then what the HELL is the point!? Just to use the wiiU controller? Dude... you are setting yourself up for failure before you've even started. Don't pretend that smash bros was ever a complex or serious fighting game that needs to retain a strategic balance. People just played it to pit (insert character here) against (insert character here). That is the entire appeal of your game, you better keep giving us characters, otherwise no one will buy the new versions every time they come out.

And thus we have the fallout of a really misleading article title.

To repeat my post from a page or so back: Sakurai never said there wouldn't be any new characters. He just said that the NUMBER of characters would be similar to that of Brawl: around 35. Under those rules, he could replace the entire roster with 35 new characters and still have those rules apply if he wanted to. There's nothing to be worried about.

In that case there's no real problem. I don't mind dropping a Falco/Wolf and a Lucas to get three new characters. Toon Link could also probably go.

 

[TWEWYFan]

Well there goes one of my favorite things about a new Smash Brothers game. I can't help but feel that they've more or less missed the point. It's a sequel to a mascot fighter, getting to see and play new characters is part of the fun!

 

[TheProfessor234]

I didn't realize Super Smash was about balance....
Maybe this is a prelude that Nintendo is going to make Super Smash into a real fighting game? hah
In any case, I would be up for having skins to use on characters that don't actually get made.

 

[ToastiestZombie]

Or you know, you could stop re-releasing the same game over and over again and come up with a new gameplay or style or something. Then again it's Nintendo, so I strongly doubt that'll happen soon.

Oh goddamnit, I fucking hate comments like this. I'm not saying that Nintendo's games are always developed to make cornerstones of innovation. But seriously, look at the massive creativity in Super Mario Galaxy, Pikmin, Skyward Sword and Smash Bros compared to the CoD series, or any bloody series for that matter. What do you expect Nintendo to do? Make Mario into a third person adventure game? Completely seperating it from its roots. Or make Super Smash Bros into another generic fighter with complicated button combinations?

o_o Dude, it was a sarcastically posted comment, I had no intention of causing anger, it's just that it's getting kinda stale, rereleasing the same game over and over again, surely this will come to an end one day? Just for the sake of sanity? [And I do believe there already have been 3d/third person mario's, and Mario's an adventure game, so what's your point?]

oh dear oh dear. Anyway, I never really liked brawl that much, it's a bit of a clusterf*ck. I just hope it'll be an original one, just for the sake of the internets. I still doubt that though, a change of scenery isn't much of a sequel, more of an add-on if you ask me.
And my comment was directed to all of the cloned games from today, not just Brawl, it was just an example for me to rant about what I believe is wrong with the gaming industry.
This is exactly why I delete most of my posts before actually posting them, they have a tendency to blow up. Captcha: zombie prom, oh great, now we've got that as well. brilliant.

You've really got high hopes for damn sequels don't you. Name five games that have come out the past ten years that are sequels made by the same company that are basically completely different games set in the same universe. And no, Fallout 3 doesn't count because it was made by Bethesda, not Interplay. Go on... do it.

By your logic Half Life 2 should be an add on because hey, it's just a change of scenery and a new story. I mean, they even kept the same shooting mechanic as always and kept the puzzle/FPS gameplay. Same with Mass Effect 2 and 3, and Skyrim. They should all be add-ons because they keep the same gameplay, don't they? Heck, Mass Effect 2 and 3 are in the same storyline! What the fuck were Bioware thinking! I guess we can't even play Assasins Creed 3, or Rome Total War 2 because they're actually making an add on seem like a sequel. What is up with developers these days, really I think we should demand that every single sequel be in a completely different genre with the characters from the first game slapped on! New IPs for that sort of stuff... bah. Heck, why do we even have genres anyway? Doom should of been an add on for Wolfenstein because it's still shooting enemies through maze like levels! I think every single new game should invent their own genre!

