Unpopular Smash Ideas/Opinions [Be Nice]

[Opossum]

I think I've often attributed Porky as "too pathos", which I think was wrong - a lot of that comes from conflating bad fan content (particularly ones with spanking-themed attacks) with how he'd be depicted in a real game - my actual problem with Porky is just that he represents by far the least interesting part of the series. I like the Mother games because they're these weird off-beat games about the power of friendship with deep pathos, and Smash's portrayal of it is very refreshing since it focuses nigh completely on those "weird off-beat" and "power of friendship" elements instead of the series' more "spooky horror" stuff which is what a lot of EB fan content and -inspired projects focus on, but I personally find to be utterly expendable.

I'm of two minds on that. On one hand I absolutely agree that, ESPECIALLY in the case of Mother 3, the themes of community and togetherness are essential to the story. But on that same hand, I think Porky is equally important to that message by representing the fascist police state that collective togetherness is able to triumph over. So having togetherness triumph over a very real and credible threat like that makes the game stand out a lot to me.

That being said though, I'd take Kumatora or especially Duster over Porky any day of the week for Smash, admittedly partially for those same reasons. I just feel it's better in the long run to add characters that represent the defiance of sexism and ableism, respectively, than adding the game's literal embodiment of Actual Nazi-coded Fascism. A lot less of an ick factor lol.

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

There are a lot of reasons I could imagine for why commercials aren't repped in Smash much - the lack of rep for Western exclusive content as a whole, which tend to be the commercials that take the most liberties and as such provide the most content, is the obvious example - but I think a major one is simply that easily-accessible preservation of commercials is a new thing with the advent of the internet - in the past commericals were typically preserved through public domain VHS compilations or actual archives you would have to drive to, nowadays you can google any game and write "commercial" at the end, and bam, you have it. You Cannot Beat Us was not meant to be discovered and watched almost 40 years later, it was meant to be thrown out and forgotten once the NES is established in Australia and they could make ads for individual games, which would then also get thrown out. I can understand why a team that likely has a lot of NES/SNES veterans wouldn't care much for commercials, and that's without getting into the bag of worms that is the legitimate stigma around and consequences for piracy in Japan.

 

[fogbadge]

There are a lot of reasons I could imagine for why commercials aren't repped in Smash much - the lack of rep for Western exclusive content as a whole, which tend to be the commercials that take the most liberties and as such provide the most content, is the obvious example - but I think a major one is simply that easily-accessible preservation of commercials is a new thing with the advent of the internet - in the past commericals were typically preserved through public domain VHS compilations or actual archives you would have to drive to, nowadays you can google any game and write "commercial" at the end, and bam, you have it. You Cannot Beat Us was not meant to be discovered and watched almost 40 years later, it was meant to be thrown out and forgotten once the NES is established in Australia and they could make ads for individual games, which would then also get thrown out. I can understand why a team that likely has a lot of NES/SNES veterans wouldn't care much for commercials, and that's without getting into the bag of worms that is the legitimate stigma around and consequences for piracy in Japan.

we had commercial songs in brawl

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

we had commercial songs in brawl

Yeah, I am aware, there is certainly some notable ad rep in Smash (Captain Falcon's black alt, the BOTW trailer song), but it's still not as much as I personally would find perferable nor as much as you tend to see in other crossovers (PSASBR and MultiVersus immediately come to mind as having ad references, though the latter is admittedly on the same level as or lower than Smash's commerical rep, mostly being dialog) and the Japanese slant, while understandable, does take away from it IMO.

I dunno, maybe reading up on Polygon Man's origins in PSASBR was just too formative an experience for me as a kid, heh.

 

[Borskaboska]

Since I mentioned this in passing - while I do still dislike Banjo in Smash (albeit for different reasons from what I initally thought, more that the character is just super tangled in console war BS than him being tied to Nintendo inherently), I think we should be able to agree he sets a prescedent for 3P weirdo picks, right? In the context of how Smash handles 3P content, Banjo before Steve and without Master Chief isn't really far off from adding Dynamite Headdy before Sonic. Yeah, Mega Man before Ryu also goes a bit against conventional priority, but both of those characters are some kind of icon that can cross console and generational borders, Banjo is basically only known to Nintendo fans from the company's longest (even if not biggest) flop era.

I think banjo got in because he was highly requested in the melee/brawl days, and also the fact that rare was very closely tied to nintendo in the snes/64 days and sakurai is at his heart an old school gamer. Many characters like Samus and Megaman are tied to how they were represented in the 90's, it's just how the cast tends to trend. I expect a 3rd party that was big in the 90's, even the ones that fell off a bit since then like banjo, is like 10x more likely than practically anyone else. The only real exception to this would be joker, who was just so monsterously popular it was impossible to ignore.
I would think wed get crash before master chief or someone from fallout, for example, even though those guys are more contemporaniously popular.

 

[Thegameandwatch]

also the fact that rare was very closely tied to nintendo in the snes/64 days

Banjo at one point was also owned by Nintendo since the back of DKR says “TRADEMARK OF NINTENDO, DIDDY KONG, BANJO, AND KRUNCH CHARACTERS LICENSED BY NINTENDO”

 

[SharkLord]

I think banjo got in because he was highly requested in the melee/brawl days, and also the fact that rare was very closely tied to nintendo in the snes/64 days and sakurai is at his heart an old school gamer. Many characters like Samus and Megaman are tied to how they were represented in the 90's, it's just how the cast tends to trend. I expect a 3rd party that was big in the 90's, even the ones that fell off a bit since then like banjo, is like 10x more likely than practically anyone else. The only real exception to this would be joker, who was just so monsterously popular it was impossible to ignore.
I would think wed get crash before master chief or someone from fallout, for example, even though those guys are more contemporaniously popular.

And I believe Mega Man was also a massive request before his addition, since he was an icon of the NES and his various spinoffs usually found a home on whatever Nintendo system was active at the time. I don't think older inherently means more likely, but a strong legacy and a decent level of Nintendo connection gives third-parties a big boost. A little less so nowadays, though, now that the likes of Joker and Steve set a precedent for successful recent-ish games

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

The thing about the "X character who otherwise doesn't fit the Smash heirarchy got in because of fan demand" sentiment is that it could theoretically apply to any character. If a butterfly landed in the right place, it could've been "guy in a caged ball from Fuzion Frenzy" in place of Banjo; Gex could've gotten that Mii costume instead of Geno. I think that should be a call to question our fandom's allegiance to this heirarchy and experiment with potential characters beyond what we think is possible or even reasonable. Mega Man, Simon, Banjo, all of those were big fan picks, I don't think being tied to Nintendo had anything to do with their inclusion, just their requests. That goes for 1Ps too, remember when people thought that Ult's theme was going to be "heroes vs. villains" and not just that they were following fan demand, which happens to be really fixated on villains?

 

[UserKev]

I just had an idea. I feel like we should have exclusive items. Let the star power up only accessible from the Mario franchise. Etc. I know it wouldn't justify much but it does add a unique layer.

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

The notion that cuts are inately negative cannot coexist with the idea that there is such a thing as a "bad newcomer pick" (beyond some bare-minimum bad-taste things). It's also a fandom sentiment that only became mainstream very recently, from my memory, people before Ult's reveal wanted characters like Pichu and Dr. Mario gone for good. Regardless of if this mentality is right or wrong, it's not an "obvious truth" like some would claim, and certainly not often practiced consistently.

 

[Ze Diglett]

The notion that cuts are inately negative cannot coexist with the idea that there is such a thing as a "bad newcomer pick" (beyond some bare-minimum bad-taste things). It's also a fandom sentiment that only became mainstream very recently, from my memory, people before Ult's reveal wanted characters like Pichu and Dr. Mario gone for good. Regardless of if this mentality is right or wrong, it's not an "obvious truth" like some would claim, and certainly not often practiced consistently.

It's always funny how people justify wanting no cuts by saying "every character is someone's favorite" when those same people universally decried Corrin's inclusion years back.

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

It's always funny how people justify wanting no cuts by saying "every character is someone's favorite" when those same people universally decried Corrin's inclusion years back.

"every character is someone's favourite" is not a bad sentiment on its own, but I only ever really see it used in a weird passive-aggressive moralizing way (seemingly completely unaware that cutting content IS often the moral option from a development perspective), and in application to past/cuts instead of future/newcomers. You're a NASB thread veteran, you know what I'm talking about.

 

[fogbadge]

It's always funny how people justify wanting no cuts by saying "every character is someone's favorite" when those same people universally decried Corrin's inclusion years back.

And they always ignore the reverse: everyone is someone’s most hated

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

I guess ECISF is a Dexit holdover, and that might be why it only gets thrown around for cuts, there's no such thing as Pokemon speculation discourse, just "they should've done a capybara by now!", send tweet, 10 likes, the end, the new characters don't exist yet, so they're not anyone's favourites and not relevant, the old ones do - but in the context of Smash, "every character is someone's favourite" applies to future or theoretical content, and there's already a lot of prescedent for "someone's favourite" not being enough within both fandom and the actual game selections. I think my problem with ECISF is less that people using it are insincere or even wrong, and more that people using it aren't asking what they're really saying and how that applies to the way they percieve Smash. I'm not asking for a discourse-less utopia persay, but - as the fandom of an entertainment product - we should unlearn objective reasoning and embrace bias, ECISF suggests that, but always come out of the mouths of those who want things to be the way they've always been, suvival of the fittest where Dixie Kong MUST be the next DK rep, and not just "yeah, I like Sneek, they should add Sneek".

 

[BackseatSakurai]

I guess ECISF is a Dexit holdover, and that might be why it only gets thrown around for cuts, there's no such thing as Pokemon speculation discourse, just "they should've done a capybara by now!", send tweet, 10 likes, the end, the new characters don't exist yet, so they're not anyone's favourites and not relevant, the old ones do - but in the context of Smash, "every character is someone's favourite" applies to future or theoretical content, and there's already a lot of prescedent for "someone's favourite" not being enough within both fandom and the actual game selections. I think my problem with ECISF is less that people using it are insincere or even wrong, and more that people using it aren't asking what they're really saying and how that applies to the way they percieve Smash. I'm not asking for a discourse-less utopia persay, but - as the fandom of an entertainment product - we should unlearn objective reasoning and embrace bias, ECISF suggests that, but always come out of the mouths of those who want things to be the way they've always been, suvival of the fittest where Dixie Kong MUST be the next DK rep, and not just "yeah, I like Sneek, they should add Sneek".

I fall on the opposite end where I do enjoy the discourse and weighing of this character vs that one, even just as a fun excuse to get people talking about the history of the medium, but I agree with the tension you're identifying here. ECISF taken to its logical extreme would, in fact, justify any potential inclusion via "they're my favorite".

Really, I wish we had a MUGEN equivalent for platform fighters that actually had the community and wealth of custom content to where everyone could just make their own perfect roster regardless of how wacky it seems to others and be content with that.

 

[Guynamednelson]

Really, I wish we had a MUGEN equivalent for platform fighters that actually had the community and wealth of custom content to where everyone could just make their own perfect roster regardless of how wacky it seems to others and be content with that.

Super Smash Bros. Crusade?

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

Super Smash Bros. Crusade?

I think Rivals and Crusade are both flawed "platform fighter MUGENs" for a few reasons.

Crusade can only really be modded in depth with CMC, which has an utterly massive file size with its built-in content, some of which (particularly stages) is near-pornogaphic. Even base Crusade, if it was as accessible for modding as CMC, has too big a file size arguably.
Rivals has dinky sprites, so it's impossible to import most existing sprites or use non-sprite graphics.
Both games have too tangible base foundations, unlike MUGEN where you have pretty much free reign in playstyle and button use. Fraymakers is probably the closest it's gotten, but that game is wildly overpriced and seems to often lose support for mods in updates.

I don't think the "MUGEN of platform fighters" should be based around a bigger game, especially not a commercial one. It should be well... MUGEN. Open source, freeware, completely modular in content and playstyle.

 

[Among Waddle Dees]

I guess ECISF is a Dexit holdover, and that might be why it only gets thrown around for cuts, there's no such thing as Pokemon speculation discourse, just "they should've done a capybara by now!", send tweet, 10 likes, the end, the new characters don't exist yet, so they're not anyone's favourites and not relevant, the old ones do - but in the context of Smash, "every character is someone's favourite" applies to future or theoretical content, and there's already a lot of prescedent for "someone's favourite" not being enough within both fandom and the actual game selections. I think my problem with ECISF is less that people using it are insincere or even wrong, and more that people using it aren't asking what they're really saying and how that applies to the way they percieve Smash. I'm not asking for a discourse-less utopia persay, but - as the fandom of an entertainment product - we should unlearn objective reasoning and embrace bias, ECISF suggests that, but always come out of the mouths of those who want things to be the way they've always been, suvival of the fittest where Dixie Kong MUST be the next DK rep, and not just "yeah, I like Sneek, they should add Sneek".

Sneek would only be an acceptable inclusion if Ellie appears in Smash and is afraid of it.

But in all seriousness... nah, I doubt it's a holdover from Dexit. I'd be much more considerate of that possibility if EiH didn't happen an E3 before the Gen 8 Dexit discovery. It's more likely that this is another effect of the Smash 4 marketing, where Sakurai treated the inclusions as a big event, sending disarray to the speculation around characters that didn't join the battle. It's fairly apparent that people got clingy to the choices made as a result of that.

Unfortunately, it's only one of the many Smash 4 blemishes that has not really subsided. I'm getting much more irritated by how much 4 ended up controlling the future of the franchise... I'm tempted to begin pushing Ultimate as a flashy Wii U port in disguise.

 

[SharkLord]

The thing about the "X character who otherwise doesn't fit the Smash heirarchy got in because of fan demand" sentiment is that it could theoretically apply to any character. If a butterfly landed in the right place, it could've been "guy in a caged ball from Fuzion Frenzy" in place of Banjo; Gex could've gotten that Mii costume instead of Geno. I think that should be a call to question our fandom's allegiance to this heirarchy and experiment with potential characters beyond what we think is possible or even reasonable. Mega Man, Simon, Banjo, all of those were big fan picks, I don't think being tied to Nintendo had anything to do with their inclusion, just their requests. That goes for 1Ps too, remember when people thought that Ult's theme was going to be "heroes vs. villains" and not just that they were following fan demand, which happens to be really fixated on villains?

