• Welcome to ZD Forums! You must create an account and log in to see and participate in the Shoutbox chat on this main index page.

Super Smash Bros. for Wii U and 3DS

Krazy4Krash

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jun 15, 2010
Location
'straya
I find that borderline impossible to believe.

You'd be surprised. Takamaru also had the distinction of being specifically mentioned by Sakurai several years ago as likely to be put in as playable if his series were to continue, as RegalBryant brought up. With ports and re-releases, as well as great inspiration appearing in games such as Captain Rainbow and Nintendo Land, many people saw it as destiny. Alas, he is an assist trophy.

True, but his franchise didn't have a trophy in that Smash Direct.

I don't get this, I feel like you're looking at the trophy theory backwards. Can an unproven theory be evidence or a way to persuade a character as a better idea? I'm one to believe it was always baseless to begin with. At most it's 50% of the way there, however Palutena was a looong predicted newcomer (well before her fake leak in January, I'm talking back when Uprising came out in 2012 at the latest). A Fire Emblem character was highly speculated as well, we just got two of them and neither were Chrom. I refuse to give the trophy theory any points yet.
 

JuicieJ

SHOW ME YA MOVES!
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Location
On the midnight Spirit Train going anywhere
I don't get this, I feel like you're looking at the trophy theory backwards. Can an unproven theory be evidence or a way to persuade a character as a better idea? I'm one to believe it was always baseless to begin with. At most it's 50% of the way there, however Palutena was a looong predicted newcomer (well before her fake leak in January, I'm talking back when Uprising came out in 2012 at the latest). A Fire Emblem character was highly speculated as well, we just got two of them and neither were Chrom. I refuse to give the trophy theory any points yet.

The main thing was the Pseudo Palutena tease. EVERYONE thought it was going to be Palutena at first, only for it to be one of Sakurai's trollings. Tiki's Awakening model was also used despite her being in multiple Fire Emblem games, and we wound up getting Robin. To top it all off, Sakurai explicitly said to pay attention during that Direct, and as a result, the trophies were speculatively looked at as potential teases immediately by some (including myself).

It's a pretty plausible theory.
 

Krazy4Krash

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jun 15, 2010
Location
'straya
The main thing was the Pseudo Palutena tease. EVERYONE thought it was going to be Palutena at first, only for it to be one of Sakurai's trollings. Tiki's Awakening model was also used despite her being in multiple Fire Emblem games, and we wound up getting Robin. To top it all off, Sakurai explicitly said to pay attention during that Direct, and as a result, the trophies were speculatively looked at as potential teases immediately by some (including myself).

I agree the Palutena trophy was obviously poking fun (and a good one, at that). That's where I think deductions stop. Tiki using her Awakening model wasn't and isn't suspicious at all when you consider it's her most recent appearance, and that's what miscellaneous trophies use near-universally; I can't think of any exceptions off the top of my head.

In regards to Sakurai's comment, I wouldn't take it to heart. We all know he's a fellow who teases, and when the Direct also had moments like Zero Suit Samus' joking disconfirmation, Ridley's shadow, the Waluigi plush and the Substitute doll, along with the aforementioned Palutena trophy business, it's not reason enough for the trophy theory to exist, I believe. Similar trophy footage was released for Melee and Brawl before those games came out, and they meant nothing. Sakurai has said in the past he doesn't like when people look too deeply into what he does, and this could just be exactly that.

It's a pretty plausible theory.

I think it can only be seen as plausible because it's not technically impossible yet. The theory in the first place was that the trophies hinted at which veteran series would be getting new characters revealed post-April 2014. After all, if even one returning series other than those related gets a newcomer, there's no reason for the trophy theory to exist. Of course we've got the Mii Fighters and Pac-Man since that time, who are new representation and entirely disregarded towards the idea, so we've established we're talking old series only. If we get a newcomer from a veteran series that isn't Zelda or Metroid, it's debunked, as far as I'm aware. It would also be proven false if only one of the two gets a newcomer.

If you think it's likely that both the Zelda and Metroid series will be getting new characters, while many others such as Donkey Kong, Star Fox, Kirby, etc. won't, then by all means believe it.



For those of you who aren't sick of scans, here's a doozy. 59 pages in the Master Guide that covers an extraordinary amount of content. The magazine is Nintendo Dream, which means it is in Japanese. The information is mostly reiteration of what we know, however there are a few new screenshots, including one that reveals a new black palette swap for Kirby (on Meta Knight's page).

