10-19-2009, 03:38 PM
While I agree that representation is very important in deciding who is let into Smash, it is definitely not the only thing that decides a character's admittance.
There are already some characters in Smash that are more interesting choices in game play rather than representatives of importance.
Examples:
1. The Ice Climbers. While they are fairly representative of the NES era, they are not necessarily the most well-known. Why did Nintendo choose them over other not-so-well-known characters from the time, such as Pit (this is Melee, I'm talking about...), the balloon guy, Lolo, Bubbles, or any other such NES character? Really, as far as Smash goes, the Ice Climbers are best known for their game play gimmick of controlling two characters at once.
2. ROB. I never had a ROB, but from what I've heard, the games that used it weren't very good. He may also represent the NES times, but he's probably known better for being one of Nintendo's less successful experiments. Once again, in Smash, he stands out from the other characters with a somewhat different game play style than everyone else. I guess we're just lucky they didn't decide to make a Virtual Boy into a character.
At the same time, I will definitely say that representation is quite important in choosing characters. Otherwise, we likely wouldn't have so many clones...
Yes, I am blaming clones on a focus on importance over game play.
... And I think I just confused myself reading back over my argument...
There are already some characters in Smash that are more interesting choices in game play rather than representatives of importance.
Examples:
1. The Ice Climbers. While they are fairly representative of the NES era, they are not necessarily the most well-known. Why did Nintendo choose them over other not-so-well-known characters from the time, such as Pit (this is Melee, I'm talking about...), the balloon guy, Lolo, Bubbles, or any other such NES character? Really, as far as Smash goes, the Ice Climbers are best known for their game play gimmick of controlling two characters at once.
2. ROB. I never had a ROB, but from what I've heard, the games that used it weren't very good. He may also represent the NES times, but he's probably known better for being one of Nintendo's less successful experiments. Once again, in Smash, he stands out from the other characters with a somewhat different game play style than everyone else. I guess we're just lucky they didn't decide to make a Virtual Boy into a character.
At the same time, I will definitely say that representation is quite important in choosing characters. Otherwise, we likely wouldn't have so many clones...
Yes, I am blaming clones on a focus on importance over game play.
... And I think I just confused myself reading back over my argument...