Which Melee character (that is not in brawl) should be in the next SSB game

Which Melee character (that is not in brawl) should be in the next SSB game

  • Mewtwo

    Votes: 11 45.8%
  • Dr.Mario

    Votes: 3 12.5%
  • Young Link

    Votes: 2 8.3%
  • Pichu

    Votes: 3 12.5%
  • Roy

    Votes: 5 20.8%

  • Total voters
    24

YoshiMonsta

Yoshi! Yoshi!
Which of the characters in Melee that aren't in Brawl should be in the in the next game, honestly why should any of them. The reason they got rid of the, was kind of that they are fail characters, nobody liked them, but I no a lot of people who would disagree though. Would You? And do you think any of them should be put in the spotlight. And if so, please write which moves should be changed of that character and (if possible) which move it should be replaced by.
 

Dark Light

Cherries and Berries
I think Young Link should have returned. Instead of making him get his clone Link moveset, he should get his Majora's Mask moveset (utilizing transformation masks such as Deku, Goron, and Zora). I know Toon Link exists, but Toon Link could also get another moveset as well, putting Windwaker into perspective. Plus, Young Link's inclusion could support the remake for Majora's Mask on the 3DS (if there will be any in the first place).

And, personally, Young Link was my secondary in Melee, after Ness.

Mewtwo should have NEVER been cut in the first place. Seriously.
 

Propeller Toad

Dislikes the amount of neglect Toad receives...
Pichu was and still is my Melee main, so of course I would vote for him. Unfortunately, he's given a lot more competition this time around so I must admit that it would be difficult to see Pichu return this time around. Perhaps making Pichu as an alt for Pikachu would at least satisfy the Pichu fans.

Other than Pichu, I'd say Mewtwo is perhaps the only one that deserves to be brought back. There was no reason for his cut other than time constraints (and possibly the amount of Pokemon characters slots) as Mewtwo is still relevant to this day. I have a good feeling that he will return in SSB4 due to the amount of fans wanting him to return as well as the fact that he had the most data created out of the forbidden 7 in Brawl.
 

SonicMario

Star Spirit
Out of all these. Mewtwo for sure. Nintendo could improve him and I think it'd be kinda unique to have a character that was missing for one game but then came back. Mewtwo could be played as making a "grand return". Although it may not be possible.

As for Propeller Toad or any other Pichu fans, there is the theory that Brawl!Pikachu was once Melee!Pichu because the goggles that only Pichu had in Melee are an alt for Pikachu in Brawl. The Pikachu in 64/Melee according to this theory "retired" so to speak or perhaps became a Raichu. Of course it's only a theory that people may put in their headcanons if they liked Pichu. Although people who didn't like Pichu can just as easily say Pikachu stole Pichu's goggles. I'll admit I'm one of those who's glad Pichu didn't return, but I can hardly say I'd hate him enough to have a headcanon like that. (Both can be sort of dark interpretations too like the Melee Pichu is Brawl Pikachu could be that the ol' Pikachu died for some reason, or the other thing on stealing Pichu's goggles makes Pikachu look like a bully)
 

Propeller Toad

Dislikes the amount of neglect Toad receives...
@Northern Verve

I'll add up to that theory. Pikachu can wall jump in Brawl, but in Melee and 64 he couldn't. However, Pichu was able to wall jump in Melee. ;)

Pikachu is alright to me in Brawl; however, there were still those small differences that made Pichu feel more different to me in Melee when compared to Pikachu (Pichu had some unique moves like his up and side smash, different varieties of Pikachu's specials). Regardless, I am fine with seeing a Pichu alt at least in SSB4.
 

SonicMario

Star Spirit
Propeller Toad said:
@Northern Verve

I'll add up to that theory. Pikachu can wall jump in Brawl, but in Melee and 64 he couldn't. However, Pichu was able to wall jump in Melee. ;)
Oh yeah I kinda forgot about that.
 

YoshiMonsta

Yoshi! Yoshi!
I think that none of them should exist for these reasons.

1. I think that Roy should never have existed, being less main in Fire Emblem then Ike. Also for the most important reason, they made him just as Agile as Marth. Having mainly different moves he should be on a different weight area.

2. Dr.Mario the biggest reason is obvious: He is a 2nd copy of Mario. You cannot have Mario, Luigi, Dr.Mario. Plus he was all the same except for the fireball move, which the idea of firing pills sucks. He should either have an entirely different move or a well thought out similar replacement one.

3. Young Link is a mistake, he is basically the same as Link. Which you would think the idea of a copy would need something more different the fire arrows. Toon Link is very different with agility and can easily top normal link, and you wouldn't think that link was stronger as s kid, would you?

4. Pichu is a copy of Pikachu and a bad idea for SSB games. He needs to be more different then just being able to wall jump and have different smash attacks. And don't give me the crap that says that he is more agile then Pikachu. Pikachu is already agile enough. And he has nothing to value over Pikachu, considering Pikachu can wall jump in Brawl he will not be lowered as a standard. And also, there is a whole lot of Pokemon already, who thinks that there should be a copy of a Pokemon?

5. Mewtwo is a pretty good idea but there are some flaws in his idea. In general you know he is a legendary right? But the standards set for a legendary is much higher, thanks to Brawl's http://www.mariowiki.com/Spear_Pillar. Leaving you expecting a legendary to be as powerful as Dialga or Palkia. And if a "legendary" can get defeated by a mere Pikachu or Jigglypuff alone then you have to wonder about the whole legendary idea. Making them all supposedly more powerful then a normal Pokemon would do no good to be a real character. If Mewtwo was to return though, it would help Pokemon a lot to make him a boss. Being more powerful then the ordinary Pokemon (like Rayquaza) would help his reputation.
 

Smasher

Smasher
Forum Moderator
Chat Operator
Core 'Shroom Staff
Awards Committee
YoshiMonsta said:
nobody liked them
uh

Anyway, Roy was one of my favorite characters in Melee because I love to play as the Fire Emblem characters. I would love to have him back. Mewtwo would also be good to have. The other three I really don't care about, but I wouldn't mind having them back.
 

SonicMario

Star Spirit
A little bit of a counter-point to your "The means of power has been raised". Because you have Ganondorf. In the Legend of Zelda games he's in he's the lord of evil and he can only be defeated by the Master Sword. If this applied to Smash Bros. Then Ganondorf wouldn't be able to lose to any other character for the exception of Link. But in Smash Bros. you can beat Ganondorf with characters like Mario, or with Pokemon, or Olimar for that matter. Smash Bros. purposely balances fighters that are either nerfed from their games universes so it'd be more fair or buffed to give those characters more of a chance (You could argue Olimar is the most buffed considering he and the Pikmin are made alot larger then what they really are). I'm sure in the actual Pokemon games Mewtwo is alot stronger then Jigglypuff and Pikachu are that isn't meant to be the same thing when they're all on the Smash Bros. Roster.
 

YoshiMonsta

Yoshi! Yoshi!
YoshiMonsta said:
I think that none of them should exist for these reasons.

1. I think that Roy should never have existed, being less main in Fire Emblem then Ike. Also for the most important reason, they made him just as Agile as Marth. Having mainly different moves he should be on a different weight area.

2. Dr.Mario the biggest reason is obvious: He is a 2nd copy of Mario. You cannot have Mario, Luigi, Dr.Mario. Plus he was all the same except for the fireball move, which the idea of firing pills sucks. He should either have an entirely different move or a well thought out similar replacement one.

3. Young Link is a mistake, he is basically the same as Link. Which you would think the idea of a copy would need something more different the fire arrows. Toon Link is very different with agility and can easily top normal link, and you wouldn't think that link was stronger as s kid, would you?

4. Pichu is a copy of Pikachu and a bad idea for SSB games. He needs to be more different then just being able to wall jump and have different smash attacks. And don't give me the crap that says that he is more agile then Pikachu. Pikachu is already agile enough. And he has nothing to value over Pikachu, considering Pikachu can wall jump in Brawl he will not be lowered as a standard. And also, there is a whole lot of Pokemon already, who thinks that there should be a copy of a Pokemon?

5. Mewtwo is a pretty good idea but there are some flaws in his idea. In general you know he is a legendary right? But the standards set for a legendary is much higher, thanks to Brawl's http://www.mariowiki.com/Spear_Pillar. Leaving you expecting a legendary to be as powerful as Dialga or Palkia. And if a "legendary" can get defeated by a mere Pikachu or Jigglypuff alone then you have to wonder about the whole legendary idea. Making them all supposedly more powerful then a normal Pokemon would do no good to be a real character. If Mewtwo was to return though, it would help Pokemon a lot to make him a boss. Being more powerful then the ordinary Pokemon (like Rayquaza) would help his reputation.
Did you read this Smasher?
 

Smasher

Smasher
Forum Moderator
Chat Operator
Core 'Shroom Staff
Awards Committee
That doesn't have anything to do with what I posted.

Smasher said:
YoshiMonsta said:
nobody liked them
uh
I said that because it's obvious some people do like them, that's all.
 

YoshiMonsta

Yoshi! Yoshi!
Well, I disagree with Ganon for the same reason. But since he was in his second game just now it is highly unlikely that they will get rid of him, for he has made himself a valuable character.
 

Dark Light

Cherries and Berries
You shouldn't look down on a character just because his supposed power level is lower than it is supposed to be. For example, Flamethrower is a very strong move in Pokemon, yet it's just a combo projectile in Brawl. Rock Smash is a very weak move in Pokemon yet it is often used to kill bosses in Brawl.

The main reason characters like Mewtwo and Ganondorf are in because they are really well-known/popular characters, not because of their moveset potential or their legendary status in games they appear in. You should really throw out the concept of being "they're too powerful to be in" because Super Smash Bros. is not considered "canon" anyway.
 

SonicMario

Star Spirit
^
Exactly

The Smash Bros. games are supposed to make characters that normally be inferior or superior to another character and make it able for players who are skilled with one can beat somebody that's less skilled then another. Should Jigglypuff not be able to win against Ganondorf even if the Jigglypuff player is more skilled? Should a Mewtwo player be able to beat a Pikachu player even if the Mewtwo player is less skilled? I know you're saying that's why you think both shouldn't be in a SSB game at all. But think about it, we need that balance anyhow. Think back to the original Smash Bros. on the 64. If you applied the game logic for their series rather then what SSB does then Link and Samus would be among the best characters because they actually have weapons that kill (Then again Kirby and Yoshi would be pretty good too because usually when they eat something it dies)
 

Ultraluigi

doing whatever since 2011
Northern Verve said:
^
Exactly

The Smash Bros. games are supposed to make characters that normally be inferior or superior to another character and make it able for players who are skilled with one can beat somebody that's less skilled then another. Should Jigglypuff not be able to win against Ganondorf even if the Jigglypuff player is more skilled? Should a Mewtwo player be able to beat a Pikachu player even if the Mewtwo player is less skilled? I know you're saying that's why you think both shouldn't be in a SSB game at all. But think about it, we need that balance anyhow. Think back to the original Smash Bros. on the 64. If you applied the game logic for their series rather then what SSB does then Link and Samus would be among the best characters because they actually have weapons that kill (Then again Kirby and Yoshi would be pretty good too because usually when they eat something it dies)
But tiers can really influence the gameplay. For example, could Ganondorf beat Meta Knight? No, probably not, because Ganondorf sucks. Skill also matters, though
 

Dorayaki

King Bowser
Mario's doctor costume can be used in altrnate, the problem is if Mario will be a doctor again, or it won't appear again

in Pokemon and Fire Emblem, both problems are that they both share parallel stories among different games, similar with Zelda
it's hard to make recurring representives if they weigh as much as many other characters
the staff can only make rotations to Lucario and Ike
maybe in Smash 4 they would do it again, replace them with others, such as Minun and Sheeda
 

YoshiMonsta

Yoshi! Yoshi!
If Ganon was as powerful as a Pikachu it won't balanced out the game play. If it states that the only way to kill Ganon was with the master sword it would not make sense. It would give Legend Of Zelda a bad name for not having him "only be able to get defeated by the master sword. If anything Ganon should be a boss you fight as Link so only the master sword will defeat him. if not it gets rid of that whole idea therefore making Ganon less invincible and therefore the Zelda games would be less worthwhile. Perhaps they could replace with someone less "invincible". The whole idea of him messed up the legend of Zelda idea. But Ganon has made himself a valuable character no doubt. Yhat would be like saying that Bowser can only be defeated by the master glove, or DK only being able to be defeated by the master hammer. It would make little sense if even though the game states it, it is not followed. So if Ganon was still almost invincible then it would even out to make him the most (or 2nd if Mewtwo is in the game) powerful character in the game.
 

SonicMario

Star Spirit
Ultraluigi said:
Northern Verve said:
^
Exactly

The Smash Bros. games are supposed to make characters that normally be inferior or superior to another character and make it able for players who are skilled with one can beat somebody that's less skilled then another. Should Jigglypuff not be able to win against Ganondorf even if the Jigglypuff player is more skilled? Should a Mewtwo player be able to beat a Pikachu player even if the Mewtwo player is less skilled? I know you're saying that's why you think both shouldn't be in a SSB game at all. But think about it, we need that balance anyhow. Think back to the original Smash Bros. on the 64. If you applied the game logic for their series rather then what SSB does then Link and Samus would be among the best characters because they actually have weapons that kill (Then again Kirby and Yoshi would be pretty good too because usually when they eat something it dies)
But tiers can really influence the gameplay. For example, could Ganondorf beat Meta Knight? No, probably not, because Ganondorf sucks. Skill also matters, though
Tiers only apply to the professional tournaments, it doesn't apply to normal fights unless of course the players are using techniques used professionally. The people who participate in those know how to do more stuff then most people know how to play it normally. If someone is more skilled with Ganondorf then the other person is with Meta Knight, just because Meta Knight is higher on the tiers doesn't mean he automatically has a higher chance of winning especially if they get too overconfident of this fact.

YoshiMonsta said:
If it states that the only way to kill Ganon was with the master sword it would not make sense.
There's your problem YoshiMonsta. We're talking about Smash Bros. here. It's not supposed to make sense. While Smash Bros. is a fighting game the fact that the way you beat foes is unorthodox because most fighting games use Life Bars. In Smash Bros. you damage your foe until you can knock them off the stage or up in the air. Even if not all the characters are from more lighthearted series Smash Bros. is supposed to be a wacky-type of fighting game that pits popular characters from Nintendo's history against eachother. Regardless how a match would really go if they met in their universes, because it's not Smash Bros. job to solve how those fights would go. Also Ganondorf and Mewtwo's reputation aren't harmed at all being in the games, I think Mewtwo took a harder blow to his "reputation" in not being in Brawl then being the worst character in Melee tier-wise. And I'd say Ganondorf not being included would also be worse for his he's practically the main villain of most of the more recent Legend of Zeldas. He's important to the series and will be included as such as a character for that series as representation.
 

NintendoQueen814

Gengar ♥
I voted for Dr. Mario. Simply because I like the character, himself. I don't care if he is a clone of Mario or whatever. But we shouldn't argue which characters we want back in the SSB games, it's only a matter of opinion.
 

SonicMario

Star Spirit
NintendoQueen said:
I voted for Dr. Mario. Simply because I like the character, himself. I don't care if he is a clone of Mario or whatever. But we shouldn't argue which characters we want back in the SSB games, it's only a matter of opinion.
Yeah we know that NintendoQueen. In fact I'd prefer an awesome newcomer get in if any of these characters were threatening a spot. Megaman before Mewtwo I'd say. But if Nintendo thinks in bringing back one of them it should be Mewtwo simply because out of all those characters, people miss him the most from Melee and they could probably tweak his moveset to be alot better.

I just think YoshiMonsta's being a little ignorant of why Ganondorf and Mewtwo were playable in the first place. I however will be fine if Mewtwo again is excluded when SSB4 comes out. And I can absolutely guarantee Ganondorf will return.
 

NintendoQueen814

Gengar ♥
Northern Verve said:
NintendoQueen said:
I voted for Dr. Mario. Simply because I like the character, himself. I don't care if he is a clone of Mario or whatever. But we shouldn't argue which characters we want back in the SSB games, it's only a matter of opinion.
Yeah we know that NintendoQueen. In fact I'd prefer an awesome newcomer get in if any of these characters were threatening a spot. Megaman before Mewtwo I'd say. But if Nintendo thinks in bringing back one of them it should be Mewtwo simply because out of all those characters, people miss him the most from Melee and they could probably tweak his moveset to be alot better.

I just think YoshiMonsta's being a little ignorant of why Ganondorf and Mewtwo were playable in the first place. I however will be fine if Mewtwo again is excluded when SSB4 comes out. And I can absolutely guarantee Ganondorf will return.
In regards to your last sentence, I would agree with you. I'm not upset that any of them are gone. As long as they don't get rid of Marth.....only because he is one of the few characters I'm good with. Also, what system is SSB4 coming out for? Let me guess: 3DS.....
 

SonicMario

Star Spirit
NintendoQueen said:
In regards to your last sentence, I would agree with you. I'm not upset that any of them are gone. As long as they don't get rid of Marth.....only because he is one of the few characters I'm good with. Also, what system is SSB4 coming out for? Let me guess: 3DS.....
3DS and Wii U
 
Top