Unpopular Smash Opinions (BE CIVIL)

[Thegameandwatch]

While Project M had great ideas for the most part, I think it’s just weird that they were very inconsistent with the Melee characters since some were obviously updated (Ganondorf and Roy for example) while others were reverted to their Melee counterparts without much changes (Falco)

It’s like how Sheik still has Chain despite it not being a good move because they didn’t want to buff the character too much. Same with removing its tether recovery function that was in Brawl.

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

While Project M had great ideas for the most part, I think it’s just weird that they were very inconsistent with the Melee characters since some were obviously updated (Ganondorf and Roy for example) while others were reverted to their Melee counterparts without much changes (Falco)

It’s like how Sheik still has Chain despite it not being a good move because they didn’t want to buff the character too much. Same with removing its tether recovery function that was in Brawl.

I'm pretty sure the mentality was based on Melee tier placement. Project M as a whole originated as a project to revert Falco, and I'd say it was the right move, at least in regards to shine. That's also why Brawl newcomers generally got more changes than Melee and 64 newcomers as a whole, it wasn't made for Brawl fans.

 

[Mario & Sonic Guy]

Now that I think about it, the fact that Wario-Man could use items can pretty much explain why his power boost wasn't too significant. Whereas, for Giga Mac, his damage output had to be doubled for most of his attacks to compensate for his inability to use items; something that Giga Bowser should've had himself, as he too couldn't use items.

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

I just posted about this on the MVS thread, and it kinda surprised me that the response suggested my experience wasn't simply rare but an outright outlier. Not an opinion, but could give context for why I see Smash the way I do.

I wasn't sold on Smash as a kid by Pikachu or Mario or Yoshi or even Sonic, I browsed the Brawl dojo with a family member who was interested in the game (IIRC they wanted to play as Sheik as they liked OOT) and was really sold on it when I saw these images:

I got into Smash because I wanted to play as this funny silhouette man and find out what he's about. I always assumed everybody who likes Smash got into it because they saw some cool character - maybe Falco, Meta Knight, Ness, ROB, so on - they have never heard of, who just happened to be standing alongside Mario, or some very specific side-character from a specific game they played (like Sheik as mentioned above) - the "nobody plays as Mario in Mario Kart" meme - and that the only outlier element to my experience was that it was Mr. G&W specifically and not a "cool" character.

 

[GothicSlenderman]

Smash fans are the straight white guys of platform fighters.

They take up the majority, are the most privileged, get everything they want but act like they're the most oppressed. They go after any minority (literally any other platform fighter) and act like we're out to get them when we're just trying to exist when everything is already against us.

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

Smash fans are the straight white guys of platform fighters.

They take up the majority, are the most privileged, get everything they want but act like they're the most oppressed. They go after any minority (literally any other platform fighter) and act like we're out to get them when we're just trying to exist when everything is already against us.

You have a point but that is a terrible comparison.

 

[Perkilator]

Smash fans are the straight white guys of platform fighters.

They take up the majority, are the most privileged, get everything they want but act like they're the most oppressed. They go after any minority (literally any other platform fighter) and act like we're out to get them when we're just trying to exist when everything is already against us.

Not to mention that they refuse to give anything outside their bubble a fair shot and only like what they already know.

 

[Ze Diglett]

I just posted about this on the MVS thread, and it kinda surprised me that the response suggested my experience wasn't simply rare but an outright outlier. Not an opinion, but could give context for why I see Smash the way I do.

I wasn't sold on Smash as a kid by Pikachu or Mario or Yoshi or even Sonic, I browsed the Brawl dojo with a family member who was interested in the game (IIRC they wanted to play as Sheik as they liked OOT) and was really sold on it when I saw these images:
View attachment 398518
I got into Smash because I wanted to play as this funny silhouette man and find out what he's about. I always assumed everybody who likes Smash got into it because they saw some cool character - maybe Falco, Meta Knight, Ness, ROB, so on - they have never heard of, who just happened to be standing alongside Mario, or some very specific side-character from a specific game they played (like Sheik as mentioned above) - the "nobody plays as Mario in Mario Kart" meme - and that the only outlier element to my experience was that it was Mr. G&W specifically and not a "cool" character.

I wanna say I got into Melee as a kid after seeing the Pokemon in it and not knowing who anyone else is, but the truth is I stuck almost exclusively to those Pokemon + Mario in my played experience of the game. That said, I think I did grow into the "who the heck is that" appeal as I got older, with folks like ROB and G&W now being some of my favorites. Maybe I just became a closeted hipster or something

 

[Cutie Gwen]

Smash fans are the straight white guys of platform fighters.