I mean, Banjo wouldn't have gotten such a push if people didn't genuinely want him. It's not because people are "sticking to the hierarchy," they just liked Banjo and Kazooie and wanted them in Smash. And they wouldn't be so hotly requested if he wasn't an icon of the Nintendo 64. With Simon and Mega Man, it's also worth noting that Mega Man and Castlevania are seen as icons of platforming and the NES, and Mega Man especially is one of Capcom's mascots, so there was more of a pull than solely fan requests. Even then, the fact they had their roots on the NES and had tons of games on later Nintendo systems probably helped a lot for their Smash popularity in particular

 

[BackseatSakurai]

Super Smash Bros. Crusade?

I don't think the "MUGEN of platform fighters" should be based around a bigger game, especially not a commercial one. It should be well... MUGEN. Open source, freeware, completely modular in content and playstyle.

Yeah, I've played all of the available options and they all fall short in one way or another. I think Rivals has the best pool of available stuff just by virtue of the engine being solid gameplay wise and the game being by far the most popular out of the ones with custom content (so there's a lot of it). Fraymakers barely gets new stuff uploaded and like WWW said it tends to break over time.

Smack Studio had an interesting editor but it's so barebones, high cost of entry for what's there, and high learning curve to create stuff - to the extent that I don't think it'll ever have that initial community that gets people onboard. It's a cursed problem - it should be separate from a commercial product, but people won't bother taking the time to create worthwhile content for a game if there's not a pre-existing player base (which would necessitate built-in content).

I'm optimistic about the future of an idea like this, but I also wonder if the demand is truly there given how little people seem to care about Fraymakers etc.

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

Mega Man especially is one of Capcom's mascots

That is literally false per Capcom admission

Capcom on why Mega Man is the company's unofficial mascot

This information comes from the Capcom-Unity forums… “…we don’t have an “official” mascot. We have a logo, that’s it. As far as unofficial mascots go, however, yes, MM would definitely be that. I have actually heard someone discuss this, and I think the reasoning was something akin to Mega Man...

nintendoeverything.com

I'm honestly not sure how much Banjo/MM/Simon support was derived from the conclusion of "this is a Nintendo game, games on Nintendo consoles should come first", but I do think a lot of it was present, especially for Banjo. That is not a reasoning Smash has ever abided by except for fan demand content, the closest thing to an exception is Tetris. It could be a simple case of there being more audience overlap, but then where did "bring Banjo home" come from? Why was the sentiment always that Mega Man or Banjo MUST come first and anything else will not do? I think that's the big thing that really makes me not able to come around to Banjo: the "come home" element that - let me remind you - Grant Kirkhope, who WORKED on Ult, was pushing. Nintendo did not create Banjo, they deserve no credit for those games, and having an emotional attachment not to a game or its developer alone but what platform it is distributed on and who distributes it is irrational as all hell. Nobody speaks this way about Disney and Ghibli or Dreamworks and Aardman, hell nobody even speaks this way about Sony and Crash Bandicoot - it just makes Banjo support seem very superficial at best and bizarrely culty at worst. It'd be fine if Smash and its fandom didn't consider cultural context beyond "I like this game", but both do, and Banjo's entire context starts and ends with console war weirdness. That'd be fine if they added a character associated with console wars against Nintendo, since that would encourage curiousity on both sides, but they didn't, they played into the weird "come back home" element.

 

[Thegameandwatch]

I'm honestly not sure how much Banjo/MM/Simon support was derived from the conclusion of "this is a Nintendo game, games on Nintendo consoles should come first",

Applies to other franchises at the time to a lesser extent such as for Final Fantasy and maybe even Ninja Gaiden before Smash 4 DLC happened for the former.

 

[SharkLord]

That is literally false per Capcom admission

Capcom on why Mega Man is the company's unofficial mascot

This information comes from the Capcom-Unity forums… “…we don’t have an “official” mascot. We have a logo, that’s it. As far as unofficial mascots go, however, yes, MM would definitely be that. I have actually heard someone discuss this, and I think the reasoning was something akin to Mega Man...

nintendoeverything.com

I mean... The quote is them admitting that even if they don't have an official mascot, Mega Man works great as an unofficial one. I wouldn't say it's entirely false

I'm honestly not sure how much Banjo/MM/Simon support was derived from the conclusion of "this is a Nintendo game, games on Nintendo consoles should come first", but I do think a lot of it was present, especially for Banjo. That is not a reasoning Smash has ever abided by except for fan demand content, the closest thing to an exception is Tetris.

It was never a hard-set rule, but up until Cloud proved Nintendo connections weren't a hard-set rule, it wasn't unreasonable to assume the big crossover of Nintendo games would prioritize Nintendo-centric content, as it had for the series' entire lifespan up until then. So yes, any third-party who got popular around that time would more that likely be someone who fit that bill.

It could be a simple case of there being more audience overlap, but then where did "bring Banjo home" come from? Why was the sentiment always that Mega Man or Banjo MUST come first and anything else will not do? I think that's the big thing that really makes me not able to come around to Banjo: the "come home" element that - let me remind you - Grant Kirkhope, who WORKED on Ult, was pushing. Nintendo did not create Banjo, they deserve no credit for those games, and having an emotional attachment not to a game or its developer alone but what platform it is distributed on and who distributes it is irrational as all hell. Nobody speaks this way about Disney and Ghibli or Dreamworks and Aardman, hell nobody even speaks this way about Sony and Crash Bandicoot - it just makes Banjo support seem very superficial at best and bizarrely culty at worst.

We're only human, man, we're gonna get emotionally attached to things. That's natural. People get attached to their consoles, they get attached to the games they associate with them. Which games you played on that system varies between people, but if sales and attachment rates are any indication, we can tell there's certain games a lot of people played and associate with the system.

With Rare and Nintendo, Ninty owned up to half of Rare's shares for a time and Rare was essentially a second-party developer for a time. They defined the Donkey Kong Country sub-series, and almost all of their games in that time were Nintendo exclusives. Hell, if I remember correctly, Nintendo straight-up owned the Banjo IP until Microsoft took it in the buyout. As such, people strongly associated Banjo and Kazooie with the greater Nintendo ecosystem, and saw him as a sort of honorary Nintendo character. It probably doesn't help that Microsoft basically treats Banjo as Their IP To Sit On And Do Nothing With

And I don't think that's superficial or cultish. Super Smash Bros. is the big Nintendo crossover. It's made by Nintendo and largely features Nintendo characters. Much of the fanbase is people who play Nintendo games on Nintendo systems, and are inclined towards wanting more Nintendo characters in there. Banjo-Kazooie, being a major title for the Nintendo 64, naturally falls within that demographic

 

[HyperSomari64]

I mean... The quote is them admitting that even if they don't have an official mascot, Mega Man works great as an unofficial one. I wouldn't say it's entirely false

can't Capcom just make a poll where people around the globe choose which character from ALL of their franchises (except licensed games and games where they just are the publisher) can be their true official mascot?

Edit: thinking it more, Capcom it's like Cartoon Network.
Both have many iconic video games/tv shows, but none of which's characters could be considered their true company mascot. And the only times they had a mascot (The Jester and Moxy/Captain Commando), it got forgotten with time.

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

We're only human, man, we're gonna get emotionally attached to things. That's natural. People get attached to their consoles, they get attached to the games they associate with them. Which games you played on that system varies between people, but if sales and attachment rates are any indication, we can tell there's certain games a lot of people played and associate with the system.

With Rare and Nintendo, Ninty owned up to half of Rare's shares for a time and Rare was essentially a second-party developer for a time. They defined the Donkey Kong Country sub-series, and almost all of their games in that time were Nintendo exclusives. Hell, if I remember correctly, Nintendo straight-up owned the Banjo IP until Microsoft took it in the buyout. As such, people strongly associated Banjo and Kazooie with the greater Nintendo ecosystem, and saw him as a sort of honorary Nintendo character. It probably doesn't help that Microsoft basically treats Banjo as Their IP To Sit On And Do Nothing With

Just because that is logical does not mean it is rational. The console a game released on is not part of the game, and Nintendo provided nothing to Banjo except marketing and budget - the fact they owned the IP if anything just makes Nintendo appear to be a thorn in the series because again, they literally did not make it. There is also easy to find evidence that Rare are the ones choosing to do nothing with Banjo, Microsoft has nothing to do with it.

If Banjo support is indeed just a venn diagram thing and not motivated by console wars, why did the marketing for Banjo's inclusion play into the console war possessiveness? "Raring to go", Kirkhope's "we're home" tweet, the DK characters appearing and cheering - it feels like an active encouragement of that mentality. Why does Nintendo give more attention to Rare games on NSO than other games? One of the Rare trailers had gold sparkles and opened with a Rare logo reveal as if that alone is a big reveal, that is not something you give to a simple "hey, you can play this game on Nintendo consoles now", it feels like there's a deeper meaning attached and it makes me icky.

 

[Thegameandwatch]

it wasn't unreasonable to assume the big crossover of Nintendo games would prioritize Nintendo-centric content, as it had for the series' entire lifespan up until then

I think in some cases it was the feeling or if they will fit in rather then if they were always associated with Nintendo.

I think it was only Classic Megaman if it’s almost fully associated with Nintendo. The rest were either associated with other platforms such as arcades (Pac-Man and Ryu) and PlayStation for Snake’s case or it was later on such as with Sonic.

 

[BonafideFella]

i'd argue ryu {as he's portrayed in smash anyways} is as synonymous with nintendo as mega man is - street fighter ii on the SNES was a MASSIVE deal, it was the highest-selling home console game capcom had for AEONS

 

[Otoad64]

I think the “bring Banjo home” thing ultimately comes down to the fact that Banjo essentially died as soon as the series left Nintendo. Nobody talks about Aardman or Ghibli the same way because they exist outside of Dreamworks and Disney, something that can’t really be said for Banjo, Conker, etc.

i'd argue ryu {as he's portrayed in smash anyways} is as synonymous with nintendo as mega man is - street fighter ii on the SNES was a MASSIVE deal, it was the highest-selling home console game capcom had for AEONS

It’s weird because while that’s true, I feel like Street Fighter doesn’t have nearly as much of an overlap with Nintendo fans as Mega Man for whatever reason.

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

I think the “bring Banjo home” thing ultimately comes down to the fact that Banjo essentially died as soon as the series left Nintendo. Nobody talks about Aardman or Ghibli the same way because they exist outside of Dreamworks and Disney, something that can’t really be said for Banjo, Conker, etc.

I think this is the first thing I've seen that really helps the "come back home" thing make sense somewhat - but I don't think it's an excuse either, the truth about N&B's development and Threeie, and that things would've turned out the same way (at least in terms of Banjo's future and not N&B as a game alone) on Nintendo, is very easy to find, and even if the narrative of "Microsoft killed Banjo" was just people innocently conflating causation and correlation, it was absolutely amplified by console wars. To me I find it extremely hard to detach Banjo from console wars, that is what he is on a fundamental level to me: a console war martyr, the only Banjo discussion I see that doesn't evoke that martyr view is content actively DISPROVING the martyr perspective.

I think the real thing with Banjo for me is:

• Banjo is a harmless pick from the perspective of "I like this character"
• "I like this character" is not the logic that Smash fandom typically abides by, nor is it the logic Smash itself abides by, there is always some deeper element
• The alternative reasoning is completely nonsensical and represents one of the most negative aspects of Nintendo fandom
• Banjo's marketing and portrayal, added as a result of this fan demand, actively play into this reasoning

 

[LiveStudioAudience]

Here's my take. I think various characters in the context of "coming home" to Nintendo or having justified representation in the big N crossover is a console/company association, but specifically when a respective series was at its height relative to the marketplace.

Why are Rockman and Simon seen as Nintendo appropriate characters more than Ryu? Because to a degree Mega Man and Castlevania were so significant in that NES era that was dominating the US and even still doing strong in Japan (albeit facing challenges from the PC Engine in its latter years). Even the critical heights of something like Symphony of the Night were very much after the fact vs the big presence of the NES trilogy. By contrast Street Fighter 2 was big on the SNES sure, and the system was home to all the various SFII updates. However, the series was defined in many respects as an arcade one that got home ports. Respectable, well-done ports depending on the console, but still ports, nonetheless. I mean Fatal Fury was all over the SNES, but few would claim Terry as a major Nintendo adjacent figure because his home series are still culturally defined by the Neo Geo and arcades.

This all applies to Banjo-Kazooie as well. They had a sequel after the Rare buyout, cameos in stuff like Sonic & Sega All Stars racing, and some well down modern ports. But there can be little doubt their height was on the N64 with two very well-regarded games and Banjo getting in an incredibly well appreciated racing title. Their peak, with games that were rivalling (and some would say surpassing) the likes of Super Mario 64 were on the N64 and all the rational arguments about how Nintendo didn't make them and that the characters don't formally belong to them are emotionally meaningless to fans that recall when Banjo-Kazooie was a big deal was their time on the Nintendo 64.

To use a somewhat tortured baseball comparison, if Babe Ruth had ever ended up working with the Yankees again in any significant capacity after 1935, fans and the press would have seen it as the Babe coming home, despite that fact that he was someone born in Maryland and whose first major league team was the Boston Red Sox. For a lot of people his proverbial home was the Yankees. Attachment and association, when maintained enough after many years, becomes too strong to ever fully let go of. Now that context is effectively a neutral one to me as the console wars produced far worse aftereffects than fans wanting Banjo in Smash, so whether misplaced sentiment or not, I simply see it as the way things are in the emotionally driven culture of general fan hype.

 

[Baysha]

Only slightly related take but I think that a Nintendo focused Smash with Nintendo related third parties should also have Nintendo related fourth parties such as James Bond, Scrooge McDuck, etc.

 

[SharkLord]

Just because that is logical does not mean it is rational. The console a game released on is not part of the game, and Nintendo provided nothing to Banjo except marketing and budget - the fact they owned the IP if anything just makes Nintendo appear to be a thorn in the series because again, they literally did not make it. There is also easy to find evidence that Rare are the ones choosing to do nothing with Banjo, Microsoft has nothing to do with it.

If Banjo support is indeed just a venn diagram thing and not motivated by console wars, why did the marketing for Banjo's inclusion play into the console war possessiveness? "Raring to go", Kirkhope's "we're home" tweet, the DK characters appearing and cheering - it feels like an active encouragement of that mentality. Why does Nintendo give more attention to Rare games on NSO than other games? One of the Rare trailers had gold sparkles and opened with a Rare logo reveal as if that alone is a big reveal, that is not something you give to a simple "hey, you can play this game on Nintendo consoles now", it feels like there's a deeper meaning attached and it makes me icky.

I mean, they're made by Rare. "Raring to go" is a harmless pun. DKC is also a beloved series made by Rare, so there's another connection to play off of. It's also worth considering that since Rare's now owned by Microsoft and their games haven't been on Nintendo systems for a long time, so having Rare games on a Nintendo system in this day and age is a big deal.

For the notion of "coming home," I'll just repost LSA's writeup, since they cover basically everything I'd need to. Banjo's peak was in the N64 era, so naturally that's the system he's most associated with

Here's my take. I think various characters in the context of "coming home" to Nintendo or having justified representation in the big N crossover is a console/company association, but specifically when a respective series was at its height relative to the marketplace.

Why are Rockman and Simon seen as Nintendo appropriate characters more than Ryu? Because to a degree Mega Man and Castlevania were so significant in that NES era that was dominating the US and even still doing strong in Japan (albeit facing challenges from the PC Engine in its latter years). Even the critical heights of something like Symphony of the Night were very much after the fact vs the big presence of the NES trilogy. By contrast Street Fighter 2 was big in the SNES sure, and the system was home to all the various SFII updates. However, the series was defined in many respects as an arcade one that got home ports. Respectable, well-done ports depending on the console, but still ports, nonetheless. I mean Fatal Fury was all over the SNES, but few would claim Terry as a major Nintendo adjacent figure because his home series are still culturally defined by the Neo Geo and arcades.

This all applies to Banjo-Kazooie as well. They had a sequel after the Rare buyout, cameos in stuff like Sonic & Sega All Stars racing, and some well down modern ports. But there can be little doubt their height was on the N64 with two very well-regarded games and Banjo getting in an incredibly well appreciated racing title. Their peak, with games that were rivalling (and some would say surpassing) the likes of Super Mario 64 were on the N64 and all the rational arguments about how Nintendo didn't make them and that the characters don't formally belong to them are emotionally meaningless to fans that recall when Banjo-Kazooie was a big deal was their time on the Nintendo 64.

To use a somewhat tortured baseball metaphor, if Babe Ruth had ever ended up working with the Yankees again in any significant capacity after 1935, fans and the press would have seen it as the Babe coming home, despite that fact that he was someone born in Maryland and whose first major league team was the Boston Red Sox. For a lot of people his proverbial home was the Yankees. Attachment and association, when strong enough after many years, becomes too strong to ever fully let go of. Such a context is effectively a neutral one to me, as even the console wars produced far worse aftereffects than fans wanting Banjo in Smash so whether misplaced sentiment or not, I simply see it as the way things are in the emotionally driven culture of general fan hype.

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

To use a somewhat tortured baseball comparison, if Babe Ruth had ever ended up working with the Yankees again in any significant capacity after 1935, fans and the press would have seen it as the Babe coming home, despite that fact that he was someone born in Maryland and whose first major league team was the Boston Red Sox. For a lot of people his proverbial home was the Yankees. Attachment and association, when maintained enough after many years, becomes too strong to ever fully let go of. Now that context is effectively a neutral one to me as the console wars produced far worse aftereffects than fans wanting Banjo in Smash, so whether misplaced sentiment or not, I simply see it as the way things are in the emotionally driven culture of general fan hype.

That kinda proves my point. If a mentality can be compared to the way sports fans get attached to sports teams... it's probably inherently best to evolve past and condemn it.

Anyway, to get back to my original topic: Banjo does not have a particularly notable cultural footprint, and that disparity is notable tenfold when put against Microsoft's other IPs, which are significantly more mainstream than any of Capcom or Konami's sans maybe some arcade stuff like Frogger. He sets a clear prescedent that obscure, off-beat games can be prioritised for third parties. There's no reason that you can't snub say, Kratos for Vibri, based on this established prescedent EXCEPT for potentially a lack of fan demand, and that point, why do we allow fan demand to follow this heirarchy system if we know it can break it?

 

[SharkLord]

That kinda proves my point. If a mentality can be compared to the way sports fans get attached to sports teams... it's probably inherently best to evolve past and condemn it.

Anyway, to get back to my original topic: Banjo does not have a particularly notable cultural footprint, and that disparity is notable tenfold when put against Microsoft's other IPs, which are significantly more mainstream than any of Capcom or Konami's sans maybe some arcade stuff like Frogger. He sets a clear prescedent that obscure, off-beat games can be prioritised for third parties. There's no reason that you can't snub say, Kratos for Vibri, based on this established prescedent EXCEPT for potentially a lack of fan demand, and that point, why do we allow fan demand to follow this heirarchy system if we know it can break it?

Fan demand isn't really something you can force. People aren't just going to unanimously decide "Y'know what let's start pushing this obscure character from a single game from over a decade ago" on the spot just to "break the hierarchy." The most popular third-parties in speculation today - Crash, Master Chief, Doomguy, Dante, etc. - Tend to be popular in general, outside the Smash fanbase. The smaller-scale characters that still get tossed around, like Shantae or Rayman, are holdovers from the more Nintendo-centric era of speculation, and managed to hold on into now. Most people are going to gather around characters that A: They think are possible, and B: They actually want to see in Smash.

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

Fan demand isn't really something you can force. People aren't just going to unanimously decide "Y'know what let's start pushing this obscure character from a single game from over a decade ago" on the spot just to "break the hierarchy." The most popular third-parties in speculation today - Crash, Master Chief, Doomguy, Dante, etc. - Tend to be popular in general, outside the Smash fanbase. The smaller-scale characters that still get tossed around, like Shantae or Rayman, are holdovers from the more Nintendo-centric era of speculation, and managed to hold on into now. Most people are going to gather around characters that A: They think are possible, and B: They actually want to see in Smash.

So that raises more questions:

1. If fan demand cannot be swayed by any individual or group, and only occurs organically through simultanious thought, why should fan demand be listened to? Surely that just reinforces the idea I went into prior that fandom is not a voluntary or laborious act, and therefore should not be "rewarded". Are fan demand choices even intelligent design if this is how fan demand works?
2. It has been proven time and time again that whoever calls the shots on Smash's roster does not care what is percieved as "impossible" or "possible", Sakurai in particular makes a big deal in his BTS content and interviews about only really wanting to make fans happy as opposed to any other reason, so why is possibility ever considered by anyone?

I don't expect that there are more Ristar fans than Shadow fans, but I do expect, from the alleged "point" of Smash and roster speculation - to just have the character you want - that someone who wants Ristar could say it and be listened to, without needing to prove anything, and that Smash's own roster design would disregard the numbers and throw caution to the wind so long as ONE person likes it.

 

[GoldenYuiitusin]

Most people are going to gather around characters that A: They think are possible, and B: They actually want to see in Smash.

Had to.

 

[SharkLord]

View attachment 401985

Had to.

Vegeta would be the kind of guy who would back someone generally considered likely, actually get his most wanted, and remain salty for years anyways because his least favorite was revealed the same day

EDIT: He'd also be the kind of guy to get one prediction right, let the success go to his head, and then get continuously blindsided for the rest of the speculation cycle

 

[BackseatSakurai]

I think fan demand filtered through some sort of other criteria should be the way it's done. For example, if the most popular character request is Goku, that doesn't sway the needle, because it doesn't hit other checkboxes. However, if two characters that are virtually equal across every other metric are on the table, but one has a huge grassroots fan movement, then it would sway towards that character.

Basically, make the fans happy as long as what the fans are asking for doesn't break the template of what is attempting to be achieved in the first place.

edit: also worth considering that a good deal of fan "demands" are more like fan expectations, which the series creates through its own decisions. This is why the obligatory "new pokemon", "new FE" characters are irritating - it makes the speculation more boring. I don't really understand wishlisting from the perspective of trying to be "correct" about what will happen - predictions are separate from wishlists - but I dunno what the hell I'm even rambling about atp.

 

[Opossum]

So that raises more questions:

1. If fan demand cannot be swayed by any individual or group, and only occurs organically through simultanious thought, why should fan demand be listened to? Surely that just reinforces the idea I went into prior that fandom is not a voluntary or laborious act, and therefore should not be "rewarded". Are fan demand choices even intelligent design if this is how fan demand works?

I...don't really know how this flows together to be an if/then. Because I'm reading this as "if I can't make people want characters they otherwise wouldn't, or make them not want ones they otherwise would, why should fan demand matter?" which is just very problematic. If people want a character, you put them in to appease them because that means more people play the game. It's an open and shut case.

1. It has been proven time and time again that whoever calls the shots on Smash's roster does not care what is percieved as "impossible" or "possible", Sakurai in particular makes a big deal in his BTS content and interviews about only really wanting to make fans happy as opposed to any other reason, so why is possibility ever considered by anyone?

The real answer here is that people are very set in their ways and refuse to budge on things that they themselves see as impossible. The whole "it can't happen because it hasn't happened before" paradox. It's nothing particularly new or exclusive to Smash.

 

[ninjahmos]

If Ganondorf ever gets a reworked moveset, I think it'd be pretty cool if they gave him an option to switch between hand-to-hand combat and using his sword, and his moves could be different for both options.