You can view the full album here.
 
Last edited:

JuicieJ

SHOW ME YA MOVES!
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Location
On the midnight Spirit Train going anywhere
If you think it's likely that both the Zelda and Metroid series will be getting new characters, while many others such as Donkey Kong, Star Fox, Kirby, etc. won't, then by all means believe it.

Way to be condescending -- and inaccurate.

All I said was that it's plausible, not that it's 100% fact, so please don't be putting words in my mouth about "believing" things.
 

Ventus

Mad haters lmao
Joined
May 26, 2010
Location
Akkala
Gender
Hylian Champion
I am so ready fo Smash Bros. I'm going to throw down so hard when my Katsukity comes in...whenever it does. :)
 

Krazy4Krash

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jun 15, 2010
Location
'straya
Way to be condescending -- and inaccurate.

I'm neither of those things. Now here I am thinking of you as acting rather patronising in this ironic attempt to call me out.

All I said was that it's plausible, not that it's 100% fact, so please don't be putting words in my mouth about "believing" things.

You brought up the idea as an argument in favour that a Zelda newcomer was more likely than Isaac partially because of a trophy in the Direct, which wouldn't mean anything unless you gave value to the idea. I'm sorry, you've obviously favoured it. Of course, that was in relation to Ghirahim, so are you perhaps not so sided towards it any more? If that's the case, I go back to what I said originally in that I feel you're looking at the trophy theory backwards - that a character is at least somewhat more likely due to a trophy being shown, instead of the trophy suggesting a character. Regardless of whether or not I agree to the theory, that's what I'm not understanding.
 

JuicieJ

SHOW ME YA MOVES!
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Location
On the midnight Spirit Train going anywhere
I'm neither of those things. Now here I am thinking of you as acting rather patronising in this ironic attempt to call me out.

Yes you are. Regardless of whether or not you were trying to be condescending, your wording was -- the way you put it basically translates to "If you want to believe something stupid, go ahead." You're also inaccurate because, again, I never said that I believe anything, which is simultaneously putting words in my mouth. There's no calling out involved on my part, just pointing out that you were out of line.

You brought up the idea as an argument in favour that a Zelda newcomer was more likely than Isaac partially because of a trophy in the Direct, which wouldn't mean anything unless you gave value to the idea.

There yo go again putting words in my mouth. All I did was reference the trophy theory in relevance to Isaac being mentioned, as Ghirahim seemed like the most likely candidate for a Zelda newcomer, especially were it to be from Skyward Sword. This only means that I thought he had a chance because the trophy theory was looking pretty solid to me, not that he had more of a chance than Isaac. I never said that, nor did I imply it.

Of course, that was in relation to Ghirahim, so are you perhaps not so sided towards it any more? If that's the case, I go back to what I said originally in that I feel you're looking at the trophy theory backwards - that a character is at least somewhat more likely due to a trophy being shown, instead of the trophy suggesting a character. Regardless of whether or not I agree to the theory, that's what I'm not understanding.

Now you've lost me, because what you described has basically no difference.
 

Ronin

There you are! You monsters!
Forum Volunteer
Joined
Feb 8, 2011
Location
Alrest
Zelda needs just as many newcomers as Mario does, which is to say, none at all.

It's good that Ghirahim didn't waste another slot. He's already going to be in Hyrule Warriors this year, so adding him to Smash Bros 4 would be nothing short of redundant. In comparison, Link and Zelda/Sheik are returning characters, so they aren't unnecessary to that franchise's roster.
 

Krazy4Krash

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jun 15, 2010
Location
'straya
Yes you are. Regardless of whether or not you were trying to be condescending, your wording was -- the way you put it basically translates to "If you want to believe something stupid, go ahead." You're also inaccurate because, again, I never said that I believe anything, which is simultaneously putting words in my mouth. There's no calling out involved on my part, just pointing out that you were out of line.

You're reading tone that's not there, I feel like you're choosing to be offended for the sake of drama. I put emphasis on the word "and" to express how specific the theory was, that's all. There's no implications suggesting stupidity, the final phrase of "by all means believe it" was sincere acceptance on my part towards anybody who happens to still have confidence in theory despite remaining bound by the strict conditions for it to turn out correct. Not everybody resorts to sarcasm. However, what I can't accept is ignorance. That's why I went into explicit detail as to what the theory entails, not for you, but for everybody.

