Super Smash Bros. for 3DS & Wii U Thread 10: Against the Odds, We Choose to Hype!

Status
Not open for further replies.

20091106071322!Sf4-dan.jpg
,
 
Why? I think it's great for little kids or people who aren't that good at smash, yet still want to be involved in the game somehow. As long as it's a separate mode.

Care to elaborate? I think thatd be a pretty fun side mode.

Yeah fuck five player modes. Let the fifth guy in your group read a book while everyone else has fun!

/s

It's a massive waste of resources to waste on a throwaway mode only so that people could play minor characters that don't do anything interesting (koume & kotake, yellow devil) or even worse, stop you from actually being able to play major characters that should be characters (K. Rool, Ridley and anyone else that is the main/iconic antagonist of a series).


The stage bosses should just stick to minor bosses and if the few we know are anything to go on, the bosses have a small number of attacks and boring predictable patterns, I don't see why anyone would want to play as a neutered version of a character who's had 90% of their moves removed.
 
Does the Kirby series really need another character though? You've already got the main character and antagonists for the series in.

DK doesn't have any antagonists, Metroid doesn't have any antagonists, FE is apparently a main Nintendo franchise now and that doesn't have any antagonists either but there's so many games and playable characters that it would be a long time before they got round to that unfortunately.

FE makes sense to not have many antagonists, though. I don't think there are any recurring (humanoid) antagonists, unlike protagonists who often star in multiple games. That, or the antagonists are giant ancient dragons/demons who wouldn't make for great fighters in smash. While metroid has some recurring antagonists, most of them a humongous and incredibly intricate in design. The *CLOSEST* thing to something that could be playable is ridley.

K rool would be a great DK villain, but we know he hasn't been a villain since the 90's, yet DK's series continues to this day without him. Do we know for sure there is no legal reason at play, either? Do rare own any character rights for him, at all? (Was rare in the mario super sluggers credits where K rool appeared?)
 
what if we always set the boss to playable and just have nobody play it

that's our boss toggle

right?

The main issue with Kirby reps is that there's only about 5 recurring characters, which makes most Kirby picks very hard to future-proof. Outside of the core trio, the most games anyone has appeared in is 3.

And as far as Triple-Deluxe goes, Modern Kirby Team =/= Sakurai+Namco.
True enough. I don't really expect another Kirby rep, to be honest, since I think we've already filled out all the Kirby characters that most people are somewhat familiar with.

And regarding Triple Deluxe, yeah. I just haven't really seen anything you could expand on with Bandana Dee to fill out his moveset in a particularly interesting way. What'd be his Side-Special or his Up-Special? Spear jabs are kinda neat but I can't see how you can extend that to a whole moveset.
 
I'd be in favor of Waddle Dee. I mean, he's been a protagonist since Kirby 64, playable in some form or another since Kirby Super Star, and the Bandana variation has been the "fourth Kirby guy" for a while now. Spear for most of his attacks, maybe give him a parasol recovery, some "accidentally falling" attacks. He'd be fun.

I think he's in the same position as Toad, though, where he's pretty much just an elevated minion. I can't think of any scenario where Sakurai would include Waddle Dee before Toad.
 
I'm struggling to think of another suitable Kirby character aside from maybe Galacta Knight.

Agreed.

The thing with the Kirby series is that it has very few supporting characters with consistent appearances. Rick, Gooey, and Adeline all fell off the face of the earth, and most Kirby villains are in one game and out the next. Bandana Dee is really the only recurring character in the series at the moment that could make a case for a fighter.
 
I think Kirby has pretty much all the bases covered, I'd prefer another DK, Metroid, or new series rep before thinking about another one.
 
FE makes sense to not have many antagonists, though. I don't think there are any recurring (humanoid) antagonists, unlike protagonists who often star in multiple games. That, or the antagonists are giant ancient dragons/demons who wouldn't make for great fighters in smash. While metroid has some recurring antagonists, most of them a humongous and incredibly intricate in design. The *CLOSEST* thing to something that could be playable is ridley.

K rool would be a great DK villain, but we know he hasn't been a villain since the 90's, yet DK's series continues to this day without him. Do we know for sure there is no legal reason at play, either? Do rare own any character rights for him, at all? (Was rare in the mario super sluggers credits where K rool appeared?)

No, Nintendo owns the Kremlings and K. Rool.

He may not be in too many recent games, but he is still the main antagonist of the series considering he's the most recurring villain, the villains in the Retro games are only there because they didn't want to be too similar to the Rare games, it's not as if either the Tikis or Snowmads are going to return in the next game (if there is one) so you can't exactly call either of them a recurring or iconic antagonist.