They take up the majority, are the most privileged, get everything they want but act like they're the most oppressed. They go after any minority (literally any other platform fighter) and act like we're out to get them when we're just trying to exist when everything is already against us.

I understand what you're saying, Smash is the biggest of the genre with nothing else coming even remotely close to it, but this is an incredibly weird thing to say. I may not check out much in the genre but isn't Rivals of Aether pretty popular with a healthy playerbase and no big glaring issues people have like Multiversus' monitization, PSABR's mechanic of only killing with supers or NASB just being ridiculously cheap looking and feeling at launch? Especially when these games unfortunately often get hyped up as Smash killers, thus having overly fanatic people get very defensive as a response (which tbf isn't a Smash specific thing)

 

[Diddy Kong]

Smash fans are the straight white guys of platform fighters.

They take up the majority, are the most privileged, get everything they want but act like they're the most oppressed. They go after any minority (literally any other platform fighter) and act like we're out to get them when we're just trying to exist when everything is already against us.

Not a good comparison cause Smash is the originator of these platform fighter games. Hence in a superior position both in marketability, budget, fan base and business prospects. Also, most other platform fighters just had one installment and so people are much happier to just have that one game to experience.

The fans are definitely annoying, loud and privileged but, not a good comparison still.

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

I think if there's any real world comparison you can give to elitist Smash fans, it's the way less extreme/tone-deaf comparison (not even a comparison depending on context) of school bullies. Nintendo's hype marketing - even if not by intention - directly contributes to an unhealthily competitive environment extending outside of the game, there's only so much accountability you can put on the little guy when it all clearly starts at one big, very powerful guy.

 

[Perkilator]

I think a plethora of veteran reworks plus more of a balance between single-player and multi-player content would be more than enough for the next Smash game to stand out from Ultimate and feel fresh in its own right.

 

[Cyborg Sun]

I always assumed everybody who likes Smash got into it because they saw some cool character - maybe Falco, Meta Knight, Ness, ROB, so on - they have never heard of, who just happened to be standing alongside Mario, or some very specific side-character from a specific game they played (like Sheik as mentioned above) - the "nobody plays as Mario in Mario Kart" meme - and that the only outlier element to my experience was that it was Mr. G&W specifically and not a "cool" character.

me getting into this game as a young kid by pure random chance (parents picked it up alongside getting a wii) not knowing who any of the characters were aside from pikachu (who I didn't even know was in the game until I actually started playing) and maybe sonic (again, didn't know was in the game AND unlockable):

 

[SharkLord]

I understand what you're saying, Smash is the biggest of the genre with nothing else coming even remotely close to it, but this is an incredibly weird thing to say. I may not check out much in the genre but isn't Rivals of Aether pretty popular with a healthy playerbase and no big glaring issues people have like Multiversus' monitization, PSABR's mechanic of only killing with supers or NASB just being ridiculously cheap looking and feeling at launch? Especially when these games unfortunately often get hyped up as Smash killers, thus having overly fanatic people get very defensive as a response (which tbf isn't a Smash specific thing)

Yeah, Rivals seems like it's pretty healthy. Half of it was the workshop and the other half was having a more competitive-oriented platform fighter, which let them build their way up to an actual sequel, which I'd totally play if I had computer stronger than an average laptop. It's just that there's very few other platform fighters that have both the name power and the polish of Smash without being super gimmicky. I think there was another competitive plat-fighter out there, Rushdown Revolt, but I haven't heard that name in ages so who knows how it's doing

 

[Diddy Kong]

I just posted about this on the MVS thread, and it kinda surprised me that the response suggested my experience wasn't simply rare but an outright outlier. Not an opinion, but could give context for why I see Smash the way I do.

I wasn't sold on Smash as a kid by Pikachu or Mario or Yoshi or even Sonic, I browsed the Brawl dojo with a family member who was interested in the game (IIRC they wanted to play as Sheik as they liked OOT) and was really sold on it when I saw these images:
View attachment 398518
I got into Smash because I wanted to play as this funny silhouette man and find out what he's about. I always assumed everybody who likes Smash got into it because they saw some cool character - maybe Falco, Meta Knight, Ness, ROB, so on - they have never heard of, who just happened to be standing alongside Mario, or some very specific side-character from a specific game they played (like Sheik as mentioned above) - the "nobody plays as Mario in Mario Kart" meme - and that the only outlier element to my experience was that it was Mr. G&W specifically and not a "cool" character.

