Official Next Smash - Speculation & Discussion Thread

[fogbadge]

Only if we get Tomodachi Life 2 to compensate. I've already accepted that they've been replaced for the hypothetical Nintendo Switch Sports 2...

it'd be 3 not 2

 

[Diddy Kong]

A bunch of post-64 characters who I don't believe are in any danger of being cut. I think anything is fair game past a certain point, but you still gotta shed past a good 25-30 characters before you get even close to that.

Fully agreed with this exact list. I'd probably include Meta Knight over Ridley. Ridley as he is in Ultimate is a rather awkward fighter, and there are Metroid characters like Raven Beak and Sylux. He seems the weakest of these characters listed. But regardless, good choices.

Also I think people underestimate Sheik's longevity on archetype alone. I'm somewhat conflicted on them compared to some other fighters, enough to put them in the "middling" category, but Sheik is kind of a foundational featherweight "hit and run" type and is Smash's original ninja character. A character archetype that Sakurai is evidently very fond of provided his selection of Greninja and consideration of Ninjara as well.

Yes, Sheik was once a part of a (undercooked) transformation mechanic with Zelda - but I don't feel like this is where their usefulness ends. I get that legacy isn't the be all end all here, and I leave the possibility open for Sheik to be cut after all, but I think Melee was early enough in the series' lifespan for Sheik to be considered a foundational archetypical character for others to be built upon much like the aforementioned Captain Falcon or Fox.

Not sure if this holds weight in the end. There are many characters who offer unique archetypes that might get cut. And like you said, Greninja is there already too, so the archetype isn't exactly without a replacement.

But sure thing. Sakurai wanted a ninja, and got one with Sheik. It's a popular archetype for sure. That helps a lot. But is she a good representation for a Zelda character ?

Now take Greninja as example. Also a ninja archetype but the big difference is, he fights exactly like that in source material. And also seemingly has timeless popularity. The most popular Pokemon by a recent poll even. Sheik doesn't really hold up to that am afraid.

And as a side note, I find it funny that Zelda is struggling for representation on the roster as is and people are so eager to cut the most flavorful member of that cast. Sheik embodies much of what everyone says they want from Zelda - memorable one-shot characters with strong moveset hooks. But Sheik is, on technicality, a version of Zelda and that gets held against them IMO quite unfairly sometimes. They really aren't at all alike in any way that counts. Anyway, I think Sheik sticks around because if there is such a strong desire for more Zelda content it would feel counterintuitive to essentially shave it down to the basics.

Problem is that Sheik is probably the number one reason they aren't really trying to add another character like that, unless the roster becomes bloated of these types of Zelda one off characters.

So yeah she's a popular Zelda one off, but her move set itself isn't exactly from Zelda. But her inclusion might've prevented them from including the likes of Midna, Skull Kid, Ghirahim or one of the Champions of Breath of the Wild. I'm saying it might be, cause its all speculation. I do think it's weird however that there never has been a newcomer beyond Toon Link, and he's basically a reskinned Young Link.

Also, the Zelda series seems stuck in just wanting to add multiple versions of Link and Zelda. If we want a change and everyone is so keep on removing the smaller Links, why not remove the secondary Zelda who's functionally not even a Zelda character? At least there's merit in keeping a character as Toon Link, cause he's a preservation of the classic Link move set. Also, I feel like huge gaming icons like Mario and Link do deserve a secondary character on the roster.

I might just be nitpicking but yeah, I don't see Sheik holding up. Not to the same manner as Captain Falcon or Ness at least. In the end, this is just my perspective. And I really don't know what's gonna happen. I just think that she would be a sensible cut if it ever comes down to it. But am quite confident we're not even gonna lose that many characters so yeah.

 

[P4ST4N4G4]

Fully agreed with this exact list. I'd probably include Meta Knight over Ridley. Ridley as he is in Ultimate is a rather awkward fighter, and there are Metroid characters like Raven Beak and Sylux. He seems the weakest of these characters listed. But regardless, good choices.

Not sure if this holds weight in the end. There are many characters who offer unique archetypes that might get cut. And like you said, Greninja is there already too, so the archetype isn't exactly without a replacement.

But sure thing. Sakurai wanted a ninja, and got one with Sheik. It's a popular archetype for sure. That helps a lot. But is she a good representation for a Zelda character ?