I'm still of the belief that the Kremlings being referenced in a larger way at all in this game is proof that K. Rool is going to be somewhere in the game, but worst case scenario at the moment is a gangplank galleon stage boss.
 
It's a massive waste of resources to waste on a throwaway mode only so that people could play minor characters that don't do anything interesting (koume & kotake, yellow devil) or even worse, stop you from actually being able to play major characters that should be characters (K. Rool, Ridley and anyone else that is the main/iconic antagonist of a series).
The stage bosses should just stick to minor bosses and if the few we know are anything to go on, the bosses have a small number of attacks and boring predictable patterns, I don't see why anyone would want to play as a neutered version of a character who's had 90% of their moves removed.

Massive waste of resources according to you, maybe. If nintendo finds value in it, I disagree. There are tons of people I've played with who get bored after 1-2 matches because they constantly lose, even with handicap. I can't count how many times we've had 4-5 people and 1-2 of them quit because they keep losing, so it becomes 1v1 and then we stop altogether because 2-3 people are sitting there, bored. If you could include a mode where casual players can still enjoy the game because they're directly affecting the outcome of the battle with no way to 'lose,' then I'm all for it. As someone who lives in a house with players of all skill ranges, I can totally see playable boss battles being a fun little mode for people who aren't great at smash.

If i can convince an 8 year old to play smash w/ me because he can cause chaos using a boss character, then boss mode is a huge win in my household. The 8 year old won't care that 'Ridley is nowhere near as cool as he was in super metroid,' he'll just care that he's causing chaos. I wouldn't say it's a huge waste of resources since the bosses already exist in normal play, either. It's not like they're making new assets, it's not like they have to rebalance the game (no one is going to balance boss mode!), all they have to do is disable the random attacks and tie those to button presses or touch screen presses on the gamepad.

To a competitive smash player, sure, this is a waste of time, but then, so are a lot of other modes and content you'll never use.
 
Guys.

We don't even know if playable bosses are a thing yet. Hell, all we've seen bosses do are just basic actions and move across the screen, nothing's even come close to even hinting at boss characters.

It's not that it couldn't happen, because it absolutely could. It's that you probably shouldn't get all bent out of shape over it's hypothetical inclusion or omission quiiiite yet.
 
Massive waste of resources according to you, maybe. If nintendo finds value in it, I disagree. There are tons of people I've played with who get bored after 1-2 matches because they constantly lose, even with handicap. I can't count how many times we've had 4-5 people and 1-2 of them quit because they keep losing, so it becomes 1v1 and then we stop altogether because 2-3 people are sitting there, bored. If you could include a mode where casual players can still enjoy the game because they're directly affecting the outcome of the battle with no way to 'lose,' then I'm all for it. As someone who lives in a house with players of all skill ranges, I can totally see playable boss battles being a fun little mode for people who aren't great at smash.

If i can convince an 8 year old to play smash w/ me because he can cause chaos using a boss character, then boss mode is a huge win in my household. The 8 year old won't care that 'Ridley is nowhere near as cool as he was in super metroid,' he'll just care that he's causing chaos. I wouldn't say it's a huge waste of resources since the bosses already exist in normal play, either. It's not like they're making new assets, it's not like they have to rebalance the game (no one is going to balance boss mode!), all they have to do is disable the random attacks and tie those to button presses or touch screen presses on the gamepad.

To a competitive smash player, sure, this is a waste of time, but then, so are a lot of other modes and content you'll never use.


I can see the value in some other modes that I never touch.


But a playable boss mode would only have me thinking "Oh, you wanted to play as your favourite villain from your favourite franchise in smash? Too bad, you get to tap buttons on the gamepad and watch your "character" automatically attack and move whilst everyone else gets to actually play the game" it just sounds completely unfun and disappointing if you actually like any of the characters that are a boss instead of a character.
 
Guys.

We don't even know if playable bosses are a thing yet. Hell, all we've seen bosses do are just basic actions and move across the screen, nothing's even come close to even hinting at boss characters.

It's not that it couldn't happen, because it absolutely could. It's that you probably shouldn't get all bent out of shape over it's hypothetical inclusion or omission quiiiite yet.

A 5th player controlling a boss using the gamepad would be amazing!
ridley confirmed
 
Guys.

We don't even know if playable bosses are a thing yet. Hell, all we've seen bosses do are just basic actions and move across the screen, nothing's even come close to even hinting at boss characters.

It's not that it couldn't happen, because it absolutely could. It's that you probably shouldn't get all bent out of shape over it's hypothetical inclusion or omission quiiiite yet.

If it does happen, and it's fun to play as a boss, it'll be played very often in my house due to some people not being that great at smash.

I can see the value in some other modes that I never touch.


But a playable boss mode would only have me thinking "Oh, you wanted to play as your favourite villain from your favourite franchise in smash? Too bad, you get to tap buttons on the gamepad and watch your "character" automatically attack and move whilst everyone else gets to actually play the game" it just sounds completely unfun and disappointing if you actually like any of the characters that area boss instead of a character.

Not saying i'd find boss mode fun, I think it's a gimmick, but I can totally see the appeal for someone who wants to participate but isn't that great, or if they're the 5th wheel and want to be able to do something while they wait for their turn. Some people would rather push a button on a screen and help decide the outcome of the battle than sit there and be bored.

4 players in a room? Everyone decent at smash? Yeah, we'll never touch the mode. You add more people, you vary up the skill level, and a boss mode might be fun and exciting, or at the very least, spice things up. I'd play it more than I played special brawl, that's for sure.
 
I think he's in the same position as Toad, though, where he's pretty much just an elevated minion. I can't think of any scenario where Sakurai would include Waddle Dee before Toad.

I'd be a bit surprised to see a Waddle Dee included before Toad as well. To Bandana Dee's advantage, it got its start a while ago most notably with Return to Dreamland in 2011. Toad didn't really become a big player until recently with 3DW and Captain Toad, which might have been too late for consideration in this particular game.
 
Guys.

We don't even know if playable bosses are a thing yet. Hell, all we've seen bosses do are just basic actions and move across the screen, nothing's even come close to even hinting at boss characters.

It's not that it couldn't happen, because it absolutely could. It's that you probably shouldn't get all bent out of shape over it's hypothetical inclusion or omission quiiiite yet.

You'd think with this being the fourth time around the block, people would realize this already.
 
I'd be a bit surprised to see a Waddle Dee included before Toad as well. To Bandana Dee's advantage, it got its start a while ago most notably with Return to Dreamland in 2011. Toad didn't really become a big player until recently with 3DW and Captain Toad, which might have been too late for consideration in this particular game.

Now I want a newcomer trailer that has bandana dee ("makes a point!") and captain toad ("Lights it up!")!!!
 
You'd think with this being the fourth time around the block, people would realize this already.

There's literally nothing else to talk about though, this thread would be boring if not for talking about this sort of stuff and if you don't like it you should try starting your own topic of conversation.


Lots of things that people talk about in this thread are hypothetical inclusions, should we just outright stop talking about the game or only talk about things that we do know that have been done to death already?
 
It warms my heart to see how much love Marx has been getting these past few pages.

I can see the value in some other modes that I never touch.

But a playable boss mode would only have me thinking "Oh, you wanted to play as your favourite villain from your favourite franchise in smash? Too bad, you get to tap buttons on the gamepad and watch your "character" automatically attack and move whilst everyone else gets to actually play the game" it just sounds completely unfun and disappointing if you actually like any of the characters that are a boss instead of a character.

It's not like Ridley would be cut from the full roster because he had to be crammed into boss mode. If he (or any other character) is playable in this boss mode, then he probably wouldn't have been playable at all otherwise. Such a mode wouldn't cheat you out of any characters.
 
It's not like Ridley would be cut from the full roster because he had to be crammed into boss mode. If he (or any other character) is playable in this boss mode, then he probably wouldn't have been playable at all otherwise. Such a mode wouldn't cheat you out of any characters.

The prominent rumor that started the whole playable boss thing mentioned Mewtwo becoming a boss. That's kind of being cheated out of a character.
 
It's not like Ridley would be cut from the full roster because he had to be crammed into boss mode. If he (or any other character) is playable in this boss mode, then he probably wouldn't have been playable at all otherwise. Such a mode wouldn't cheat you out of any characters.

I wasn't saying that I'd be disappointed that they removed a character and made it a boss, more that if K. Rool or Ridley were bosses I wouldn't be able to play them without constantly thinking "This would have been so much better if they were just an actual playable character".
 
Now I want a newcomer trailer that has bandana dee ("makes a point!") and captain toad ("Lights it up!")!!!
I hope we get a trailer with Bandana Dee in it this weekend, just so I can watch this place go nuts. Would be hilarious if someone with actual inside knowledge of just that trailer leaked that verifiable detail and then a bunch of nonsense.

