"True Fan" Thoughts

Such a disgusting label.

So I am making my way through Doctor Who (2005-Present), and am enjoying it very much. I started on a recommendation from a friend, and ended up officially hooked. Most of it resonates very well with me. And as soon as I catch up to present day, I plan on watching as much of the original run as possible, as well as related spin-off material.

Naturally, I wanted to find out more than the show presents. Since there are loads of books, comics, and the like, it is a pretty much never-ending task (which I'm okay with). And I can definitely accept that I will never see some of these items in person, and therefore be unable to actually read them. So a lot of the time I just have to settle for summaries that are available online, and try to see/make all the connections on my own. The Tardis Data Core is a great place for this. It's not entirely easy to keep everything in order. It's actually damn near impossible, since there is so much information, and it's all presented in a massively tangled web of continuity. But I do my best, and enjoy trying to do so. It's fun to find out all this stuff, but I'm doing it for myself because I have a genuine interest to know. I doubt I will ever really discuss it with anybody.

With any popular form of media (e.g. television show, books, movies, etc.), you will always find a lot of hardcore fans. But you'll also find casual enjoyers, people that are kind of indifferent towards the whole thing, and people that simply don't enjoy it at all. This is a fact of life. And through searching for information, it's pretty unsettling the way some "fans" treat others.

It is my firm belief that truly enjoying something like a television show, video game, comic book, or any form of popular media means that in addition to loving it for what it is, you can take a step back and analyze things that you don't like about it. You can logically discuss it, with evidence to back up your opinions. It's odd how some people are absolutely blinded by their love for these things, and downright scary how they will outright attack those who state any dissatisfaction whatsoever.

I've noticed this much more in online forums and articles, because it's way easier to verbally assault someone's views when you don't have to face them in person (not to mention you're doing it anonymously). But it's really, really irritating how the defenders' arguments almost always boil down to statements like:

"You obviously just don't understand the show."
"Because you don't like [Character], you're not a true fan."
"Anyone who thinks [Opinion] is not a real fan."
"Anyone who doesn't think [Opinion] is not a real fan."
"Anyone who doesn't like [Character] isn't really a fan."
"If you liked [This], then you're not a fan of the series."
"Well, you're just not a true fan then."

What the hell is a "true fan?" Are there specific guidelines written down somewhere that you have to follow in order to be this "true fan?" Does it mean that everyone must think the same thing about the same stuff? That's a very counter-intuitive thought process, because it disdains people from forming their own opinions, which is what makes it interesting in the first place. And it quickly turns any conversation into a one-up competition, which is tiring and utterly pointless.

What do things like this even mean?

If I want to talk about the show, then I want to actually talk about the show. I want to discuss why certain things happened, what I thought about it, what I think will happen next, things that annoyed me, and on and on. I don't want to get into a conversational tournament about "who knows more," and often about very trivial facts. To me, that says that the person has more passion for their ego than the show itself. They will continually steer any conversation (often wildly) back to a subject that they have memorized, even though it has nothing to do with the original topic.

Imagine you really like Doctor Who. You've watched a bunch of episodes You enjoy the writing, characters, and the like. It's just a lot of fun. You start to talk to someone who also likes the show. The conversation proceeds as such:

"I really like Doctor Who."
"Oh really? Can you name at least five people on the Doctor's family tree?"
"Um, no."
"Can you name all the actors who have played the Doctor in order, including alter egos?"
"Um, no."
"Do you know which 1930's classic sci-fi story inspired the episode, [Episode]?"
"Um, no."
"Can you tell me how many classic Dalek episodes there are, not including dream sequences by either the 2nd or 3rd Doctor?"
"Um, what?"
"Psh, I thought you said you liked it. You're not a real fan."

How incredibly insulting. And I've heard conversations like this. All someone does is say they like something, and somebody else feels like it's their job to shut that person down, because apparently the person is masquerading as a "true fan." The initial person is being told, "No, you don't actually like it, you're just saying you do."