This conversation wouldn't be happening if you didn't feel the need to point out "Horse Apples, how dare you say I believe in this theory!?". It was a general statement to begin with; the entire paragraph was me establishing the grounds of the theory, not a personal letter to you and your stance. I hadn't even said anybody treated it as fact, let alone yourself. What I see is you having ignored every initial point I made, grabbed the last sentence, took it personally, then try to point out I'm in the wrong.

There yo go again putting words in my mouth. All I did was reference the trophy theory in relevance to Isaac being mentioned, as Ghirahim seemed like the most likely candidate for a Zelda newcomer, especially were it to be from Skyward Sword. This only means that I thought he had a chance because the trophy theory was looking pretty solid to me, not that he had more of a chance than Isaac. I never said that, nor did I imply it.

Many questions. In what world was Ghirahim the most likely Zelda newcomer, even from Skyward Sword? Since when was any Zelda newcomer likely? Not because of the trophy theory, right? Please don't say that's why. Additionally, how was Ghirahim especially any more likely from an unproven theory than otherwise?

Most important of all, and I must stress again, why reference the trophy theory in the first place? Please give me an answer that doesn't ignore the above questions. Do you only not see the theory as "believable" any more because Ghirahim is not the potential Zelda newcomer? I view that as biased.

Now you've lost me, because what you described has basically no difference.

What I'm reading is "Ghirahim was likely because of this theory, and the theory was likely because of Ghirahim". Not necessarily "backwards", but neither part of that statement makes sense, and especially not together. Before you say I'm putting words in your mouth again, don't deny the fact you've obviously favoured it at least in the past, and it's entirely fair game that I could assume that you continued to, otherwise biased in favour of Ghirahim. Excuse me for jumping out of the current conversation, you went to the effort of making a blog post on the topic and saying looks like I was right about the trophies shown off in the Smash Direct being indications of newcomers. I guess it was just Ghirahim or bust for you, right?




Two new musical track demonstrations have been put on the music page of the official site. They are Mega Man 2 Medley and Bath Time Theme (Vocal Mix). I'm not sure how frequently the page will continue to be updated, let's hope it's plentiful.

Also, I'm sure plenty of you saw the supposed leaked screenshots a few days ago. Well now there's supporting video footage. It's the 3DS version, and content in it we haven't seen include the characters Ganondorf, Shulk and Bowser Jr., and the returning Yoshi's Island stage from Brawl. There's five short clips on a YouTube channel here. I'm not sure how long they will remain up, however.
 
Last edited:

Dio

~ It's me, Dio!~
Joined
Jul 6, 2011
Location
England
Gender
Absolute unit
Many questions. In what world was Ghirahim the most likely Zelda newcomer, even from Skyward Sword? Since when was any Zelda newcomer likely? Not because of the trophy theory, right? Please don't say that's why. Additionally, how was Ghirahim especially any more likely from an unproven theory than otherwise?

Most important of all, and I must stress again, why reference the trophy theory in the first place? Please give me an answer that doesn't ignore the above questions. Do you only not see the theory as "believable" any more because Ghirahim is not the potential Zelda newcomer? I view that as biased.

Well Zelda seems to be the perfect series for a newcomer seeing as it is one of Nintendo's flagship titles, they seem to have upped the fire emblem characters a lot this time and considering it is not as popular as Zelda outside of Japan you'd think they might have another Zelda newcomer. As for why Ghirahim is the most logical choice, do I even need to say? He is loved and has been since before even the release of SS when he was known simply as fabulous Debbie, he was highly requested by fans for Smash and he is also a villain, something this iteration of Smash severely needs, seeing as Bowser is the ONLY real villain in the game right now.
 

JuicieJ

SHOW ME YA MOVES!
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Location
On the midnight Spirit Train going anywhere
Well Zelda seems to be the perfect series for a newcomer seeing as it is one of Nintendo's flagship titles, they seem to have upped the fire emblem characters a lot this time and considering it is not as popular as Zelda outside of Japan you'd think they might have another Zelda newcomer. As for why Ghirahim is the most logical choice, do I even need to say? He is loved and has been since before even the release of SS when he was known simply as fabulous Debbie, he was highly requested by fans for Smash and he is also a villain, something this iteration of Smash severely needs, seeing as Bowser is the ONLY real villain in the game right now.

G-King basically nailed it on the head.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom