Is Sakurai biased against Zelda?

[Gregster101]

Now, this is something that's been on my mind since Smash 4 and it's only increased with Ultimate, and that question is, is Sakurai biased against the Legend of Zelda series in Smash? The reason I ask this question is because, despite being part of Nintendo's Big 3 franchises along with Mario and Pokemon, it has less characters than both of them, with only 6 characters compared to Mario's 9 and Pokemon's 10. Even Fire Emblem, despite being a much smaller franchise comparatively, has more characters than the Zelda series, with a total of 7 characters. Zelda hasn't gotten a new unique character in Smash Bros since Melee with both Zelda and Sheik, with most of the popularly requested candidates for a new Zelda character like Skull Kid, Midna, and Ghirahim being stuck in Assist Trophy hell. I'd be less annoyed this if it wasn't for the fact that half the Zelda characters in Smash are semi clones. Young Link and Toon Link are both semi clones of Link, while Ganondorf is a semi clone of the completely unrelated Captain Falcon. Speaking of whom, despite Ganondorf being the most requested Zelda character in a Smash 2 poll, Sakurai didn't initially plan on adding Ganondorf as a playable character, only doing so late in development because he had a strikingly similar body build to Captain Falcon. But that begs the question, what exactly compelled him to make Ganondorf a clone of Captain Falcon instead of someone like Black Shadow instead? If there wasn't enough time to give Ganondorf a unique moveset, I would have just cut him from the game for Black Shadow as a Captain Falcon clone instead and just saved him for Brawl with a unique moveset, cuz the fact that it's now three games later and he still plays like Captain Falcon even with the sword is just confusing.

What do you guys think? Do you think Sakurai has some sort of bias against the Zelda series?

[Jedi]

I don’t think he has a bias against Zelda, while Zelda might have less overall characters than the other two, it still has a massive amount of content in every smash in comparison to other series.

[Gregster101]

15 minutes ago, IS Bath Salts HQ said:

I don’t think he has a bias against Zelda, while Zelda might have less overall characters than the other two, it still has a massive amount of content in every smash in comparison to other series.

I suppose. Granted, I still think Zelda is long overdue for a new character who isn't part of the Triforce Trio, but I can see what you mean

Edited January 21, 2019 by Gregster101

[Jedi]

Just now, Gregster101 said:

I suppose. Granted, I still think Zelda is long overdue for a new character who is part of the Triforce Trio, but I can see what you mean

I do think it could use another character, but I’m also not upset if it doesn’t get one, basically where I’m at.

[Sasori]

We might get one in Tingle when the DLC comes around. He is weirdly absent from the assist trophy line-up now for some reason.

But anyway I don't really think its bias. I think its just hard to include Zelda characters since no one really lasts long. You could do one of the villains like Ghirahim or Zhant, but they aren't really important in the grand scheme of things.  Even Impa who is a recurring character does not really have much to make a moveset out of.

[DarthR0xas]

I think it's more a case of a lack of anyone major needed to be added. The Triforce Trio (plus variations) are already in the game, and for most people that is enough. While having some other Zelda character would be pretty cool, no one really sticks out as someone who needs to be added. 

I wouldn't say Sakurai is biased against franchises, I'd say he's biased for other ones. Namely, Fire Emblem. While a very important series with a lot of notable characters who stick out as people who should be in Smash, Sakurai has always been way more willing to quickly shove another one in as opposed to another franchise, or at least that's what I perceive as occurring. Not saying that's a bad thing, it's his game series and I love FE, but it gets noticeable at points

[Gregster101]

12 minutes ago, Sasori said:

We might get one in Tingle when the DLC comes around. He is weirdly absent from the assist trophy line-up now for some reason.

But anyway I don't really think its bias. I think its just hard to include Zelda characters since no one really lasts long. You could do one of the villains like Ghirahim or Zhant, but they aren't really important in the grand scheme of things.  Even Impa who is a recurring character does not really have much to make a moveset out of.

Tingle is in the background of the Great Bay stage, and his balloon acts as a platform. Now granted, they could have the Wind Waker version of Tingle be playable since he is technically a different character from the Majora's Mask version of Tingle that appears on the Great Bay stage, but I doubt it.

[Zapp Branniglenn]

I've never been under the impression Sakurai has ever had much sway over what characters get into smash. If he did, why do so many smash bros games get announced before he's hired to work on them? It's possible the Zelda series has just consistently slipped under the cracks, especially since they had a very strong showing in Melee (more than Pokemon, and almost twenty percent of the roster, which is the highest proportion of any franchise for any smash game). And since Zelda has so few recurring characters like the triforce trio, there isn't much necessity to have any more since most are one-offs. Impa is the only standout, but Impa is almost never depicted as being somebody who could fight, instead just being the royal nanny. Suggesting Impa for Smash is pretty much the same thing as suggesting Toadsworth for Smash. I do think Zelda is the most in need of a new character, however, because of how long it's been. I'm still perturbed that Brawl's iteration of Ganon was copy and pasted for Smash 4 when we could have gotten alttp Ganon who was suddenly made relevant again in 2013 with a sequel to that game.

Anyway, Sakurai doesn't have bias for or against franchises. Seeing his game collection, it's pretty clear he has no preference for any franchise or genre. And his inclusion of Ganondorf in Melee only suggests the opposite, since that was one of many characters he really wanted playable yet resorted to a clone moveset due to lack of time and resources.

Edited January 21, 2019 by Glennstavos

[Slumber]

I've always felt that Skullkid and OoT Impa would be good inclusions, but the Zelda games are kinda hard to choose characters for. With SSB's tendency to go with whatever is most relevant, the most relevant characters beyond the Triforce Trio are usually really hard to pin down. I'd say there are about 4 "Tiers" of major Zelda characters.

You get Impa, who is probably the most consistent running character beyond the Triforce Trio, but comes in all shapes and sizes and really only has about one active role in the franchise.

Then you get the villains, 90% of whom are completely usurped by Ganon in some form. You'd essentially have to pick from a bunch of second fiddles like Girahim and Zant, which would really be stretching. Skullkid is one of the few recognizable outliers, who stays as the sole threat throughout his game. Vaati would be nice, too, but you'd have to draw on TMC a bunch, and Nintendo doesn't seem to really respect that game.

Then a tier lower is Link's sidekicks(Navi, Ezlo, the King, Midna, etc.), who are all supports at best.

And finally you get Link's extended allies from each game. The Sages, the masks from MM, the Champions from BotW. And these are all very similar casts. Technically you could get some good fighters here, but these are bit parts in specific games, which would be weird draws.

Edited January 21, 2019 by Slumber

[Gregster101]

21 minutes ago, Glennstavos said:

I've never been under the impression Sakurai has ever had much sway over what characters get into smash. If he did, why do so many smash bros games get announced before he's hired to work on them? It's possible the Zelda series has just consistently slipped under the cracks, especially since they had a very strong showing in Melee (more than Pokemon, and almost twenty percent of the roster, which is the highest proportion of any franchise for any smash game). And since Zelda has so few recurring characters like the triforce trio, there isn't much necessity to have any more since most are one-offs. Impa is the only standout, but Impa is almost never depicted as being somebody who could fight, instead just being the royal nanny. Suggesting Impa for Smash is pretty much the same thing as suggesting Toadsworth for Smash. I do think Zelda is the most in need of a new character, however, because of how long it's been. I'm still perturbed that Brawl's iteration of Ganon was copy and pasted for Smash 4 when we could have gotten alttp Ganon who was suddenly made relevant again in 2013 with a sequel to that game.

Anyway, Sakurai doesn't have bias for or against franchises. Seeing his game collection, it's pretty clear he has no preference for any franchise or genre. And his inclusion of Ganondorf in Melee only suggests the opposite, since that was one of many characters he really wanted playable yet resorted to a clone moveset due to lack of time and resources.

Which would you rather, Ganondorf being included in Melee but having to be a Captain Falcon clone for the remainder of the series, or Black Shadow being included over Ganondorf in Melee with Ganondorf having to wait for Brawl to be included, but with the benefit of his own unique moveset? Like don't get me wrong, Ganondorf does deserve to be in Smash. However, he deserves BETTER than being a Captain Falcon clone, especially since Captain Falcon's moveset was completely made up for Smash to begin with

[Gregster101]

15 minutes ago, Slumber said:

I've always felt that Skullkid and OoT Impa would be good inclusions, but the Zelda games are kinda hard to choose characters for. With SSB's tendency to go with whatever is most relevant, the most relevant characters beyond the Triforce Trio are usually really hard to pin down. I'd say there are about 4 "Tiers" of major Zelda characters.

You get Impa, who is probably the most consistent running character beyond the Triforce Trio, but comes in all shapes and sizes and really only has about one active role in the franchise.

Then you get the villains, 90% of whom are completely usurped by Ganon in some form. You'd essentially have to pick from a bunch of second fiddles like Girahim and Zant, which would really be stretching. Skullkid is one of the few recognizable outliers, who stays as the sole threat throughout his game. Vaati would be nice, too, but you'd have to draw on TMC a bunch, and Nintendo doesn't seem to really respect that game.

Then a tier lower is Link's sidekicks(Navi, Ezlo, the King, Midna, etc.), who are all supports at best.

And finally you get Link's extended allies from each game. The Sages, the masks from MM, the Champions from BotW. And these are all very similar casts. Technically you could get some good fighters here, but these are bit parts in specific games, which would be weird draws.