The level of dedication is irrelevant. If you like it, then you like it. Stamping "I like this" on something solely for social reasons is just stupid. Saying that you're a "bigger fan" because other people just don't "get it" is idiotic. Get over yourself.

Holy crap.

I'll say it up front. There are things in Doctor Who that I flat-out don't like. Big things, too. Large events, entire episodes, some major character development, writing practices, and the ways some seasons are run in general. And if we talked about it, I would tell you why I think this. I would use specific examples have logical counter-arguments to the opposing side. But I wouldn't try to force you to agree with me. And if you had strong convincing points as well, then holy crap, my opinion might be altered. It would be a discussion, not a verbal attack.

I think it's also pretty scary how when people make the above "true fan" statements online, so many people upvote those comments. It's like a riotous mob. I think when someone says, "Well, I didn't like [Development] because [Logical Reasoning]," it's daring. But it shouldn't be daring. It should be normal! And the fact that the comment after it with 3400+ upvotes is, "That's because you're not a DW fan and should just go die in an alley somewhere, you should never be allowed to reproduce or talk and are a poor excuse for a human being," is positively terrifying. "If you don't love it unconditionally, then you should be executed." Yeah, that's a rational mindset.

Haha, what?

And on the other hand, thinkin that going against the majority simply because they're the majority makes you a "bigger fan" than others is silly too. "Those 'conformists' don't understand the real message behind the source material. I'm a 'true' fan because I disagree with the majority." What? Do you even have any actual opinions, or do you just like to boost your ego by making statements like that? If you like something, it's just as bad to abandon it as soon as it changes as it is to blindly follow it.

There's no way to know how many of these irrational people there are. But the fact that they're so loud, annoying, and foolish creates a stereotype for everyone across the board. It's really a shame.

If you instinctively say you love everything, regardless of how good it actually is, then it means that the writers/producers/etc. can get lazy due to no one telling them it should be better. Then that becomes the new norm, and the cycle is free to continue. There is no such thing as the "biggest" fan or a "true" fan. You like it, you like parts of it, or you don't. Thinking that mindlessly accepting anything that comes up makes you a "bigger fan" is just silly. It's not a competition. You are not trying to "prove something" to anybody. It's an individual preference. It is not a two-sided "us or them" feud, but so many people act like it is. It's not something that can be measured in any way.

Yeah, doesn't that make you feel good?

Bottom line, think what you want to think. Don't shut other people down just because they don't agree with you. Support what you want to, but don't be blinded by your passion. Your opinion is only that, and people are going to disagree with you, so get over it. Try listening to people that have a dissenting opinion. You might actually learn something, as scary as that sounds. If you like something, then say it. If you don't like something, then say it. Just be able to discuss it rationally. There's nothing worse than finding out that somebody loves the same thing as you, but is nothing more than a smarmy, egotistical, smug, irrational know-it-all. They give a bad name to everyone else. Oh, and if you don't want to talk about it, then don't. Accept that some people love it, some people like it, some people dislike it, and some people just don't care. Enjoy that the community exists, but be able to enjoy it for yourself too.

Nintendo Direct Thoughts

After seeing the most recent Nintendo Direct, I decided to post about the presentations in general. Enjoy.

I enjoy the presentations immensely for a number of reasons:

1. It's information about Nintendo from Nintendo itself.

There's no guesswork. There's no, "do you really think they were telling the truth?" They're super credible, because it's their own stuff. They know what they want to say and how they want to say it. It's purely a marketing thing, but it has the extra benefit of being friendly and welcoming to the consumer. It also allows Nintendo to make unexpected surprise announcements (à la NES Remix), which only boosts anticipation for the next presentation. You know basically what to expect, but that next surprise is always just around the corner. They're good about keeping a tight lid on things.

Oh, hey.

2. It replaces the few "big reveal" periods throughout the year.

This is great from a supporter standpoint, because we're not left out in the cold for half of the year. We're not speculating what's going to happen, because we're constantly kept in the loop. There's no question as to whether or not you're going to hold out to see what's in store. You can make that decision at really any point. Plus, if they waited solely for something like E3 and it bombed, then they wasted so much time and effort, and it's going to take practically half the year to recuperate (not to mention everybody laughs at you for months on end).

That doesn't mean that Nintendo's E3 booth can't still be awesome.

3. Nintendo is really the only company that can do it.

It's kind of a middle finger to Sony and Microsoft, but deservedly earned. Nintendo is the only company with consistently good in-house staff in every single area. That's a big reason why they're still thriving today. They can do everything in-house if need be. They have the ability and power to control every single step of the process, from brainstorming to sale dictation. And they have the best people to do it. That's not a luck-based thing. They think and re-think every single aspect and repercussion of the decisions they make, down to every employee. There's a great post I read the other day about Nintendo's (NCL) hiring process, and how intense it is even by Japan's standards. They really care about what they're doing, and putting out the best possible product.

But back to the point. Sony and Microsoft heavily rely on third parties for game development. They have some good people in-house, but nowhere near enough to be able to self-propel. There's a crap-ton of crossed wires, red tape, and contracts between a horde of companies (and that's for pretty much every game). There's really no way either company could have anything like a Nintendo Direct, because too much of what's happening is out of their hands. The convoluted bureaucracy muddles everything up. So even though Howard Lincoln has moved on, Nintendo can still shove it in their opponents' faces.

"Remember what I taught you."

4. It's a marketing tool that in turn excites consumers.

How can they lose? They're permeating the entire group of people that play games (which they helped boost and introduce through the Wii and DS) while raising awareness and gaining instant feedback. It's a win on our end too, because we see what's coming up and are instantly informed. Can't beat a win-win. It's sort of an evolution from the days of calling the Game Counselors, which in itself was an immeasurably effective way to do marketing research (and was willingly powered by millions of consumers at no cost to the company!).

5. It's a window into Nintendo.

Granted, it's a tiny, heavily regulated window, but it's a window nonetheless. For a company notorious for being secretive, it's great to have the opportunity to take a peek inside at the action. Coupled with the insanely awesome Iwata Asks, it really allows you to take a look inside what Nintendo is doing. It's like a commentary/making of/behind the scenes for a film. Too cool.

Overall, Nintendo Direct is one of the best ways for Nintendo to stay current and in the public eye, and they know it. They have all the right tools and abilities, and know that they're the only ones that do. So they take advantage of it. And it's presented in a fun way, too. So smart.

As a side note, I would highly recommend watching the Nintendo of Europe and Nintendo of Japan presentations if you don't already. Even though you might not understand all of Japan's presentation, it's very interesting to see the individualized content for each region. And that includes interviews and presenters as well. Definitely worth checking out.

Thank you, Nintendo of Europe.

I would also recommend searching out the smaller presentations. An example would be the Pikmin 3 Direct (Japan exclusive). The whole thing had a much more casual attitude, with crew members heard laughing offscreen at jokes, multiple cameras, dialogue over gameplay, and just an overall more conversational atmosphere. It was like Miyamoto had his own talk show.

Bottom line? Nintendo knows what they're doing. And even though every presentation might not have the most breaking news ever for you, you're still informed to what's happening by the primary source. It is very much appreciated on this end.

Virtual Console Thoughts (Nov. 2013)

Less irritated than before.

Over the course of the past few months, I've been forced to re-evaluate my opinions on Nintendo's Virtual Console service. All the way back in January of this year, I was annoyed that there weren't more options available to Wii U users, including the elephant in the room that is the GameCube. The trickling pace of Wii U VC titles was frustrating, especially when games such as Yoshi were chosen over other, more-worthy options.

However, after viewing the Nintendo Direct presentations over the past year (which are a brilliant way to keep the customers in the loop), I've had a partial change of heart. It is obvious that Nintendo is focusing on the indie scene, and working hard with up-and-comers to ensure a successful future. As stated before, Nintendo is a long-term thinker. Their eShop digital policies and ease of development is very generous to parties looking to release their games on a big-name console. New blood is more important than ever in this gaming industry. Nintendo and Sony both know it, and are pushing resources accordingly. Shuhei Yoshida (President of Sony Worldwide Studios) recently stated in an interview that "Sony needs Nintendo to succeed." And he's right. What industry better prospers than one with experienced, competent, and skilled competitors? The fact that both Nintendo and Sony, two of the biggest names in the business, see indie game developers as a huge part of the industry speaks volumes about their strategies and the future of the industry itself.

I agree with Nintendo's stance to focus on helping new, innovative titles. Fostering developers of the future will definitely pay off in the long run. Super Mario Bros. 3 isn't going anywhere. All of Nintendo's classic library can be put on hold, or at least moved to the back burner. There are far more pressing matters that need attention. When the delight of the classics finally wear off (if they ever do), Nintendo is going to need somewhere else to turn. I'd say it's a pretty good move to start building those relationships now. It would be fantastic to see a partnership as accomplished as the one Nintendo and Rare used to have.

The whole three-pronged approach seems to be a pretty good one. Focusing on fostering future talent and success, focusing on developing quality first-party titles, and letting the classics trickle out a little at a time so they don't overshadow something else Nintendo wants us to look at. While a small part of me is still irritated that I can't plug away at all the SNES titles I want, I know that Nintendo is doing what they think is best for the company's future. And I have to admit, I think it's a good idea. They have a pretty good track record too, so I'll trust them with this one.

Although I do wonder how long the Wii Mini will stick around in stores after the holidays.

(Not really) new!

Wii U 2013 Thoughts

So 2013 is almost over, and the Wii U isn't moving nearly as much as Nintendo wants it to. Their longstanding (accurate) philosophy is that software sells hardware. So where's the software?

The truth is, there's a decent chunk currently out there, but the media/internet loves to look back at the somewhat bumbled launch of the console. And for the uninformed and/or lazy people, their easiest course of action is to parrot back what they read on some article that popped up at random from over nine months ago. Yes, back in November of last year there was not really any reason for the common person to pick up a Wii U. But it is September of 2013, and quite a few quality pieces of software are available.

Yes, third-party support has been less than admirable for the Big N, but they are the only company that has enough strength in their own IPs to survive in their own if need be. This is partially a curse, because "cautious" developers/publishers will play it super safe and wait for Nintendo to do the hard selling work before they enter the game, declaring that "they strongly supported it the entire time," and challenge anyone to prove otherwise. A simple Google search to any prior interview/press release can shatter their so-called "facts." Other points are made concerning Nintendo's almost casual approach to indie developers. It's thrown around that it's "just not enough, and Sony and Microsoft have been doing it way longer, so Nintendo can't possibly succeed." Well, I would agree to the second point. Sony and Microsoft have been doing it a lot longer. But I don't make the connection to Nintendo not being able to do it just because they haven't done it before. I'm pretty sure that both other companies had to find their feet and gain credibility over time as well. To be supremely accepted without reservation immediately would be a fool's expectation. It takes time. I don't even know why I have to justify it, because it's such an obvious conclusion. If it's going to work, it's still going to take time, regardless of who it is.

It's funny to note that pretty much since its inception as a game maker, Nintendo's forecast has been "doomed" by a big-name source every single year. Yet somehow, impossibly, it hasn't happened. The people that keep stating over and over again that this, surely this, is Nintendo's last year, know it probably isn't true, but have stuck to those guns for so long. They're just waiting for the near impossible chance that it might happen, so they can stand up and proclaim how they always knew Nintendo was a failure from the start.

Yawn.

Naturally, anytime I read an article title with one of those people's names in it or how much Nintendo is doomed, I skip it. It's not that hard. You just don't read it. Those people are just trying to stir up the pot and gain publicity. And because some people are willing to become angry over trivial bullshit, it works. Some would argue that it's their job to be critical analysts, but I counter that they base their predictions on extreme short-term, cherry-picked results. Not to mention they never look at Nintendo in terms of a full company, they look at "just Wii U" instead of everything Nintendo has going on (consoles, handhelds, services, software, etc.). That goes against everything Nintendo bases their company policies on.

Nintendo is a long-term thinker, and always has been. In this way, they separate themselves from the American corporate structure mindset. Hell, American corporations are lucky if they're thinking more than two weeks down the road. This angers analysts, because Nintendo isn't "playing by the rules" or, "doing what they should be doing." Such statements are absolutely ridiculous. An analyst's job is to analyze, not dictate what "should happen." Because they can't possibly predict what will happen long-term, they will ostracize anyone that dares to think that way. People that state Nintendo is doomed should check out actual numbers and reports once in a while. Their heads might explode. Another huge difference between them and pretty much everyone else is that they learn from their mistakes. They don't just abandon something once it starts to look like it's not working out, like other big parties in the gaming business.

So anyway, I'm getting off of my soapbox to talk about software. Just on the eShop alone, there are a ton of good titles (both legacy games and original titles). The whole layout and setup of the Wii U eShop compared to the Wii one is like night and day. I found the Wii layout to be clunky, confusing, and unaesthetic as hell. The Wii U one makes actual sense, and is easily navigated. Which means people are more likely to buy things. Nintendo is also has a "quality over quantity" policy. Short-term, it means less things available right off the bat. Long-term, it means better things overall with no filler crap (for the most part).

Retail titles are slowly but surely becoming more and more. And I'm not talking about all that shovelware, which is pretty much a given considering how some developers still see Nintendo consoles as gimmicky toys. I'm talking about real games. The lineup looks great, and is slowly picking up steam. It just took a while to get moving. The biggest opponent Nintendo is fighting against right now is the uninformed public, who is just repeating what the general media told them to think a year ago. I still encounter people that are unaware that the Wii U is a new piece of equipment. It's depressing how people can justify buying any video game items when they're just doing what some uninformed person told them to do, and in the end don't care about it anyway. Why even bother if you're just going to be a clueless sheep?

It just takes so long for the mass of society to catch up with the people who are paying attention. That goes for pretty much any subject, not just video games. More important things like the economy, politics, health and safety, down to pop culture things like movies, books, comics, and video games. It's very frustrating to the informed people about any of aforementioned areas, because they know what's up, but everybody else is so slow to put the pieces together. One of the areas I choose to try to be well informed in is games. Granted, there's so much going on I can't possibly stay on top of it all, so I prioritize the areas I think are worth following. I would prefer to make an informed decision (about any subject, not just this) as opposed to someone I don't know who I'm not sure is even credible tell me what to do.

GameCube Virtual Console Thoughts

Still a long way away.

Since the launch of the Wii U, there's been a lot of hype and speculation about the future of the Virtual Console service. Even eight months into the release, the prospects are still very much uncertain. Nintendo tides over most people with news about moving Wii to Wii U, MiiVerse compatibility, GamePad play, and the like. Titles move over at a snail's pace. Why is this? To keep interest flowing consistently? For better long-term profits? Both, most likely. But a huge issue always comes to my mind whenever someone brings up the Virtual Console: the inclusion of GameCube titles.

Without a doubt, the GameCube can be placed into the category of a "legacy console". It's twelve years old and three console generations past. Even the later model Wii took out GameCube readability. So no issue in terms of it being "not old enough." Even when the Wii U was announced, there was excited whisperings of GameCube games being available for download.

But (and I know Nintendo is already moving towards a proposed solution), the internal memory is meager at best when compared to even last-generation consoles. Retail games take up a large amount of space, and even with the Deluxe Set, your internal memory is full before you can blink. eShop titles take up less space, but with consistent updates and patches, they quickly grow in size as well. The Basic Set (8 GB) is sitting on shelves gathering dust while the Deluxe Set (32 GB) is constantly in demand, but it's still not enough. Nintendo introduced the ability to connect an external hard drive to your console for additional storage space. This "solution" was, I feel, a short-term fix to a long-term problem. Even after it was hastily introduced, updates came quite often to improve and expand upon it. The whole thing reeked of afterthought.

With E3 upon us and the holiday season coming up shortly afterwards, Nintendo has to have some kind of hardware solution in their bag of tricks. Releasing consoles in a variety of colors only goes so far, and can only distract the consumer for so long. Even now, it was just announced that a 32 GB version will be released in White as well as Black. So what? That doesn't fix the underlying problem.

There is a possibility that Nintendo will release their own external hard drive. This will allow them to fix their initial faux pas while at the same time making money off of it. To sway people to their side further (other than just having an official "Nintendo brand Wii U External Hard Drive"), they could offer some included software/game/DLC/etc.

Another option (and this is the one people want the most) could be releasing another batch of consoles with a bigger stockpile of internal memory right off the shelf. If I can buy a used Xbox 360 with 320 GB storage space or a PS3 with a 500 GB storage space, why shouldn't I have the option to buy a Wii U with more than 32 GB? Would it cost too much?

Thus, we hit another roadblock. The GamePad replacement price has been valued by Nintendo at approximately $150 (It is not being sold as a solo item yet, it is only available as a replacement by Nintendo directly). Yet, the whole Basic Set is priced at $300. Could this mean that the base console itself is only valued at $150 by Nintendo? That's cheap. So what if Nintendo says, "Hey, let's release a Wii U with lots of memory." The only problem is, everyone who already bought their console is stuck with 32 GB max, and they sure as hell don't want to buy a new one that is going to cost even more than they paid the first time. And Nintendo can't sell a base console by itself for cheaper than a full set, because many games need the GamePad to function. You can't return only part of your purchase.

Or can you?

Since Nintendo has recently started selling refurbished hardware firsthand, why don't they make some sort of offer where you can send in your unit, have it upgraded with all your data transferred over, and then send it back to you? Since you won't need a new GamePad or anything, it can be done for a way smaller fee than buying some bundle brand new. All you would have to pay for is the price to upgrade your internal memory. Then it gets sent back with all your data intact, since Nintendo is doing it themselves and can easily navigate their own security measures (which is a big deal to them, for obvious reasons). This way, people that jumped on the purchase right away can have just as much storage space as people buying the upgraded console off the shelves brand new. And since Nintendo would then have consoles with less storage space that had been sent in, they could offer them, refurbished, at a way lower price. There would definitely be consumers that would not need that large amount of space, and the lower price would most likely sway them even further.

The increased storage space would mean that there would be no problem in people downloading lots of Virtual Console stuff directly to their Wii U, which also means there's way less of a chance of people passing around software through illegal means, which scares Nintendo to death. It's way easier to stick something on a tiny, portable hard drive and take it somewhere else to fiddle around than to pick up your whole Wii U setup and drag it around behind you. So Nintendo kills a lot of birds with one stone.

Bringing us back to the main focus of this post: GameCube games on the Virtual Console. NES, SNES, and N64 titles do not take up that much space. N64 would be the most, and that has a max of 64 MB. With only those options (aside from Genesis, Turbo-Grafx, etc.), you're not filling up even the Wii's internal memory any time soon. And since the Wii U is such a big step up in terms of storage, no way you're filling it up with those. However, Nintendo realized they had hit a huge snag after offering full, new retail titles to be downloaded on the Wii U without fully considering the space requirements. GameCube games are the same way. With a maximum disc capacity of 1.5 GB, you're looking at a lot of space used up just for GameCube titles.

Bottom line is, Nintendo needs to open up that space, and I think the "send in, upgrade, send out" model is their best bet. They aren't going to move ahead with something that takes up a lot of space, but requires a non-Nintendo supplier. They want to, logically, have control of their own products and services. So until that happens, GameCube games on the Virtual Console are not going to be a high priority. If they are announced before some sort of storage increase, I will be slightly surprised.

New Smash Bros. Game Thoughts

Characters? Assist Trophies? Combos? Stages?

The new Smash Bros. game doesn't have a set release date yet, but what has been revealed is that Sora Ltd. (one of the main developers of Brawl) with work with Namco Bandai on this new installment. I am excited.

Namco Bandai's recent fighting feats include Soul Calibur V and Tekken Tag Tournament 2, which were pretty damn good in my opinion. You can't argue that both of those franchises have a large amount of success, otherwise there probably wouldn't be five or more of each.

I think that with Namco Bandai near the head of this game, it could take a step more towards the Melee side of the series, where things are fast-paced, skill is more rewarded, and there is less of, "Hey! You just happened to hit that glowing thing by chance and now I'm dead!" Don't get me wrong, I like Brawl a lot, I just like the pacing of Melee's combat better. It seemed less clunky control-wise. They tried to put Brawl in with the other 'family friendly let's-play-all-together' games, but I never played any Smash game with my family, nor did I have an urge to. I played with people who were around my skill level who enjoyed the series for what it was.

So, are we talking a mainstream Namco character in this one? As obvious as the decision may seem, Pac-Man could actually be the perfect choice. I could see a Final Smash where he eats a power pellet and all other characters turn blue-ish, and Pac can just run into them, consume them, and their eyes go zigzagging off the screen. He has gloves, he can punch, he can have that wakka-wakka sound while he's moving, akin to Mr. Game & Watch's ticking steps.

And since the game is Nintendo, and Nintendo is all about delving into its past, they can pick and choose attacks from all those old Pac-Man games. Even though they might not be great (or even good), they still have unique things about them. I'm talking Professor Pac-Man, the Pac-Man World series, Super Pac-Man, and the like.

Who says he can't use that slingshot from Pac-Man 2: The New Adventures? Or don his Professor Pac-Man hat, glasses, and smack you with that stick? Or have the fairy from Pac-Land help you attack? Why not have the magic boots from Pac-Land as an item, which would give you many more jumps than normal? Or the fruit from mazes included in the other food percentage-reducing items? Or make any of the Pac-Man World maps a stage in itself? Or chuck that key from the maze right into somebody's face? As long as they don't ruin any new characters like they did Sonic. For such a push to have him, most of his moves are the same. Spin. Spin. Another spin. Nobody I know plays as Sonic. He could have been a cool character to use, too. Shame.

What about Assist Trophies? Holy crap, there are a million and one awesome things they could do. What's that? The Galaxians showed up and are all zooming and shooting down the screen? Dig Dug is running around the stage trying to pump up/explode other characters? The Pac-Man ghosts are zigzagging around the stage following players' paths? Why not make a stage with all Namco arcade classics cycling through, kind of like the WarioWare, Inc. stage from Brawl? Speculation is so much fun.

In the 1980's alone, Namco released over sixty games. Sixty. I'm sure not all of them were games to write home about, but there were definitely some treasures in there. Namco is one of the companies with a history of landmarks as big as Nintendo's, sometimes even bigger. And since the Smash Bros. series has a history of showcasing little-known gems (e.g. Ice Climbers, Pit, Captain Falcon, Ness etc.) by those who are younger or never go outside mainstream games, it seems like a perfect fit that many of those Namco games could find a resurgence in being known and appreciated. I know that everybody knows who Ness is now, but back when the N64 Smash Bros. came out? I can't tell you how many times I heard, "Oh, they made him just for this game. He's an original character." Or for Samus, "I think it's pronounced sa-moose." Or for Falcon, "I have no idea where he's from."

What if the Smash Bros. series got combos? If the developers could make it work well, it would be a huge addition to the series, and throw a completely new strategic element into the mix. Between N64 and Melee, there was a huge change. Between Melee and Brawl, not as big. They really need to pull out something new that will make a big impact for this one. For me, having connectivity between your Wii U and 3DS isn't enough.

I'm looking forward to you, new Smash Bros. game.