That is what you sound like to me.

but that is wrong, Half life 2 plays different from halflife one, and it follows from half life one. It has completely different graphics, updated weapons and enemies. You can't tell me that the storyline is bad. Skyrim also has a completely different graphic style, the story and lore have changed, and a new combat mechanic (dual wielding)
I disaprove of games like brawl, because it's basically the same game. Oh sure, a few differences are made in combat to fine tune it, but it has a flimsy story to connect the heroes you can play as, and it's really not important which character you play as. Same goes for CoD, the single player isn't interesting anymore, it's just who can kill the most idiots with as much yelling as possible. There are some good sequals, say Bioshock, God of War 2 and 3, Rayman 2 and 3 and whatever follows, Killzone 2, Littlebigplanet 2. They feel like new games in a different setting, or an expansion upon the first storyline, so that the universe may be explored more. They are not the same game with 10 new characters. But every game boils down to the original if you say it crudely enough.

Besides, didn't you get the point? I don't like brawl as a game, and I don't want to continue talking about this. I'm not looking to ignite a flamewar on the internet. Again.

Here's a screenshot from Melee:

Spoiler

Here's a screenshot from Brawl:

Spoiler

They look very, very different.
Also, how the fuck does Half Life 2 play any different to Half Life? They're both games where you shoot things with various guns, and occasionaly solve puzzles and do a bit of platforming. Also, have you EVER played any fucking fighting game? You do know how hard it is to make big changes in them? Street Fighter 2 was basically Street Fighter 1 with a lot more new characters. Same with the new Mortal Kombat, it plays exactly like the old ones with a new lick of paint. What about Marvel vs Capcom 3? What did they add? Three played tag team battles, and...
Smash Bros added the Subspace Emmisary, a pretty damn good story mode. It added online for the first time, a ton more characters, a ton more challenges and a fucking level creator. Skyrim was basically Oblivion, streamlined, with a new engine because the old one was dead and with dual wielding.

Also, look at Super Mario Sunshine:

Spoiler

A game about cleaning shit with a water pump that's also used for platforming. Set on an island filled with tropical creatures, a very sunny game.

Compared to Super Mario Galaxy:

Spoiler

A game which was more of a traditional 3D platformer, but it was set in SPACE for gods sake. Meaning planets with their own gravity, something I'm pretty sure no platformers had done before. Also, it's got a much less cell shaded, more realistic and darker art style compared to Sunshine. Did I mention that it's set in SPACE! What other game series has been able to say that they changed from a tropical island to space!

Now, compare God of War 1

Spoiler

To God of War 2:

Spoiler

There's basically no difference, I honestly couldn't see it. Also from what I've heard it has the exact same gameplay with a new story, maybe a few new moves. How is it that a sequel that changes the setting from a tropical island to SPACE bad? When a sequel that stays in the same time period, same character, same gameplay, quite a lot of the same enemies and just a continuation on a story good?

I'm thinking you might just have a bias against Nintendo, because really when you can come up to me with a straight face and tell me that Bioshock 2 is a better sequel with more new features than Brawl that just paints you in that light.

 

[monkey_man]

Here's a screenshot from Melee:

Spoiler

Here's a screenshot from Brawl:

Spoiler

They look very, very different.
Also, how the fuck does Half Life 2 play any different to Half Life? They're both games where you shoot things with various guns, and occasionaly solve puzzles and do a bit of platforming. Also, have you EVER played any fucking fighting game? You do know how hard it is to make big changes in them? Street Fighter 2 was basically Street Fighter 1 with a lot more new characters. Same with the new Mortal Kombat, it plays exactly like the old ones with a new lick of paint. What about Marvel vs Capcom 3? What did they add? Three played tag team battles, and...
Smash Bros added the Subspace Emmisary, a pretty damn good story mode. It added online for the first time, a ton more characters, a ton more challenges and a fucking level creator. Skyrim was basically Oblivion, streamlined, with a new engine because the old one was dead and with dual wielding.

Also, look at Super Mario Sunshine:

Spoiler

A game about cleaning shit with a water pump that's also used for platforming. Set on an island filled with tropical creatures, a very sunny game.

Compared to Super Mario Galaxy:

Spoiler

A game which was more of a traditional 3D platformer, but it was set in SPACE for gods sake. Meaning planets with their own gravity, something I'm pretty sure no platformers had done before. Also, it's got a much less cell shaded, more realistic and darker art style compared to Sunshine. Did I mention that it's set in SPACE! What other game series has been able to say that they changed from a tropical island to space!

Now, compare God of War 1

Spoiler

To God of War 2:

Spoiler

There's basically no difference, I honestly couldn't see it. Also from what I've heard it has the exact same gameplay with a new story, maybe a few new moves. How is it that a sequel that changes the setting from a tropical island to SPACE bad? When a sequel that stays in the same time period, same character, same gameplay, quite a lot of the same enemies and just a continuation on a story good?

I'm thinking you might just have a bias against Nintendo, because really when you can come up to me with a straight face and tell me that Bioshock 2 is a better sequel with more new features than Brawl that just paints you in that light.

[Monkey man apologizes for the derailment to OP, and regrets having gone so far into this. To the bloke I'm yelling at, I say just drop it, see the reasons below.]

Spoiler

well fine I have a bias against nintendo. it's shit. Happy now? I DID NOT WANT TO START A FLAMEWAR. but if you insist. You've taken 2 completely different Mario games altogether, another setting and gameplay. Mario in space and mario watering the plants. This is an example of two different games, but not a sequel. MARIO GALAXY 2 could be considered a sequel, I wouldn't know I never played it.

God of war 2 follows it's predecessor with indeed a very similar game, but it does change things, important things, story, gameplay moves and more story. It's a similar but nut identical game.

Half life 2 plays very different from half life 1. The setting and atmosphere is different. In 1 you are a scientist desperate to survive, in halflife 2 you lead the resistance to fight te aliens. IF YOU TAKE ANY GAME AND SAY: YOU ARE X DOING Y, all the games sound boring. It's the depth and story that makes a game interesting, and the gameplay that keeps it engaging.

IN MY OPINION Brawl is basically a plotless brawler(hence the name) and I don't like the premiss of having one of those being blurted out every other year, same goes for Call of Duty and the other clones. They are too identical to be called a sequel, and I think everyone who purchases them is dumb. And I also fall under that category, to a certain extent. But that doesn't mean it's bad, there's still entertainment value in the bloody game, I just disagree with the fashion it's come out. As a 60$ sequel instead of a 20$ expansion. BECAUSE IT ISN'T A PROPER SEQUEL!.

And back to Bioshock, it replaces the main character to discover what has happened what happened to Rapture after Jack left. It's gone to shit even more, and now a big badass Daddy must try and find his Little Sister, it's a new concept within the limit of the old game.
A sequel uses the old game AS A STEPPING STONE, so that it can recreate the experience WHILE STILL DOING SOMETHING NEW FOR IT. I don't think a fightergame with half the cast changed makes any difference, as the Gameplay is IDENTICAL. Same buttons same tactics, and only slightly different outcomes. There is nothing to explore, there is just a shitheap of items to collect, and then you and your mates can replay the same game again.

AND NOW PLEASE. CAN WE DROP THIS?! I DIDN'T WANT TO START A FLAMEWAR. Because fanboys cannot be reasoned with, and nor can I. Because I am a fanboy as well, and this sh*t isn't going anywhere anytime soon. Never. We will never agree just because we cannot see each others standpoint clearly. If you quote me again I will ignore it. Just no. DROP IT!

I am terribly sorry for this derailment, and I hope it will not happen again. so OP, good luck with the thread, I'm outta here

 

[lord.jeff]

This is kind of dumb, as other have said, They themselves don't want Smash Bros. to be a serious competitive fighter, but all of a sudden balance is now there concern. The majority of fans could care less for balance they just want more characters, this is honestly not a very smart move on their part.

I also have to agree with the others that the clone characters like falco and Wolf should just be an alternate skin with different voices for the characters there based off. Of course not for Ganon, heshould be given a new moveset entirely. This would leave room for a few new characters(and Mewtwo's return).

How is balance not important to a party game? I'm pretty sure having it so everyone just plays Metaknight to get the best chance at winning causing less use of other characters and players picking someone not based on style or favorite series but based on who's best isn't good, also a lack of balance hurts new players as they can end up with a character that's nerfed by comparison.

I think adding a few more characters would be good but the days of near doubling the roaster are over, which if they do actually put more work into existing characters instead of just using this as an excuse to be lazy but non of us will know that till the game comes out. Seriously if they kept expending the roaster at this rate we'd have over a hundred characters in two consoles and probably two hundred in the next, which I find a little to much myself.

 

[The Towel Boy]

Talk of Mega Man has been said, strangely enough, keep Lucario and I would be happy.

 

[Innegativeion]

Wow this is really disappointing.

Isn't the whole appeal of smash bros. duking it out with your favorite Nintendo characters? Wasn't half the appeal of the sequels seeing more and more outrageous machups (IKE VERSUS DEDEDE, MATCH OF THE CENTURY YOU'VE ALL BEEN WAITING FOR) this is a serious 'what the hell are they thinking' for me.

I mean, I hate clones as much as the next guy, but I was really excited to see if metroid would finally get more than ONE representative, or if a female pokemon trainer with 3 new pokemon would be introduced, or if Girahim would be playable, or if we'd see any new franchises like xenoblade or some such.

Remember, nintendo, you have to worry about SELLING the game and not just how it plays, although the latter is of course extremely important. New characters sell games. I don't feel like the same game with a level of balance that should have been included originally, plus a new coat of paint could possibly be worth 50+$.

Sakurai MUST be exaggerating here, they HAVE to have new characters. Or at least, I sincerely hope they recieve enough feedback for the them to realize "my god this is a really stupid idea."

Hey, it worked to get Sonic in the roster.

For all that is holy; Ridley.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE

He's only as big as bowser's fat ass! Samus is so lonely as the only metroid representative. Metroid is a HUGE franchise. Bigger than effing' fire emblem, and bigger than even starfox! (Three representatives with basically the same movesets? COME ON!)

 

[TastyCarcass]

Spoiler

A game which was more of a traditional 3D platformer, but it was set in SPACE for gods sake. Meaning planets with their own gravity, something I'm pretty sure no platformers had done before.

Spoiler

Sonic Adventure 2 did it.

He's only as big as bowser's fat ass! Samus is so lonely as the only metroid representative. Metroid is a HUGE franchise. Bigger than effing' fire emblem, and bigger than even starfox! (Three representatives with basically the same movesets? COME ON!)

Metroid has never really had a huge roster of characters, nor was it ever about them. It seemed more to be about a lonely and at times clostrophic atmosphere. In my opinion it makes absolute sense for her to be the only character from Metroid, she does work alone after all. However I do hope for a Fusion skin or skins that make her technically other characters, an SA-X skin or Metroid Prime Dark Samus skin.

Ridley is simply too big. I know he was small in the original metroid, but he would just look silly if they made him that small. His wingspan is far too large. I'd imagine that if a character can't move through the danger tunnel in the middle of Hyrule temple without clipping like a madman they won't include him.

A space pirate should probably be included though, probably Weavil as he is the only one we've who's actually been given character as far as I'm aware.


Moving on...



I for one am massively looking forward to this. Smash Bros is the only Nintendo game with any serious competitive potential, and although I am not a competitive gamer, I am a streamer and a commentator, and I take part in my university's own gaming scene, where we arrange tournaments in our pub.

When you play Mario Kart seriously, you actually can and are probably better off going to another racing game. There are many Mario Kart clones after all, some of which have less randomised party gameplay.

However, there are no fighting games with the same mechanics as Smash Bros. There are many clones in terms of themes, as there are many crossover party fighting games and we have Playstation All Stars coming soon. However, there are no physics based fighting games with the knock out the arena gameplay that Smash offers. There is a lot of tension from pulling off a recovery, and a lot of that is unleashed if someone manages to spike a low percentage character. No other games offer that, and I am glad that Nintendo are finally embracing the competitive atmosphere.

Personally I'm in it more for the gameplay than the nintendo party, and I am surprised no one has copied the "knock out arena" gameplay, or that there isn't a genre of gameplay called 'smash', as there is clearly a market for it.


Still, I do hope that we get a StarFox Adventures Krystal, complete with Magic and Staff, or a more agile 'toon' version of Zelda who can transform into Tetra, or finally giving Ganondorf his very own much deserved moveset or replacing him with Toon Ganondorf.

 

[BrunDeign]

If you just take out the clones then you get more than three spaces opened up for new characters (four if you count Lucas).