Definitely not me. I got into Smash because Donkey Kong and Pokemon where in my opinion the best things ever in that point of time. And Mario and Yoshi where cool too. I didn't know Link, like everyone else he was "Zelda" but I definitely did recognize him. Zelda is the very first franchise Smash introduced me to that got me interested. Metroid, Kirby, Mother, Fire Emblem, and countless other series followed after.

 

[AlRex]

I got into Smash because I was already into Mario, Pokémon, and a few other games, and it more or less introduced me to the Nintendo catalogue that wasn’t Mario, Zelda, or Pokémon adjacent. There were a good handful of third party series I already knew, and I had also played some PlayStation, DreamCast, and PC games, and later got into older consoles and emulation, as well as keeping relatively consistent with Nintendo consoles since then.

 

[MBRedboy31]

I inherited a bunch of videogames from my older brother so I’ve had Smash 64 for as long as I can remember, so I don’t have a conscious reason I got into Smash. The characters I recognized were the Pokémon characters, the Mario and Mario-adjacent characters, and Link. I mained Pikachu back then, both out of recognizability and out of Thunder spamming being the best strategy I knew. I eventually bought Kirby 64 as a kid, but I knew him from Smash first.

(My character picks were generally a lot more boring back when I was little; I was the guy who picked Mario in Mario Kart and Mario Party just because he’s the main character, ahaha.)

 

[GoldenYuiitusin]

I hadn't really gotten into Smash until I found out Mewtwo (at the time my favorite Pokémon and still one of my favorites) was in Melee, which was only on the second time I played it at a friend's house. Then I was hooked and wanted a GameCube of my own for Melee.

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

One thing I should mention in regards to Mr. G&W is that I always gravitated towards retro content as a kid in general - even before really understanding decades as a concept properly, I could kinda just comprehend "this is old" from looking at tiny things like outdated graphic design; JPG artefacts online; or film debris on TV episodes, and was drawn to it - one thing I remember very early in life was picking a Wacky Races DVD at a supermarket over more modern movies without any prompting from my parents or knowledge of what it is. I almost certainly had fully comprehended the idea of "old vs. new" by the time I got Brawl (though I also liked the retro characters I played as in crossovers at a more formative age without knowing they were the older ones - Stimpy in Nicktoons: Attack of the Toybots, and Cow & Chicken in Cartoon Network Racing), and likely absorbed a bit of "only 90s kids remember" internet content, so I guess my affection for Mr. Game & Watch going in blind was technically rooted in an existing like, but moreso for just the general concept of the 60s-through-90s than a liking for Game & Watch.

 

[Louie G.]

Ultimately I got into Smash Bros because it was, by extension, a Mario game. And I loved Mario, but my experience with the wider Nintendo sphere was still blossoming. Smash is what introduced me to a lot of characters and series I would later fall in love with, so Mario functioned as the trojan horse that connected this series to my then obsession (Mario Kart) and put it in my hands.

But I had run-ins with Smash prior to that, and... in retrospect, my experience is actually not all that different than Wario x3's. When I played Melee at my friend's house, I recall picking Jigglypuff - I didn't play Pokemon as a kid, so this was just a matter of choosing the funniest looking guy. When I played Brawl with the same friend, I picked Mr. Game & Watch. When I played Brawl with my cousins, I chose King Dedede. I knew nothing about any of these characters, I just thought they looked strikingly fun and goofy. Lo and behold, years later, I am a loyal King Dedede main and he's pretty much my favorite Nintendo character from my favorite Nintendo series. I'm not sure it was these characters who actively made me seek out the game, but I'm sure the sheer colorful variety on display certainly helped push me further toward it. So I suppose I'm somewhere right in the middle of this.

 

[Perkilator]

Quoting from another thread:

Another another thing I dislike is when people want to keep a second Link in the next game. I'm sorry, but to me, one Link is enough.

 

[Diddy Kong]

Quoting from another thread:

I find a secondary Link to be of higher value than a secondary Zelda.

Yes it means what it says. I would pick Toon Link to stay over Sheik. In a heartbeat.

 

[Cutie Gwen]

Quoting from another thread:

I'm quite fond of Toon Link but I get what you mean, multiple characters with the same name does end up sounding rather uninteresting conceptually, it's like 70% of the reason I am utterly uninterested in the idea of Paper Mario as a playable character, even if he wouldn't be a third version of Mario's moveset. Or third or fourth, depending on how one sees Luigi and Wario, I suppose

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

I'm all for more variant characters, but ironically Paper Mario - probably the most popular one - is the least interesting to me. I can't really put my finger on why though - I'd argue it's because it's essentially the same character design in a different art style instead of a proper diegetic outfit/power variation on Mario, but that'd be a little hypocritical since I'm all for Classic Sonic and (until recent developments) Classic DK. I think part of it is that it does feel a bit main-protag-for-the-sake-of-main-protag, and a partner would be a better pick.

Anyway, speaking of variant clones... Sanic has been an official Sega character for quite some time, and while I wouldn't go for him over Tails, Knux, or Eggman; he would make an cute clone even past the initial novelty - though I most certainly would not want a unique moveset.

 

[SubspaceJigglypuff]

I'm only fine with "variant" characters if they're low-cost clones. The second someone like Dr. Mario or Toon Link actually takes considerable dev time to make is when I'd go "oh nah."

Sheik is the only one I don't mind, she's basically Zelda in name only. Well not even that really

 

[Louie G.]

Over time I've grown to feel that the judgement of Sheik as a variant of Zelda is kind of pedantic. I don't have that much stake in the character myself, but Sheik has divorced themselves well from their previous gimmick (which barely worked) and grown into a full fledged character in a pretty convincing way.

Outside the series context, there's really nothing bridging the two together in Smash anymore and making a fuss about it just reads to me as "I want Impa instead" most of the time. I realize that Sheik is, quite literally, a variant of Zelda but in just about every possible way differentiates themselves into their own thing entirely and if you want to be "that guy" are probably just straight up different people from different timelines at this point.

There isn't much that sets Sheik in a category that much different than community darlings like Skull Kid or Midna, but perhaps how you feel about those characters may be a tell on how you feel about Sheik and other "one-off" concepts.

 

[Cutie Gwen]

Over time I've grown to feel that the judgement of Sheik as a variant of Zelda is kind of pedantic. I don't have that much stake in the character myself, but Sheik has divorced themselves well from their previous gimmick (which barely worked) and grown into a full fledged character in a pretty convincing way.

Outside the series context, there's really nothing bridging the two together in Smash anymore and making a fuss about it just reads to me as "I want Impa instead" most of the time.

It does kinda feel like a genuine critique when people say they dislike the idea of pig Ganon as we already have 3 Links and 2 Zeldas but beyond the singe issue of Zelda only having Triforce bearers, I'm inclined to agree

 

[Louie G.]

It does kinda feel like a genuine critique when people say they dislike the idea of pig Ganon as we already have 3 Links and 2 Zeldas but beyond the singe issue of Zelda only having Triforce bearers, I'm inclined to agree

Yeah, I think continuing to get variants of the Triforce crew would be frustrating when there's a wealth of untapped potential in Zelda's expanded cast, but I'm moreso in the camp of "removing Sheik doesn't accomplish anything" than I am "we should add Pig Ganon and Tetra also" (although... to be honest, I really like Tetra, but that's besides the point).

People seem to believe retroactively cutting Links and Zeldas is doing the series a great service but in reality it's needless posturing and enacting grudges that just further hollow out a series that has been under-served on the roster as is. Sheik is like the one thing saving that lineup from being stale bread. Zelda has more than enough clout where Sheik and probably Young or Toon Link can very easily coexist with whoever else they see it fit to add next anyway.

 

[Champion of Hyrule]

Ignore this wrong thread

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

The way Link, Zelda, and Ganondorf are treated in Smash speculation does feel like a further hypocracy of "characters aren't just functions" mentality. All the Link, Zelda, and Ganondorf designs are, while the same character out-universe, different people in-universe with different stories that could not have occured to the same person - Smash has been interchanging a set of characters for functionally identical substitutes since Brawl, and even outright passing them off as BEING the previous character - yet nobody complains about that, and instead complains about the coexistence of what are essentially distinct characters in a diegetic sense.

 

[fogbadge]

The way Link, Zelda, and Ganondorf are treated in Smash speculation does feel like a further hypocracy of "characters aren't just functions" mentality. All the Link, Zelda, and Ganondorf designs are, while the same character out-universe, different people in-universe with different stories that could not have occured to the same person - Smash has been interchanging a set of characters for functionally identical substitutes since Brawl, and even outright passing them off as BEING the previous character - yet nobody complains about that, and instead complains about the coexistence of what are essentially distinct characters in a diegetic sense.

what are you talking about? ultimate acknowledges that BOTW link and TP link are separate incarnations

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

what are you talking about? ultimate acknowledges that BOTW link and TP link are separate incarnations

Yeah, and it completely swapped the latter out for the prior while acting like it wasn't a cut (using the name "Link" instead of adding some kind of adjective, then treating TP Link and OOT Zelda as variations in spirits). Smash treats the individual Links as interchangable functions and not truly distinct characters. I don't think that's bad at all, but it feels very inconsistent to me that the Smash fandom, being as anti-characters-as-functions and in support of "everyone getting their favourite", as it is, never complains about this. "Everyone is here" does not apply if characters aren't just functions (don't even get me started on black Yoshi, who is one of the only Yoshis with any kind of distinctive trait or plot role through Story)

 

[fogbadge]

Yeah, and it completely swapped the latter out for the prior while acting like it wasn't a cut (using the name "Link" instead of adding some kind of adjective, then treating TP Link and OOT Zelda as variations in spirits). Smash treats the individual Links as interchangable functions and not truly distinct characters. I don't think that's bad at all, but it feels very inconsistent to me that the Smash fandom, being as anti-characters-as-functions and in support of "everyone getting their favourite", as it is, never complains about this. "Everyone is here" does not apply if characters aren't just functions (don't even get me started on black Yoshi, who is one of the only Yoshis with any kind of distinctive trait or plot role through Story)

wario all of nintendo treats all the links as the same characters. as do most of the fans. of course they don't care. link is link as far as they're concerned

 

[KingofPhantoms]

The way Link, Zelda, and Ganondorf are treated in Smash speculation does feel like a further hypocracy of "characters aren't just functions" mentality. All the Link, Zelda, and Ganondorf designs are, while the same character out-universe, different people in-universe with different stories that could not have occured to the same person - Smash has been interchanging a set of characters for functionally identical substitutes since Brawl, and even outright passing them off as BEING the previous character - yet nobody complains about that, and instead complains about the coexistence of what are essentially distinct characters in a diegetic sense.

Yeah, and it completely swapped the latter out for the prior while acting like it wasn't a cut (using the name "Link" instead of adding some kind of adjective, then treating TP Link and OOT Zelda as variations in spirits). Smash treats the individual Links as interchangable functions and not truly distinct characters. I don't think that's bad at all, but it feels very inconsistent to me that the Smash fandom, being as anti-characters-as-functions and in support of "everyone getting their favourite", as it is, never complains about this. "Everyone is here" does not apply if characters aren't just functions (don't even get me started on black Yoshi, who is one of the only Yoshis with any kind of distinctive trait or plot role through Story)

I feel like the LoZ characters, or at least the Triforce Wielders are kind of an exception as veterans since, at the end of the day, there's always going to be a new version of them or a new take on them at some point or another. You can either stick to one from an older game ,or move onto one from a newer game. None of them have ever gotten a complete moveset overhaul but elements from every incarnation of Link that's been playable in Smash have been incorporated into the moveset of each new verisions of him without giving him completely new moves. That's just how the Legend of Zelda series itself is. There aren't any different versions or incarnations of Mario, Samus, Marth (unless you count his descendants), Pit or Sonic throughout the games of their respective series for the development team to pick from. Toon Link and Young Link are exceptions even to this itself due to being much younger incarnations of the character and, in the case of the former, having a completely different and distinct artstyle compared to the older 3D Links seen thus far.

Also, this logic doesn't work for Ganondorf. OoT Ganondorf and TP Ganondorf are canonically the exact the same incarnation of the character, and "they're" the only versions of him to have ever been playable in the SSB series as of yet. His design and traits just differ between Ocarina and Twilight to better fit with the different aesthetics and themes of each respective game.

As for Yoshi...I feel like palette swaps of characters who are otherwise physically identical and with very few other defining characteristic differences are kind of a different story, pun not intended. And don't Black Yoshi and White Yoshi have the exact same gameplay traits in Story? Either way, neither are nearly as distinct from the original green Yoshi as a character as Dark Pit is from Pit.

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

I feel like the LoZ characters, or at least the Triforce Wielders are kind of an exception as veterans since, at the end of the day, there's always going to be a new version of them or a new take on them some point or another. You can either stick to one from an older game ,or move onto one from a newer game. None of them have ever gotten a complete moveset overhaul but elements from every incarnation of Link that's been playable in Smash have been incorporated into the moveset of each new verisions of without giving him completely new moves. That's just how the Legend of Zelda series itself is. There aren't any different versions or incarnations of Mario, Samus, Marth (unless you count his descendants), Pit or Sonic throughout the games of their respective series for the development team to pick from. Toon Link and Young Link are exceptions even to this itself due to being much younger incarnations of the character and, in the case of the former, having a completely different and distinct artstyle compared to the older 3D Links seen thus far.

Also, this logic doesn't work for Ganondorf. OoT Ganondorf and TP Ganondorf are canonically the exact the same incarnation of the character, and "they're" the only versions of him to have ever been playable in the SSB series as of yet. His design and traits just differ between Ocarina and Twilight to better fit with the different aesthetics and themes of each respective game.

As for Yoshi...I feel like palette swaps of characters who are otherwise physically identical and with very few other defining characteristic differences are kind of a different story, pun not intended. And don't Black Yoshi and White Yoshi have the exact same gameplay traits in Story? Either way, neither are nearly as distinct from the original green Yoshi as a character as Dark Pit is from Pit.

Keep in mind that I'm not disparaging the idea of swapping out designs for Link and such, I already understand the logic behind that and why it is specific to Zelda - my specific issue is with Smash fandom, that there is a notion of "The original story and source material matters, characters can't just be replaced with someone else with the same moves/archetype because fans want to relive the original game and represent it when playing with friends, EIH is a miracle because it didn't do that", and then Zelda rep doing exactly that being overlooked. Maybe I am just subconciously looking for gotchas, but I really cannot comprehend how extreme FAC is supposed to make sense compared to extreme CAF when it is such a well of contradictions.

 

[Diddy Kong]

Yeah, and it completely swapped the latter out for the prior while acting like it wasn't a cut (using the name "Link" instead of adding some kind of adjective, then treating TP Link and OOT Zelda as variations in spirits). Smash treats the individual Links as interchangable functions and not truly distinct characters. I don't think that's bad at all, but it feels very inconsistent to me that the Smash fandom, being as anti-characters-as-functions and in support of "everyone getting their favourite", as it is, never complains about this. "Everyone is here" does not apply if characters aren't just functions (don't even get me started on black Yoshi, who is one of the only Yoshis with any kind of distinctive trait or plot role through Story)

This is why we need Link as a Link Echo Fighter.

And it would be a glorious thing.

If we can't have any other sort of Zelda newcomer ever, at least give me this. And Impa as a Sheik Echo. That's the bare minimum.

 

[Opossum]

Keep in mind that I'm not disparaging the idea of swapping out designs for Link and such, I already understand the logic behind that and why it is specific to Zelda - my specific issue is with Smash fandom, that there is a notion of "The original story and source material matters, characters can't just be replaced with someone else with the same moves/archetype because fans want to relive the original game and represent it when playing with friends, EIH is a miracle because it didn't do that", and then Zelda rep doing exactly that being overlooked. Maybe I am just subconciously looking for gotchas, but I really cannot comprehend how extreme FAC is supposed to make sense compared to extreme CAF when it is such a well of contradictions.

That's less of a contradiction as far as Smash fans go and more of a difference in how the Zelda franchise Specifically operates. At the end of the day Link is Link, but Luigi isn't, I don't know, Bob from Accounting who was made up for the game and takes Luigi's moveset.

 

[UserKev]

I may be reaching here but I would have much preferred Dedede's Kirby 64 design over the design he ended up with.

This version always stuck with me with how adorable or whatever but still manages to seem menacing and angry. Him being more Penguin like in the 64 game is greatly appealing to me.

 

[Swamp Sensei]

I think people fearing Xenoblade turning into the next Fire Emblem are missing the whole problem. The big issue Fire Emblem has is the numerous amount of clone characters beefing up the total number of characters.

Xenoblade with it's two (technically three I guess) unique characters isn't likely to have that problem. A new Xenoblade character likely won't be clone or echo fighter due to how unique the main casts are in body shape and play style.

 

[Mario & Sonic Guy]

Ironically, you can't exactly use Lucina the same way as you would with Marth. The same also applies between Chrom and Roy, especially since they don't even share the same up special; Chrom's Soaring Slash has more in common with Ike's Aether.