On the downside though, that would mean Bandana Dee is in the game. :\
 
Talking about the what ifs is totally cool, I'm a Takamaru fan after all. It's the constant playing of EXTREEEME Jumping to Conclusions™ that I'm a bit tired of.

K. Rool is such an awful character design. It's like the epitome of wonky early 3D 90's character design.

Just one of many reasons why I don't "get" the K. Rool love, especially over say Dixie Kong or Cranky Kong. At the same time, I was playing Banjo-Kazooie earlier this week and I wasn't bothered by any of the Rare Character Design™ going on in that game...
 
Yeah, K Rool is like a really terrible design.

like what is up with his gold beer gut

I only want him because we don't have enough pirate reps in the game. We have 0. Toon link is only mildly associated with pirates and is very fortunate to have had a pirate ship stage but is no pirate himself.

I'll take tetra, toon zelda (pirate by proxy), Pirate k rool, or anything else nintendo can throw at me.

On the downside though, that would mean Bandana Dee is in the game. :\

I want a spear user in the game, we have 0, also! If I can't have ephraim, then i'll settle for bandana dee!
 
It's a massive waste of resources to waste on a throwaway mode only so that people could play minor characters that don't do anything interesting (koume & kotake, yellow devil) or even worse, stop you from actually being able to play major characters that should be characters (K. Rool, Ridley and anyone else that is the main/iconic antagonist of a series).


The stage bosses should just stick to minor bosses and if the few we know are anything to go on, the bosses have a small number of attacks and boring predictable patterns, I don't see why anyone would want to play as a neutered version of a character who's had 90% of their moves removed.

Have you ever played Boost Mode in New Super Mario Bros. U? If there's one thing everyone in my group of friends (or some relative's kids on occasion) loved it was trolling the shit out of the active players. Those people who'd otherwise been bored had even more fun than the active players this way. Similar situation in Smash Bros.: Two of us are really good, one is decent, one pretty bad and one is horrible. So far the problem is that:

1.) One of us always is degraded to viewer at some point
2.) The bad player quits pretty quickly since being destroyed over and over again just isn't fun.

At that point we usually stop playing since ignoring one of us while we play Smash would be a dickmove. With Boss Mode that person still could actively participate, but wouldn't lose all the time anymore.

Massive waste of resources according to you, maybe. If nintendo finds value in it, I disagree. There are tons of people I've played with who get bored after 1-2 matches because they constantly lose, even with handicap. I can't count how many times we've had 4-5 people and 1-2 of them quit because they keep losing, so it becomes 1v1 and then we stop altogether because 2-3 people are sitting there, bored. If you could include a mode where casual players can still enjoy the game because they're directly affecting the outcome of the battle with no way to 'lose,' then I'm all for it. As someone who lives in a house with players of all skill ranges, I can totally see playable boss battles being a fun little mode for people who aren't great at smash.

Exact same situation here, Boss Mode would be godsent :D
 
Yeah K. Rool is such a terrible design, he's just an overweight pirate crocodile, what a boring design.

SnowmadLeaderpic.jpg


Bravo Retro! 10/10 character design so unique and much better than K. Rool!

This is not specifically pointed at anyone in this thread, more the general opinion that somehow the Snowmads are any better when they're on par with the Kremlings
 
Have you ever played Boost Mode in New Super Mario Bros. U? If there's one thing everyone in my group of friends (or some relative's kids on occasion) loved it was trolling the shit out of the active players. Those people who'd otherwise been bored had even more fun than the active players this way. Similar situation in Smash Bros.: Two of us are really good, one is decent, one pretty bad and one is horrible. So far the problem is that:

1.) One of us always is degraded to viewer at some point
2.) The bad player quits pretty quickly since being destroyed over and over again just isn't fun.

At that point we usually stop playing since ignoring one of us while we play Smash would be a dickmove. With Boss Mode that person still could actively participate, but wouldn't lose all the time anymore.

Exact same situation here, Boss Mode would be godsent :D
Can't bosses be killed though? If not that, possibly easily avoided. It depends a lot on how the implementation would work out, how they would play and such.

While it loses the "I'm-a-giant-purple-dragon" factor, I think a concept that's a little more exciting is a mode where the GamePad player is able to spawn items and control stage transformations.
 
The thing about K.Rool is that all of his motivations are the same as every other Donkey Kong villain ("Why don't we just take over the island while fucking with Donkey Kong, seems like a good idea"), so the only thing left to him is his design

Which is, like, the worst of any of the DK villains. Including Tiki Tong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom