Official Next Smash - Speculation & Discussion Thread

[Swamp Sensei]

Because it's possible Wii Fit and ARMS could go if theres around or even over 10 cuts that include unique characters. I have no idea why this fanbase is obsessed with paterns, just because they haven't done x thing doesn't mean they ever won't unless it's explicity stated like no anime characters.
Unless Sakurai has explicity stated 1stparty franchises already aded can't get cut, then it's definitely possible they could go, like do you really think Nintendo will cut let's say a fan-favourite like Ike or Sakurai will cut Palutena over Min Min or Wii Fit Trainer if they have to pick? most likely not.

I don't think Ike or Palutena will go.

But I also don't think Wii Fit Trainer or Min Min will go.

I expect substantial cuts. But I don't believe those characters will be lower priority.

 

[The Stoopid Unikorn]

Yeah, no.
Not going to deny Call of Duty and Grand Theft Auto being popular, but there's a higher chance of a piano falling on my head and killing me than there is of those being featured in Smash.

On my way to get a piano because GTA in Smash would be really funny
for legal reasons, I must specify that this is a joke

 

[Perkilator]

Actually, this made me think of something; I know that the following characters are major recurring requests left hanging:

• Waluigi
• Toad
• Geno
• Dixie Kong
• Bandana Waddle Dee
• Krystal
• A Sonic newcomer
• Octoling

Who else am I missing?

Bumping this because I don't really feel like talking about cuts again.

 

[Swamp Sensei]

Bumping this because I don't really feel like talking about cuts again.

You're missing a lot.

But like hey, what about Isaac?

 

[Perkilator]

You're missing a lot.

But like hey, what about Isaac?

I'll admit, I only took franchises that already have characters into account and because of that, I genuinely forgot Isaac. Whoops.

 

[Swamp Sensei]

I will say I have made peace with Jonesy being included in Smash. It helps that I've tried Fortnite again and actually enjoyed it.

The no build mode really is the best way to play.

 

[Garteam]

Yeah, no.
Not going to deny Call of Duty and Grand Theft Auto being popular, but there's a higher chance of a piano falling on my head and killing me than there is of those being featured in Smash.

I'm assuming you're referring to the degree of violence and mature themes in these games. It's tough to make this argument when we've seen titles like Bayonetta and Persona adapted for Smash with relatively little issue. You either avoid aspects of original titles that are inappropriate or, if that cannot be done, censor the elements in Smash (like Bayonetta's sexuality).

GTA in particular seems to have this weird stigma attached to it on the Boards where people assume it's just this serious crime thriller ala the Sopranos or Scarface. It's really not. It's closer to Metal Gear in that it jumps between being a semi-serious period piece and a campy parody of the genre.

Call of Duty takes itself a little more seriously, but there's still stuff like Nuketown and the entire Zombies mode that defeats this. It's tough to get more stereotypically video-gamey than pounding back a soda to help yourself in shooting zombie George Ramero with a lightning gun.

The biggest issue with these titles is likely the difficulty of negotiating with massive companies across a language barrier for the rights. Even then, we've seen that's not impossible given Microsoft and Disney's involvement in Ultimate.

I wouldn't call it likely, but I do think there is a risk of getting egg on yourself if you're entirely closed off to the idea in principle.

 

[Swamp Sensei]

I'm assuming you're referring to the degree of violence and mature themes in these games. It's tough to make this argument when we've seen titles like Bayonetta and Persona adapted for Smash with relatively little issue. You either avoid aspects of original titles that are inappropriate or, if that cannot be done, censor the elements in Smash (like Bayonetta's sexuality).

GTA in particular seems to have this weird stigma attached to it on the Boards where people assume it's just this serious crime thriller ala the Sopranos or Scarface. It's really not. It's closer to Metal Gear in that it jumps between being a semi-serious period piece and a campy parody of the genre.

Call of Duty takes itself a little more seriously, but there's still stuff like Nuketown and the entire Zombies mode that defeats this. It's tough to get more stereotypically video-gamey than pounding back a soda to help yourself in shooting zombie George Ramero with a lightning gun.

The biggest issue with these titles is likely the difficulty of negotiating with massive companies across a language barrier for the rights. Even then, we've seen that's not impossible given Microsoft and Disney's involvement in Ultimate.

I think the biggest issue is the reliance on realistic fire arms.

Joker and Bayonetta have guns, but they are the majority of their moveset. (And Bayonetta has fantasy guns aside)

 

[fogbadge]

In the history of the franchise, we've only ever had two franchises cut.

One was Ice Climber. We know that the Ice Climbers were supposed to appear in Smash 4 but couldn't due to technical difficulties. They weren't supposed to be cut.

The other was Metal Gear. We don't know why it was cut, but third party legal troubles are likely the reason. We have no reason to believe Snake was intended to be included in Smash 4.

An easy conclusion to take from this is that Sakurai doesn't intend to cut first party franchises. Once they're in, they're in. The far majority of first party IPs included in Smash don't have characters. So the franchises with characters can be seen as essential, either from obvious marketing merits or historical significance. They're special in some way.

So I have to ask, why do people think we're going to lose first party franchises like the retros, Punch Out!!, Wii Fit or ARMS? Sure these franchises aren't as notable as they once were and they aren't a part of Smash's identity like Earthbound or F-Zero. But we don't have precedence that entire first party franchises will be cut out.

We do have precedence for third party franchises being cut. And we do have precedence for supporting cast members of already represented franchises being cut.

But why do people consistently suggest cutting these guys?

i would say because people are always trying to disguise their biases as logic

No.

There’s still new sccounts.

I’d rather just be able to get into the fighting anyway.
QOL update, I don’t need to grind
8 Hours to play my main.

8 hours? what were you doing? and calling it a QOL update just cause you don't like sounds really selfish

 

[GoldenYuiitusin]

I mean, if you're constantly having the issue that you go to a friend's house and they don't have all the fighters....then just get on their ass about unlocking the rest since it doesn't take THAT long.

 

[TheQuester]

I don't think Ike or Palutena will go.

But I also don't think Wii Fit Trainer or Min Min will go.

I expect substantial cuts. But I don't believe those characters will be lower priority.

Then who exactly are those substantial cuts, exactly? Because every substantial cut possibility people bring here, other people keep repeating this.

 

[Louie G.]

The more frequently this conversation arises the more adamant I am that Wii Fit Trainer is the most undervalued character on the roster. She is...

- The sole representative of a series that helped define an entire era of Nintendo and sold upwards of 44 million copies. Wii Fit, alongside Wii Sports is the posterchild of Nintendo's ability to appeal to a market well outside the bounds of the typical gaming sphere. Which they are still quite concerned about.

- One of the first characters revealed in Smash 4, indicating high priority. This is flexible from game to game, but contrary to popular belief she is not treated as a "surprise" character or hardware weirdo but instead a pretty standard series representative.

- Very unique. I don't think enough people talk about it, but she and Shulk are a couple of the only characters on the roster who can apply stat-boosting effects to themselves and, albeit to a minor extent, she has two moves that can restore health without external influence. Which isn't even to mention the creativity behind her attacks all being oriented around yoga poses. She's a niche character in execution, but nobody else really plays like her.

I understand cuts require us to make difficult decisions, but if this credibility was applied to a character who represents a more traditional series like a platformer or an RPG... I think many would be more willing to go to bat for them. Instead, since Wii Fit is an unconventional sort of game, Wii Fit Trainer is treated more as a novelty that has run its course than a fun, unique character representing one of Nintendo's most profitable risks in 20 years. She may not be the flashiest character on the roster nor is she one of the most frequently played, but her role is not an easily expendable one.

 

[Perkilator]

Then who exactly ar those substantial cuts, exactly?

Probably any third parties that they can't secure in time for the game's release or any characters they otherwise consider low-priority.

 

[The Stoopid Unikorn]

Probably any third parties that they can't secure in time for the game's release or any characters they otherwise consider low-priority.

I would also imagine some Fire Emblem stuff might get the cut since Sakurai has expressed concerns about there being too many FE reps since Corrin.

 

[BritishGuy54]

Re: How many newcomers? Who gets cut? GTA/Fortnite in Smash

I imagine we’re getting about 10-12 newcomers at most in the base roster. Maybe add a few more for unforeseen clones that may get added later in development.

Cuts are a difficult topic, but these are ones I’d be worried about if we were to see some cuts… I don’t think they all get cut, but I’d keep an eye on these lot at least.





I don’t think GTA will ever get into Smash. I don’t really care for it getting into Smash. Fortnite might have a better shot, but I’m still not counting on it.

 

[TheQuester]

Probably any third parties that they can't secure in time for the game's release or any characters they otherwise consider low-priority.

Who exactly is considered low priority outside of Piranha Plant and the melee clones? Because even when i mention characters like Incineroar, Corrin or Bowser Jr might not be as high priority they think, people are SURE those characters are high priority, yet in the same comment are telling me Terry could be getting cut, the easiest 3rd party necomer to get back....

I'm assuming you're referring to the degree of violence and mature themes in these games. It's tough to make this argument when we've seen titles like Bayonetta and Persona adapted for Smash with relatively little issue. You either avoid aspects of original titles that are inappropriate or, if that cannot be done, censor the elements in Smash (like Bayonetta's sexuality).

We're not getting a CoD or GTA rep, the themes of those games are diferent to Bayonetta and MGS, they just simply do not fit Smash Bros. thematically, i have no idea why people think Nintendo will allow those games get represented.

I don’t think GTA will ever get into Smash. I don’t really care for it getting into Smash. Fortnite might have a better shot, but I’m still not counting on it.

At least Fortnite fits Smash Bros, so there's that.

 

[Noipoi]

I don’t expect substantial cuts at all

 

[GoldenYuiitusin]

Probably any third parties that they can't secure in time for the game's release or any characters they otherwise consider low-priority.

I don't even think it has to be "they can't secure in time".

There's a good chance some third parties aren't even ATTEMPTED to secure rights to until the post-release period if even that, which doesn't seem to cross people's minds.

Take Snake for example. Say whatever excuse there may be for how Konami was back in 2012, but it can't be argued an attempt wasn't even made to bring Snake back to Smash For by Sakurai/Nintendo.

 

[DarthEnderX]

This hasn’t been brought up much, but I’m curious how they’ll approach secret fighters going forward as they heavily leaned into it for Ultimate, but there were only a few of them in the Wii U version.

What do you mean by "secret fighters"? Do you just mean fighters that need to be unlocked? Cause nobody in Ultimate was secret. They were all announced before launch.

including the notoriously stingy Square Enix

Ah yes. The "notoriously stingy" company that has more characters in Smash than any other 3P company.

the notoriously ****ty Konami

****ty at making their own games. But willing and eager to license them out.

why even bother cutting anyone?

NOW you're speaking my language!

 

[TheQuester]

Take Snake for example. Say whatever excuse there may be for how Konami was back in 2012, but it can't be argued an attempt wasn't even made to bring Snake back to Smash For by Sakurai/Nintendo.

Smash Bros has changed a LOT since 2012, specially in terms of letting thrid parties in.
Using information from 10+ years ago is not always up to date to today's.

 

[Sucumbio]

i want unlockable characters gone
its so annoying going to a friends place to play and they have not everyone, therefore I always have to bring mine around instead.

for a game like smash unlockable fighters have no place.

Base yeah it's annoying but dlc isn't it just the SD card or you gotta have the game too? If it's a base character I don't use I don't stress it but I definitely point it out oh you don't have ___ but isnt it really easy to unlock most of the base roster? I forgot what base even came with lol been too long.

 

[GoldenYuiitusin]

Smash Bros has changed a LOT since 2012, specially in terms of letting thrid parties in.
Using information from 10+ years ago is not always up to date to today's.

Changed "a lot" by a single game with a completely different design philosophy.

Try making this sort of claim when Smash consistently follows the Ultimate model instead of when we're not even seeing the immediate game after, ok?

 

[Garteam]

I think the biggest issue is the reliance on realistic fire arms.

Joker and Bayonetta have guns, but they are the majority of their moveset. (And Bayonetta has fantasy guns aside)

While I do think realistic firearms could be more of an issue (especially for Pryce, you could probably reduce the reliance on firearms in a GTA moveset and still have something workable), the prominence of everyone's favorite special move in Joker's moveset relative to the lack of guns in Snake's moveset shows that Sakurai is a lot more comfortable with this subject matter than he might let on.

We haven't had this confirmed yet, but the absence of a physical bullet in Joker's Gun makes me think there's some weird loophole regarding ballistics in terms of the way ratings boards treat firearms. You can show a realistic gun, you just can't show realistic ballistics or (in the case of Snake) non-explosive ballistics.

On the subject of Snake, I'm kind of surprised by how skeptical people are of Konami's return. Sure, Konami still isn't great, but they're a hell of a lot better than they were in terms of licensing a decade ago thanks to stuff like the Super Bomberman R crossovers, the Castlevania anime, and now the new Metal Gear rereleases. If Sakurai could make a deal with them in 2015, I don't think making a deal in the early 2020s would have been an issue.

 

[Louie G.]

Then who exactly are those substantial cuts, exactly? Because every substantial cut possibility people bring here, other people keep repeating this.

Well, it's not always going to be the same people. Some here believe third parties will be some of the first to go, others believe there will be a strong effort made toward keeping most of them around. Some are more free with cutting first party series, others are conservative with Nintendo characters and want to keep as many in-house series around as possible. You're casting this umbrella over the community when in reality you're simply not going to find a neat and tidy community agreement over who is worth keeping around. Especially not now when the series future is such a mystery.

I think we'll lose like 7-8 characters: Piranha Plant, Corrin, Incineroar, Bowser Jr, Wii Fit Trainer, Young Link, Duck Hunt, Pichu and Roy begin my guesses.

So your perspective is, very generously, assuming every third party character will come back. Even the most staunch supporters of conserving third party participation on the next roster acknowledge at least a couple of them are in danger of being taken away. Most people telling you the cuts won't play out this way are probably of the mindset we're going to lose a not insignificant number of third party characters, likely starting somewhere within Square Enix.

As you seem to have acknowledged here, the series with the most bountiful crop of characters are likely to lose some just as they are near guaranteed to gain a new one. Pokemon and Fire Emblem are specifically some of the first series to see losses. Mario is not far behind, although it's odd that you decided to keep Dr. Mario given some of the others in a similar position you chose to get rid of. Beyond this, I'd probably be worried about losing a character off some of the less active first party series with derivative secondary characters. Lucas and one of either Falco / Wolf are probably in danger.

If we have to start inching into losing first party series full stop, which probably won't happen until the last two categories are pruned down to a reasonable extent, the retros and surprise characters could be some of the next to go. They only have a single character and don't have a lot of content to their name to lose. By this metric, Wii Fit Trainer and Duck Hunt may potentially be unsafe but so would characters like ROB or Ice Climbers. This list feels conservative in that most of the unique cuts are from Smash 4 or Ultimate - personally, I don't think seniority will be able to save everyone. There's just as much reason to be skeptical of these characters as there would be the ones you tossed out.

These areas are where I would be fearful of characters being cut. You touched on those areas, but naturally there are going to be some disagreements about who is expendable within them. I don't think Bowser Jr and Wii Fit Trainer would be among such a small number of cuts, personally. Some of these hit the nail on the head - Corrin and Piranha Plant are understandably in danger - but those are generally the ones everyone is on the same page about already. And even so, I've spoken to people who will defend Corrin's likelihood to return all the same. You're simply never going to present a list of characters that everyone will agree on, and you kinda just have to be prepared for that. Just stand your ground instead of falsely accusing people of being hypocrites because they don't represent some universal Smash hivemind of who should and shouldn't be in.

 

[Sucumbio]

Here's an interesting breakdown regarding which software has the highest Monthly Active Users across the various consoles + PCs:

Here're my big take-aways:
1. Fortnite, Call of Duty, and GTA V continue to be incredibly popular.
2. Ultimate is still a very relevant game, despite being 5 years old.
3. Age is just a number in the modern gaming industry. A lot of players will stick with old, highly established software over newer titles.

In terms of Smash, I think this also has two big implications:
1. We shouldn't take people moving to a new Smash from Ultimate for granted just because it's a newer game. There's a solid chance that a lot of people will stick with Ultimate if they think the next Smash is inferior. This is especially possible given all of the rumours regarding backwards compatibility with Nintendo's next piece of hardware.
2. If a third party is selected as a "WTF THEY GOT THEM IN THE GAME" pick like Sonic, Cloud, and Steve, Jonesy, Captain Pryce, and Michael/Franklin/Trevor may be worth serious consideration.

Wait... the risk reward scenario for Smash 6 being DLC Pack 3 vs A possibly inferior "new" game is ... There's always a catch with Nintendo how do they make the bigger bag if they f up with a crappy game nah smash 6 has to "out do" ultimate without out-doing Ultimate it's a lose lose x.x oh wait that's the fandoms fault phew

 

[DarthEnderX]

Unlockable characters are great. If you started the game with everyone available from the jump I feel like you’d lose a bit of that mysticism.

I feel like there's no reason for characters to be locked in multiplayer.

It's fine for a separate single player mode like WoL to have you unlock characters in that mode specifically.

 

[Noipoi]

I feel like there's no reason for characters to be locked in multiplayer.

Nuh-Uh

 

[The Stoopid Unikorn]

Nuh-Uh

Yuh-uh
That's right, I know the counterplay to Nuh-uh meta. What are you gonna do about it?

 

[DarthEnderX]

Nuh-Uh

Seems I've been bested...

Yeah. I never said that, only that having almost everyone barring a few first parties while keeping every third-party and thus forcing Sakurai to go through the mountain of legal hassles and negotiations with other companies that may or may not be down to have their character back made you sound like a hater.

I think what he's trying to say is: If Smash 6 is really a new game, then characters will have to be rebuilt/converted to the new system.

Unlike you, he believes the biggest hurdle to characters returning is development resources, not legal negotiations. And if that's the case, the characters most likely to be cut won't be the ones that are the most expensive to license, it'll be the ones that are less popular that fewer people will complain about their absence.

 

[Garteam]

I'm 90% sure the purpose of Ultimate's unlocking scheme was to not immediately throw new players into the water with a 70+ character roster. By starting them off with a handful of characters and unlocking new ones every 10 or so minutes, the player has a chance to briefly experiment with most members of the cast before they're given the full pie.

I do think an "unlock everyone" button while otherwise maintaining Ultimate's structure could be a good middle ground, though.

 

[The Stoopid Unikorn]

Unlike you, he believes the biggest hurdle to characters returning is development resources, not legal negotiations.

He thinks there will only be 7-8 cuts so it's clearly not his argument here.

 

[DarthEnderX]

I hope that, if Smash 6 does cut a bunch of characters, they make it so all the cut characters are frozen in ice or turned to stone or something in the background of Battlefield Stage.

And as those characters get brought back in DLC or whatever, they get broken free.

 

[Zerp]

I like unlockable characters except when the game just releases and I wanna lab changes to characters I'm interested in lol. On the bright side, it only takes roughly two hours or so to get them all if* you grind for it not long at all. Wouldn't say it takes too much time at all, we're past the days of waiting 24 hours to unlock Mewtwo, thankfully.

* I'm aware using the classic mode method would take like 9 hours, but nobody rushing for all of them will do it that way anyway

But why do people consistently suggest cutting these guys?

I think people's reasoning is probably just "these characters are boring to me". I mean, Little Mac, Min Min and ROB? Dead giveaways really.

Not gonna lie though, if I had to cut a non-clone character, first one I'd axe would be Min Min and it's exactly for that reason. If you go around asking people who they hate playing the most, Min Min will basically always be among the most mentioned. It's not a "she's too strong" or "this one option is absurd" thing either, her whole design forces some incredibly boring gameplay for most characters. And to be clear here, this isn't a personal bias thing where I wanna remove a match-up I struggle with, my main 1. literally wins the match-up lol 2. has multiple jumps, which makes her gameplan waaaay less annoying for Puff as you can bypass a lot of her keep-away nonsense. The problem is that she's just not fun to play against for the vast majority of the cast.

So my thought process is that I'd have to completely redesign her to make her less of a nuisance if we keep her in the game. And at that point, I'd rather all that effort go somewhere else, like into a newcomer.

Base yeah it's annoying but dlc isn't it just the SD card or you gotta have the game too? If it's a base character I don't use I don't stress it but I definitely point it out oh you don't have ___ but isnt it really easy to unlock most of the base roster? I forgot what base even came with lol been too long.

For Ultimate the base roster was the original 8, although it really doesn't take long to unlock characters in it. Most people's complaints were more that it was annoying to get specific characters quickly because of the unlocking order. That said, I remember seeing almost the entire roster unlocked when I got to play because first thing my brother did when the game came out was just grind handicap 1 stock matches lol. And that couldn't have been much longer than 2 hours.

 

[LiveStudioAudience]

Third party's own particular interest in their specific fighters is one of the big unknown x factors in this whole process. A Konami might be fine with whoever Smash/Sakurai would prefer given they're largely out of the AAA gaming scene, but a Square or Capcom might be more inclined towards choices that either promote or are affiliated with certain IP's. Especially after the success of Ultimate and the Switch itself, the next SSB title might be one of the best advertising venues out there which could play a major factor (depending on the developer) on which third party fighter gets highlighted.

 

[Delzethin]

The Smash 6 devs have a dilemma on their hands. Ultimate's roster is so massively big and unwieldy that bringing everyone back--especially with how difficult it was to make Ultimate's base roster happen--isn't realistic. They also couldn't rely on "Everyone is Here Again!" as a selling point, because it's not new and surprising anymore. But if Smash 6 has a small roster and doesn't have anything else going for it, how many fans are going to buy in?

Which I've seen as an argument for making an enhanced port of Ultimate. Except if the Switch 2 is backward compatible (something that seems very likely now), Ultimate will already be playable on it. How many casual fans are going to drop $60-$70 on a version of a game they can already play on the console, much less one there's a decent chance they've owned for years now? A graphical update and a couple new characters/modes wouldn't move the needle as easily as I think some people assume.

It's a big reason why I think a soft reboot with a base roster of ~50 is the best course of action. It'd be less of a strain on development and allow the devs to focus on making Smash 6 feel new and different enough from Ultimate to be worth the purchase. While keeping the roster sizeable enough to keep the backlash from cuts (again, something that realistically will need to happen to keep development from being even more stifled than Ultimate's was) from hurting too badly.

 

[Swamp Sensei]

So my thought process is that I'd have to completely redesign her to make her less of a nuisance if we keep her in the game. And at that point, I'd rather all that effort go somewhere else, like into a newcomer

I'm not convinced that'd be necessary. Reducing Min Min's CQC options and range would go a long way. I don't think Min Min has an inherently unworkable design. I think she just needs a lot of tweaking.

 

[ScrubReborn]

I do think an "unlock everyone" button while otherwise maintaining Ultimate's structure could be a good middle ground, though.

I used to be a huge advocate for this, but a bunch of people I shared the idea with pointed out that pretty much defeats the purpose and ngl they have a point, a "unlock everyone" button is kinda like having a toy but telling yourself you won't play with it until a week from now or something.

I think a better idea, kinda like Darth suggested is to have a separate mode specifically targeted for casual meetups/tournament organizers where everyone is available from the start, but for other modes you still have to unlock them normally.

(also i do get the argument a massive roster would be a bit overwhelming for starters, but Ultimate's response was like using a nuke to solve a mouse infestation. I don't think we need to reduce the starting roster to 10% of the cast to solve that, especially with a smaller roster than Ultimate. Like, say we have 60 fighters. And about ~33% were unlockable, so about ~40 starters. I don't think casuals would suffer that much.)

 

[HyperSomari64]

Nintendo has stakes on Namco, Konami, Square, Tecmo and CyGames.
Just sayin'

 

[TheQuester]

What will happen if Piranha Plant returns if there's cuts? I think it would get very toxic fast....

 

[fogbadge]

Just sayin'

that toei animation isn’t?