Jump to content
Nintendoga

Super Smash Bros. for Wii U/3DS - Settle It In Smash!

Recommended Posts

*post*

Once again as I said in the chat, Do I have to count the 17 games Pac-man has had across all the Nintendo consoles? It's not like Snake where he only had 2 games and that's it. 

And why does it matter if Pac-Man has his classic or modern design? That's entirely objective. I'd love to see Classic Sonic in Smash, but hey we still got Sonic. I'd love to see LTTP Link in Smash, but hey we still got Link. I'd love to see Super Metroid design Samus in Smash, but hey we still got Samus. You should be damn grateful that your favorite characters are even in the game, much less complain about "why do they have this designnnn I don't like that oneeee"

And you must be out of your mind if you honestly believe Klonoa is more popular and relevant then Pac-Man is.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said I would not like a Namco guy to be in, as there are many more characters deserving a slot, but irrelevance is well, irrelevant.

 

Ice Climbers, Jigglypuff, ROB, ect haven't done shit but they were still in previous editions and will probably be in this one. (The former two defiantly, but ROB I'm skeptical)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Once again as I said in the chat, Do I have to count the 17 games Pac-man has had across all the Nintendo consoles?

A lot of these games you're talking about are bad ports, ports, collections, more ports, etc. It's funny how you just name 17 games (you even stated you had to take a minute to look this up) and not name a specific title. Which of these games created a legacy and a huge following?

Most of Pacman's following came from the Arcade blow up of the original Pacman. Namco then rode off this success by porting and remixing the game to many different platforms and rereleasing it many times.

Then there's all the shitty spin-offs.. meh

 

It's not like Snake where he only had 2 games and that's it.

 

I already pointed out that I felt that Snake did not deserve to be in Brawl. He was added because "he's badass". I don't think Pacman would have the same feedback. I don't see anything redeeming that Pacman could bring to Smash Brothers. Snake brought a lot of craziness and funny stuff. Codec calls and his entire rated M fighting style was kind of cool.

 

And why does it matter if Pac-Man has his classic or modern design?

 

 

The people saying that Pacman is awesome remember him that way. Modern Link is remembered like.. Modern Link. It boils down to opinion as I pointed out but I still feel it's important.

 

And you must be out of your mind if you honestly believe Klonoa is more popular and relevant then Pac-Man is.

 

 

 

 

Again, relevancy is... irrelevant when bringing up Klonoa. I think you keep missing the point when people bring him up. It's that if there HAD to be a Namco rep, I would choose Klonoa. When people bring up Klonoa, there's absolutely no controversy and a lot of fans. Pacman? Seems to be divided if he should be added.

 

 

Ice Climbers, Jigglypuff, ROB, ect haven't done shit but they were still in previous editions and will probably be in this one. (The former two defiantly, but ROB I'm skeptical)

 

I think I already pointed this out a couple times a page back, but it has nothing to do with relevancy in present day (well, I guess it's a part of the equation). Ice Climbers was relevant in Nintendo history and it was made by Nintendo. They're not just random 3rd parties that have done little for Nintendo.

 

These characters are also lifts from the classic versions, so it's not it wasn't obvious that they're from 1980 or something.

Edited by Autosaver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that characters like ROB and Ice Climbers are in a different realm based on the fact that the game has an essential piece in Nintendo's history.

And Pacman is an essential piece of gaming history.

I think you're missing the point. (Psst: Klonoa had a game on the Wii!)

(that no one bought)

It's not that Klonoa is more relevant. It's that a character like Klonoa is more interesting and seems to have a higher image than Pacman. Klonoa seems to be more popular as a Namco rep compared to Pacman.

I would wager most people don't even know that Klonoa exists. There may not be people that love Pacman with the fervor that a Klonoa fan loves Klonoa, but I would reckon that the total recognition and respect for Pacman across the gaming community outweighs the five people who like Klonoa a real lot.

 

None of these are made at the expense of characters that would've fit better, though.

Aren't they? From a certain perspective, that they were included means one less chance for anyone else, regardless of series; whatever time and energy went into them could've gone to someone else. If not for the ICs, maybe we could've got Ridley. Or Little Mac. Or Pit a game early. Or a Ganondorf that wasn't just a roided up Captain Falcon. Or any number of things.

I mean, who else other than the Ice Climbers can you pick to rep Ice Climber?

The real question is why Ice Climber needed a rep at all. How many dozens of games/characters are more important to Nintendo's history, more fondly remembered by gamers?

So I don't think it's unfair to hope for a character whose applications are a lot more obvious without having to dig into the bottom of the barrel for them (and I think the fact they even needed a mech for Pacman in SFvT is kind of telling how deep you need to dig to make use of it).

You're free to hope for whoever you want, but Pac man not being especially liked and being largely irrelevant in modern days is a pretty poor reason to suggest he isn't or doesn't deserve to be in the running.

How did this become a question of relevancy, anyway? To the best of what I can see nobody is actually suggesting this besides you guys.

Because Pac-Man as a character is about as interesting as a bucket of rocks and hasn't been relevant in at least a decade?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And Pacman is an essential piece of gaming history.

Yes he is, but not a part of Nintendo's own history. I think that was the point being brought up which is why Nintendo using characters from the past made sense.

 

 

(that no one bought)

 

Yeah, I know. I was mainly speaking that Klonoa did have a title last generation.

 

I would wager most people don't even know that Klonoa exists. There may not be people that love Pacman with the fervor that a Klonoa fan loves Klonoa, but I would reckon that the total recognition and respect for Pacman across the gaming community outweighs the five people who like Klonoa a real lot.

 

A lot of people seem to completely dislike the modernization and bastardization Pacman has been given from Namco. This is why I'm guessing is why there has been some controversy to begin with. Some have even noted that this is Nintendo's game and they don't want Namco characters inside.

 

If it was done my way, NO Namco characters would be in the game.

 

Sonic fighting Mario lights a spark.

Megaman joining Smash Brothers lit another spark.

Pacman...? Eh.......................... ok? I don't see this being as exciting.

 

This could all change depending on how well his addition is implemented I guess. I don't think it's worth breaking tables over.

Edited by Autosaver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes he is, but not a part of Nintendo's own history. 

 

Pac-Man VS. That was the first and, to my knowledge, only time Nintendo has ever developed a game for another company. Miyamoto designed the game himself.
Edited by Red Cap-Blue Spikes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would like to point out how you keep mentioning that relevancy is irrelevant when concerning anything besides Pac-Man.

See the problem?

Again for the third time, I think you're completely missing the point when talking about relevancy.

 

Pac-Man is coming from a third party.

Game & Watch is coming from a first party.

 

Relevancy isn't really that big of a deal when it comes to Nintendo's own line. Nintendo picks characters that played a significant role (or sometimes crazy ones) in its history. These characters are lifted straight from the past and it's quite obvious. Game & Watch is still black/white and has stiff animations. His stage is a reference to the past.

 

Pacman on the other hand played a role in the arcade and not really that much on Nintendo platforms. He wasn't as important to Nintendo compared to something like Game & Watch.

 

I guess a more simpler explanation is that there's more barriers for third parties compared to first parties. It's harder to justify letting third parties in.

 

 

Overall, I guess it's more of a personal preference and opinion which is why the two sides arguing (ie: For Pacman vs No Pacman) keep going in circles. If Pac-Man was added to Smash Bros. I won't be upset and I won't be angry. Pacman being in won't be that big of a deal, I most likely won't play as him.

Edited by Autosaver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh, honestly pac-man is kind of mixed bag with me, on one hand I do love the guy mostly because im probably one of the few who actually kind of likes his character in the show and the pac man world series is just such a treat for me. On the other hand though if they were adding namco characters (im okay if they don't add any by the way) besides the whole tekken cast, pac-man would probably be the least interesting for me depending on how they decide to make him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not missing any point tbh. If you read your own posts you would see you were talking about how relevancy matters when it comes to Pac-Man, but then suddenly it doesn't when it comes to Klonoa.

I think you're letting your feelings towards Pac-Man too much into the matter. You don't care for him cool, but if he was added into the game it wouldn't be a big deal?  Really?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you read your own posts you would see you were talking about how relevancy matters when it comes to Pac-Man, but then suddenly it doesn't when it comes to Klonoa.

No. Not at all.

 

It's that if you had to let one Namco rep and completely drop every argument preventing a character from coming in, I wouldn't mind Klonoa. That's because I am a Klonoa fanboy and I love Klonoa and I find him interesting. That's it.

 

As I pointed out, I would not let any Namco character in if I had the choice.

 

I'd like to point out that relevancy to Nintendo's history isn't the only reason I dislike Pacman. It's a lot of reasons. It's just ONE of the reasons. If you gave me two irrelevant characters, you can justify one more than the other.

 

 

I think you're letting your feelings towards Pac-Man too much into the matter. You don't care for him cool, but if he was added into the game it wouldn't be a big deal?  Really?

Some people are making it to be a big deal that if x character got in they would get upset and angry. I do not feel that way. I simply just don't want certain characters in the game. That's all this argument boils down to. Some people prefer to not have Pacman added to the roster.

Edited by Autosaver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it worth mentioning that Pac Man showed up in a Mario Kart game at one point?

 

12.jpg

 

 

Not that it's a huge game changer - Final Fantasy characters have popped into Mario games before but I don't see that making a large difference for any Smash inclusions.

 

Just thought that was worth bringing up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's actually a good point. I believe Namco has teamed up with Nintendo in the kart racing sector a couple times so I guess there's more of a reason for his inclusion.

 

I don't know. Maybe I'm just negative because of bastardization of Pac-Man. Maybe what I need is a Smash Bros reveal to turn that upside down. mellow.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it worth mentioning that Pac Man showed up in a Mario Kart game at one point?

 

 

Not that it's a huge game changer - Final Fantasy characters have popped into Mario games before but I don't see that making a large difference for any Smash inclusions.

 

Just thought that was worth bringing up.

 

 

Actually, Pac-Man has been in all three games in the Mario Kart Arcade GP series. 
 
Anyways, I'm really hoping for a reveal of some sort this week. I don't care if it's an item, a stage, a character, or a game mode. I would even be happy with a picture of the menu screen.
Edited by Red Cap-Blue Spikes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pac-Man for Smash? Isn't that expected with Namco developing the game; they would want their icon to star in Nintendo's biggest Wii U game after.

 

Pac-Man does have a good deal of moves at his disposal, though it really depends on the version of him Namco and Nintendo decide to use; the TV show Pac-Man has alot of moves from the Wii U Pac-Man game (fire balls, ice breath, flotting, using his magnet tonge, bouncing like a ball) and the classic version using moves from the arcade game with some from the Pac-Man world games.

 

Sure, Lyold and Klona would make better characters (and in Lyold's case, comes from a important GC-Exclusive RPG) but Pac-Man makes the most since and I wouldn't mind his inclusion, he could be a fun character to play as :).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Actually, Pac-Man has been in all three games in the Mario Kart Arcade GP series. 

And a Tamagotchi character has appeared in two of them. As much as I'd love an official game involving Pokemon Vs. Digimon, I'm certainly not holding my breath on that one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*Is disappointed that the 101st picture is not a Wonder Red Reveal*

*shares this sentiment exactly*

 

Why did you guys have to raise my hopes for it too (even though I knew it was likely not happening).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And a Tamagotchi character has appeared in two of them. As much as I'd love an official game involving Pokemon Vs. Digimon, I'm certainly not holding my breath on that one.

 

Um, what? I don't get your point. Pac-Man getting into this game is somewhat likely. A Pokémon-Digimon crossover just isn't.

Edited by Red Cap-Blue Spikes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

You must read and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using this website. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.