Now that you mention Vaati, is he in some sort of Geno situation where he's owned by Capcom (the ones who developed the games he appeared in) rather than Nintendo? Or is he owned by Nintendo? Just curious

[Slumber]

3 minutes ago, Gregster101 said:

Now that you mention Vaati, is he in some sort of Geno situation where he's owned by Capcom (the ones who developed the games he appeared in) rather than Nintendo? Or is he owned by Nintendo? Just curious

He's a Nintendo character. He's appeared in non-Capcom Zelda games.

[Zapp Branniglenn]

13 minutes ago, Gregster101 said:

Which would you rather, Ganondorf being included in Melee but having to be a Captain Falcon clone for the remainder of the series, or Black Shadow being included over Ganondorf in Melee with Ganondorf having to wait for Brawl to be included, but with the benefit of his own unique moveset? Like don't get me wrong, Ganondorf does deserve to be in Smash. However, he deserves BETTER than being a Captain Falcon clone, especially since Captain Falcon's moveset was completely made up for Smash to begin with

I want Ganondorf more than I want black shadow. Besides, his moveset in Brawl was just fine, since they remade him around the Twilight Princess design. All three of the core characters had their TP designs, so him appearing with a unique moveset "ie, being beast Ganon" would seem a little out of place and not relevant in 2008. Hence why I said I'm upset no updates were made in the very next game.

2 minutes ago, Gregster101 said:

Now that you mention Vaati, is he in some sort of Geno situation where he's owned by Capcom (the ones who developed the games he appeared in) rather than Nintendo? Or is he owned by Nintendo? Just curious

Capcom doesn't own Vaati. As evidenced by his appearance in Four Swords Adventures, which was in-house developed.

[Gregster101]

6 minutes ago, Glennstavos said:

I want Ganondorf more than I want black shadow. Besides, his moveset in Brawl was just fine, since they remade him around the Twilight Princess design. All three of the core characters had their TP designs, so him appearing with a unique moveset "ie, being beast Ganon" would seem a little out of place and not relevant in 2008. Hence why I said I'm upset no updates were made in the very next game.

Capcom doesn't own Vaati. As evidenced by his appearance in Four Swords Adventures, which was in-house developed.

What I was referring to was would you want Ganondorf saved for Brawl where he uses attacks from his boss fights from the actual Zelda series like his sword, trident, and tennis ball magic. Cuz in Brawl and Smash 4, it felt jarring that Ganondorf in his TP design still primarily had his Captain Falcon based moveset considering he was given a Black Knight-esque design and used a sword extensively in the final battle.

 

9 minutes ago, Slumber said:

He's a Nintendo character. He's appeared in non-Capcom Zelda games.

Ok then. I suppose the biggest issue for Vaati in that case would be his lack of relevancy since Minish Cap. But if King K. Rool is any indication, relevancy isn't the end to be all deciding factor on who gets in and who doesn't. It helps, sure, but not outright essential.

[NinjaMonkey]

1 hour ago, Sasori said:

We might get one in Tingle when the DLC comes around. He is weirdly absent from the assist trophy line-up now for some reason..

The Great Bay Temple stage is back, with Tingle as stage element. That's why.

Edited January 22, 2019 by NinjaMonkey

[Etrurian emperor]

I'm going to echo what everyone else says. The problem lies more with the Zelda cast than with Sakurai. There are three main characters who are incredibly important whenever they appear but aside from that Zelda doesn't really have a core cast. While there are a lot of recognizable characters they generally don't appear in multiple titles and if they do the plot usually doesn't focus on them enough to create moveset potential.  

And I just don't think Sakurai thinks one game stars are good enough for Smash. One time villains like Zant and Ghirahim have clear moveset potential but I think Sakurai would rather put in villains with multiple appearances than settle with villains that vanish forever after their one game is up. 

[Zapp Branniglenn]

29 minutes ago, Gregster101 said:

What I was referring to was would you want Ganondorf saved for Brawl where he uses attacks from his boss fights from the actual Zelda series like his sword, trident, and tennis ball magic. Cuz in Brawl and Smash 4, it felt jarring that Ganondorf in his TP design still primarily had his Captain Falcon based moveset considering he was given a Black Knight-esque design and used a sword extensively in the final battle.

I just don't see Ganondorf being that much better if you replaced some of the punches and kicks with sword swings. And if we consider a trident or any form of magic that isn't a tennis ball projectile, we're talking about Ganon, not ganondorf. And I've already mentioned how I did and still do prefer Ganon over Ganondorf if the choice were up to me, which it's not. You gave me a choice between Ganondorf or Black Shadow, but the possibility of Ganondorf having been improved in later installments is not mutually exclusive. They could have decloned Ganondorf a bit more in Brawl but they chose not to, probably taking advantage of how the TP version is actually quite similar to the Melee concept. And if you disagree with that comparison than I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't know what Black Knight -esque means and that Ganondorf definitely threw a lot more martial arts than what we seen in previous incarnations. The new Flame Choke move also feels very in-character, possibly a shout out to a scene in WindWaker as well.

[Dark Holy Elf]

I'd like to see Impa myself but I'm not going to hold my breath, there are no slamdunk ideas left for Zelda. Others have already said why.

I also have to add:

2 hours ago, Gregster101 said:

The reason I ask this question is because, despite being part of Nintendo's Big 3 franchises along with Mario and Pokemon, it has less characters than both of them, with only 6 characters compared to Mario's 9 and Pokemon's 10.

Zelda is waaay behind Mario/Pokemon in terms of sales, to the point where labelling it a big three isn't accurate at all. It's a big two. Zelda is a very distant #3, and only if you count Mario Kart as part of Mario (yes, Mario Kart alone has outsold every non-Pokemon Nintendo franchise).

Edited January 22, 2019 by Dark Holy Elf

[Gregster101]

12 minutes ago, Dark Holy Elf said:

I'd like to see Impa myself but I'm not going to hold my breath, there are no slamdunk ideas left for Zelda. Others have already said why.

I also have to add:

Zelda is waaay behind Mario/Pokemon in terms of sales, to the point where labelling it a big three isn't accurate at all. It's a big two. Zelda is a very distant #3, and only if you count Mario Kart as part of Mario (yes, Mario Kart alone has outsold every non-Pokemon Nintendo franchise).

Really? Most people I've seen consider it, Mario, and Pokemon to be it's big three franchises. Obviously it's not quite as much of a juggernaut as Mario and Pokemon, but still

[NinjaMonkey]

No, Sakurai is biased against Donkey Kong. It's only because so many people wanted K. Rool in Smash (myself included) that it has some halfway decent representation in Smash Ultimate.

We still don't have a non-jungle DKC stage, though.

Edited January 22, 2019 by NinjaMonkey

[Gregster101]

5 minutes ago, NinjaMonkey said:

No, Sakurai is biased against Donkey Kong. It's only because so many people wanted K. Rool in Smash (myself included) that it has some halfway decent representation in Smash Ultimate.

We still don't have a non-jungle DKC stage, though.

The only thing DK really needs at this point in terms of representation is Dixie Kong as an echo of Diddy Kong, though Funky would be a nice bonus

[NinjaMonkey]

I'd want that, a Rambi AT and a non-jungle stage (as I said above).

[Dragoncat]

I thought Sakurai really favored Kirby actually? Then again the only evidence of that in Smash is making him the sole survivor in WoL.

Also, if he's not including Zelda characters because they usually just appear in one or two games and never again, then why are there so many FE reps? Corrin only appears in Fates, Roy is only in the old by this point Elibe games.

Edited January 22, 2019 by Dragoncat

[NinjaMonkey]

16 minutes ago, Dragoncat said:

Then again the only evidence of that in Smash is making him the sole survivor in WoL.

King Dedede saved everyone from Tabuu in the Subspace Emissary, as well, using those time-delayed medals. So that's twice Sakurai has shown bias towards the Kirby series in Smash, and both of those were when Smash had a story mode.

Edited January 22, 2019 by NinjaMonkey

[NSSKG151]

I don't think Sakurai is biased against the Zelda series. They already have their most iconic characters in Smash and even then having six reps is still more than the what majority of other series in Smash got though I think people get too hung up on the idea that having more reps for certain series is somehow too bad or good. Heck I would argue that the Zelda series would be just fine with Link, Zelda, Ganondorf and one of either Young or Toon Link. Besides, what they lack in number of playable reps they make up with tons of songs, several stages based on the Zelda series, plenty of assist trophy characters and recently Ultimate gave us Ganon as a boss.

2 hours ago, Dragoncat said:

Also, if he's not including Zelda characters because they usually just appear in one or two games and never again, then why are there so many FE reps? Corrin only appears in Fates, Roy is only in the old by this point Elibe games.

The difference there is that Roy, Corrin and them are the playable main protagonists from their home game and unlike Zelda having Link, Zelda and Ganondorf as reoccurring main characters Fire Emblem always have a new protagonist and cast for each game except for the sequels Marth and Ike got. The probable reason why Skull Kid, Midna and Ghirahim are not considered for playable status is that Sakurai seems to pick main protagonists, reoccurring antagonists, or huge breakout characters like Rosalina, Lucario and Isabelle and most one-off Zelda characters just don't fit that criteria which is probably why the smash devs just make them assist trophies and call it a day.