Now take Greninja as example. Also a ninja archetype but the big difference is, he fights exactly like that in source material. And also seemingly has timeless popularity. The most popular Pokemon by a recent poll even. Sheik doesn't really hold up to that am afraid.

Problem is that Sheik is probably the number one reason they aren't really trying to add another character like that, unless the roster becomes bloated of these types of Zelda one off characters.

So yeah she's a popular Zelda one off, but her move set itself isn't exactly from Zelda. But her inclusion might've prevented them from including the likes of Midna, Skull Kid, Ghirahim or one of the Champions of Breath of the Wild. I'm saying it might be, cause its all speculation. I do think it's weird however that there never has been a newcomer beyond Toon Link, and he's basically a reskinned Young Link.

Also, the Zelda series seems stuck in just wanting to add multiple versions of Link and Zelda. If we want a change and everyone is so keep on removing the smaller Links, why not remove the secondary Zelda who's functionally not even a Zelda character? At least there's merit in keeping a character as Toon Link, cause he's a preservation of the classic Link move set. Also, I feel like huge gaming icons like Mario and Link do deserve a secondary character on the roster.

I might just be nitpicking but yeah, I don't see Sheik holding up. Not to the same manner as Captain Falcon or Ness at least. In the end, this is just my perspective. And I really don't know what's gonna happen. I just think that she would be a sensible cut if it ever comes down to it. But am quite confident we're not even gonna lose that many characters so yeah.

I do believe we need a new Zelda series rep but removing Sheik would make A LOT of people angry.

Especially since she's been in every Smash since Melee.

 

[Louie G.]

Fully agreed with this exact list. I'd probably include Meta Knight over Ridley. Ridley as he is in Ultimate is a rather awkward fighter, and there are Metroid characters like Raven Beak and Sylux. He seems the weakest of these characters listed. But regardless, good choices.

I put Ridley here for a couple reasons, main one being the context that this is coming off the heels of Ultimate. Assuming we may have to lose some heavy hitters in transition, like some of those big name third parties, I think keeping around one of the headlining, long awaited first party characters without any foreseeable barriers is at least a cushion for that inevitable blow. I'm pretty confident in K. Rool's return for the same reasons but he's got a bit more baggage than Ridley, and obviously he is not the second priority for DK. Meta Knight could be here too but in a drastic, push comes to shove situation I just wanted to acknowledge that Dedede stays first.

It's kinda hard to compare the likes of Raven Beak and Sylux to longstanding villain Ridley. Sure, Ridley is officially dead and did not show up in Metroid Dread... but IMO is heavily likely to make an appearance in Metroid Prime 4. In any case, his persistent role in the series isn't really matched by any other character and his rivalry with Samus is a unique and personal one. I don't see anybody being a suitable replacement, as much as I'd welcome an additional Metroid antagonist... Ridley is always gonna be number one. Especially after waiting this long.

Frankly, I think Sakurai's insistence on giving Ridley significant non-playable roles two games in a row speaks to his personal love for the character, and acknowledgement of Ridley's importance to the series. This always read to me like he felt Ridley was worth the effort since at least Brawl. Even though it took him a while to come around on Ridley as a playable character, it's hard to imagine him going back on that now.

 

[Shinuto]

What character reveal style do you want for Smash 6? Brawl era dojo style? Smash 4 with a dojo lite and the splash reveals or Ultimate with big direct reveals?

 

[Gengar84]

There’s a lot of reasons I want to keep Sheik around and I’d be pretty disappointed if she was cut. First and foremost, I just think she’s really cool. I love her design and her ninja inspired moveset is a lot of fun. Second, she’s one of our very few unique Zelda movesets we have. It would be a shame to reduce that even further. I’d like to add to the unique Zelda movesets, not remove them. Even a one for one trade for a new character wouldn’t do that. Third, she’s also one of the few unique female fighters in Smash that isn’t an avatar alt. Finally, she’s got legacy through Smash and has been around in the games since Melee. Even though she hasn’t appeared in the mainline Zelda games since OoT, she’s stayed relevant over the years through Smash.

I think this one is more personal bias but I’d prioritize her over Zero Suit Samus despite them being in nearly identical situations. The first reason is that Sheik is technically a different character than Zelda since each game has different incarnations of Link and Zelda and only Ganondorf remains consistent. Second, she’s also has a bit more seniority being around since Melee rather than Brawl. Finally, and most subjectively, I just think she’s cooler than ZSS plus the fact that she doesn’t have Zelda in her name makes her feel like more of a separate character than ZSS compared to Samus. Ideally, I’d like both back but if we had to cut one, I’d prioritize Sheik.

 

[Diddy Kong]

I do believe we need a new Zelda series rep but removing Sheik would make A LOT of people angry.

Especially since she's been in every Smash since Melee.

Tell this to everyone who wants to remove Jigglypuff. She's literally been in every game, yet people advocate for her removal all the time.

Yall got me ****ed up thinking any of the Linklings are even remotely close to Sheik.

I think you all need to understand that Sheik has significantly transcended her origin in Ocarina of Time as a random exposition plot device and her introduction as a transformation gimmick in Melee. Being real, outside the Zelda reveal, she really isn't important and were it not for Smash Bros, she wouldn't even be a character people mention because honestly she really isn't one, especially compared to the stars of OoT and WW. But in Smash? The game where she has more appearances than either the side Links?

In Smash, she is THE ninja character, both in terms of gameplay function and aesthetic even in the face of characters that have similar appeals like Joker and Greninja. Not only does she form the mechanical foundation for the entire archetype, she is still to this day a wholly unique high-execution playstyle character that they still haven't even come close to replicating in any future characters.
This compared to Floatier Link and Combo'er Link.

So no, I don't think she's on the short-list of potential cuts, now or ever.
In fact, I'll go as far as to say she's probably one of the first characters put in the design docs for smash and serves as a baseline how they design system mechanics around these foundational characters.

I do think that Toon Link is indeed more essential than Sheik yeah. He's the preservation of the old Link moveset. There hasn't been a time we haven't had a smaller Link. They've been around as long as Sheik.

Sheik might be a popular fighting game archetype but does that overrule being what Smash is about? A celebration of popular Nintendo and other gaming characters. In this sense a secondary Link offers more than a secondary ninja Zelda. Especially since this smaller Link will offer a representation of what Zelda is about way better than Sheik.

 

[Gengar84]

Tell this to everyone who wants to remove Jigglypuff. She's literally been in every game, yet people advocate for her removal all the time.

I do think that Toon Link is indeed more essential than Sheik yeah. He's the preservation of the old Link moveset. There hasn't been a time we haven't had a smaller Link. They've been around as long as Sheik.

Sheik might be a popular fighting game archetype but does that overrule being what Smash is about? A celebration of popular Nintendo and other gaming characters. In this sense a secondary Link offers more than a secondary ninja Zelda. Especially since this smaller Link will offer a representation of what Zelda is about way better than Sheik.

I just want to defend my stance on Jigglypuff for a bit. First, I would much rather keep her around than cut her but I feel her situation is a bit different than Sheik’s. Jigglypuff does indeed have seniority over Sheik and I can definitely see that as a solid argument for keeping her around. She’s also got a pretty fun and somewhat unique fighting style, which definitely helps too. The biggest difference is how many more unique Pokemon characters Smash has already with the expectation that every Smash will include at least one more. Zelda hasn’t had a unique newcomer since Melee so cutting one of the few we already have hurts more.

We’re also a bit oversaturated with Gen 1 Pokémon with Pikachu, Jigglypuff, Mewtwo, and Pokemon Trainer. I’d argue Meowth, Eevee and Gengar would make more sense than Jigglypuff as an additional Gen 1 Pokémon. I think Pokemon might just be in the unfortunate spot that we have to make some cuts in order to bring in newcomers without oversaturating the roster with Pokemon. I do agree that her Smash seniority as one of the original 12 gives her a very compelling argument to stay but she’s got the most going against her compared to the rest of 64’s cast just because of how many options there are for Pokemon.

 

[Diddy Kong]

I just want to defend my stance on Jigglypuff for a bit. First, I would much rather keep her around than cut her but I feel her situation is a bit different than Sheik’s. Jigglypuff does indeed have seniority over Sheik and I can definitely see that as a solid argument for keeping her around. She’s also got a pretty fun and somewhat unique fighting style, which definitely helps too. The biggest difference is how many more unique Pokemon characters Smash has already with the expectation that every Smash will include at least one more. Zelda hasn’t had a unique newcomer since Melee so cutting one of the few we already have hurts more.

We’re also a bit oversaturated with Gen 1 Pokémon with Pikachu, Jigglypuff, Mewtwo, and Pokemon Trainer. I’d argue Meowth, Eevee and Gengar would make more sense than Jigglypuff as an additional Gen 1 Pokémon. I think Pokemon might just be in the unfortunate spot that we have to make some cuts in order to bring in newcomers without oversaturating the roster with Pokemon. I do agree that her Smash seniority as one of the original 12 gives her a very compelling argument to stay but she’s got the most going against her compared to the rest of 64’s cast just because of how many options there are for Pokemon.

I hear you. There is no shortage on Generation 1 Pokemon indeed. I'd argue even that Blastoise and Venusaur also could be mentioned alongside the ones you already listed. Maybe Raichu even.

But Jigglypuff is just such an easy addition. Removing her , or just deliberately not working on her seems like a petty reason for a cut. She's just not development heavy, and a 64 veteran on top.

Also regarding Zero Suit Samus? I'd keep her above Sheik myself. She was handpicked as the secondary Metroid character after all. Probably because she is Samus herself. She had many playable roles in Metroid. That's a big plus in this case. Outside of the Hunters, there hasn't been any other case like that in Metroid. There's also Zero Mission, the one game that pushed for her playable status most likely.

I don't know. Maybe it's just me. I just prefer a character's overall value outside of Smash as a more legitimate reason to keep a character in than whatever happens and is valued in Smash. Might seem counterintuitive for most, but the nature of Smash is being the biggest icons in gaming crossing over. So to me it means that iconic status beyond Smash is the most important.

So this means that indeed, a character like Toon Link or Chrom, whom many would cut in a heartbeat, have more value to me than Sheik. Because we can give Toon Link and Chrom different and more unique move sets , but Sheik will forever remain that one off disguise of Zelda in Ocarina of Time who has yet to reappear in a next game.

 

[Gengar84]

I hear you. There is no shortage on Generation 1 Pokemon indeed. I'd argue even that Blastoise and Venusaur also could be mentioned alongside the ones you already listed. Maybe Raichu even.

But Jigglypuff is just such an easy addition. Removing her , or just deliberately not working on her seems like a petty reason for a cut. She's just not development heavy, and a 64 veteran on top.

Also regarding Zero Suit Samus? I'd keep her above Sheik myself. She was handpicked as the secondary Metroid character after all. Probably because she is Samus herself. She had many playable roles in Metroid. That's a big plus in this case. Outside of the Hunters, there hasn't been any other case like that in Metroid. There's also Zero Mission, the one game that pushed for her playable status most likely.

I don't know. Maybe it's just me. I just prefer a character's overall value outside of Smash as a more legitimate reason to keep a character in than whatever happens and is valued in Smash. Might seem counterintuitive for most, but the nature of Smash is being the biggest icons in gaming crossing over. So to me it means that iconic status beyond Smash is the most important.

So this means that indeed, a character like Toon Link or Chrom, whom many would cut in a heartbeat, have more value to me than Sheik. Because we can give Toon Link and Chrom different and more unique move sets , but Sheik will forever remain that one off disguise of Zelda in Ocarina of Time who has yet to reappear in a next game.

Yeah, I think it’s mostly subjective. I have a personal disinterest in alternate versions of the same character. ZSS is cool and I’d keep her if I could but she’s pretty low on my priority list because she’s a second version of Samus with a completely unique moveset. I’d rather those resources go to a completely different character than another Samus. It’s also why I don’t really care about Toon Link, Young Link, or Dr. Mario despite being easier additions. I personally prefer echoes like Lucina, Ken, Daisy, and Richter who are all completely separate fighters. Sheik’s a borderline case because, while she is still Zelda, she’s technically a different character since they’re all separate incarnations. That goes for the Links too but the fact that they all look so similar and are called Link makes them feel less like separate characters to me.

I also value a character’s visual design, personality, and moveset over franchise legacy. If a character only showed up once but left a big impact or had a really cool design and fun moveset potential, I’d value that over a character that comes back all the time but doesn’t offer anything as interesting. That’s not to say legacy doesn’t matter at all. It’s still important, just not the main priority for me. Again, it’s mostly subjective.

As for being petty for not prioritizing Jigglypuff despite being easier to include than a fully unique newcomer, I disagree. It just means the developers had other priorities, not that they have anything against Jigglypuff as a character. Lucas and Roy didn’t make the base game of Smash 4 and Wolf didn’t come back until Ultimate despite all of them being variations on existing characters. Dr. Mario and Pichu both missed out on Brawl because the team had other priorities. I don’t think that meant they were being petty, just that they wanted to focus efforts on other characters at the time.

 

[Diddy Kong]

Yeah, I think it’s mostly subjective. I have a personal disinterest in alternate versions of the same character. ZSS is cool and I’d keep her if I could but she’s pretty low on my priority list because she’s a second version of Samus with a completely unique moveset. I’d rather those resources go to a completely different character than another Samus. It’s also why I don’t really care about Toon Link, Young Link, or Dr. Mario despite being easier additions. I personally prefer echoes like Lucina, Ken, Daisy, and Richter who are all completely separate fighters. Sheik’s a borderline case because, while she is still Zelda, she’s technically a different character since they’re all separate incarnations. That goes for the Links too but the fact that they all look so similar and are called Link makes them feel less like separate characters to me.

I also value a character’s visual design, personality, and moveset over franchise legacy. If a character only showed up once but left a big impact or had a really cool design and fun moveset potential, I’d value that over a character that comes back all the time but doesn’t offer anything as interesting. That’s not to say legacy doesn’t matter at all. It’s still important, just not the main priority for me. Again, it’s mostly subjective.

As for being petty for not prioritizing Jigglypuff despite being easier to include than a fully unique newcomer, I disagree. It just means the developers had other priorities, not that they have anything against Jigglypuff as a character. Lucas and Roy didn’t make the base game of Smash 4 and Wolf didn’t come back until Ultimate despite all of them being variations on existing characters. I don’t think that meant they were being petty, just that they wanted to focus efforts on other characters at the time.

It's all perspective indeed. And we don't know the approach Sakurai takes.

Honestly, concerning Brawl for example, I never would've brought back Sheik or Ice Climbers over Mewtwo for example. Neither Mr.Game & Watch, or even Falco. Yet look at what happened.

We don't know the procedures. Neither the priorities. I do think that characters with a strong Nintendo legacy and otherwise strong iconic status will be the highest priority.

I do think we have a general idea of who is absolutely safe. The unsafe ones are the more icky ones to predict.

Then again. I doubt we're gonna have that many cuts anyway.

 

[Gengar84]

It's all perspective indeed. And we don't know the approach Sakurai takes.

Honestly, concerning Brawl for example, I never would've brought back Sheik or Ice Climbers over Mewtwo for example. Neither Mr.Game & Watch, or even Falco. Yet look at what happened.

We don't know the procedures. Neither the priorities. I do think that characters with a strong Nintendo legacy and otherwise strong iconic status will be the highest priority.

I do think we have a general idea of who is absolutely safe. The unsafe ones are the more icky ones to predict.

Then again. I doubt we're gonna have that many cuts anyway.

Agreed. I still have a lot of hope we’ll see less cuts than people are fearing. We may not get literally every character back but I don’t think they’re going to Thanos snap the roster either. I’m expecting a starting roster size of around Ultimate’s base pre DLC with an extended DLC rollout. That’s one reason I prefer to focus on newcomers than stress about who is or isn’t coming back. It’s a fun exercise every once in a while but it gets pretty tiring for me after a while and really demoralizing if I buy into everything.

 

[BuckleyTim]

I kinda hope ultimate's basegame size isn't what we start at next time, just because that feels like an "anti-sweetspot" for me. That would still require that everything else in the game gets stretched thin in service of quantity over quality, but then that quantity can't quite stack up to Ultimate's back-of-the-box selling point so it's like why go this hard on quantity again when you could instead go in new directions gameplay and game mode wise?

I'd rather the next smash feel as different from ultimate as possible instead of it feeling like "we want as much roster as possible in this engine again but alas the constraints of reality are very apparent".