Featured Comments


This article looks at comments made from the September 15th- September 18th (Japan time).

Thanks to TheAnvil for covering the previous week. Tokyo was a lot of fun, but now I need to catch up on my sleep. This weekend we’ll be an interview with one of the voice actors from Smash for Wii U. Stay tune for another interview straight from the source!

Remember, don’t insult other posters. If you insult other posters, your post that you might have spent so much time on might not get approved, and thrown in the trash. Stay classy!


Already replied:

Frostwraith has already written it. I should have linked it in my actual article.


I do like the ideas that you presented in this comment. Very well thought out!


I saw Frostwraith mentioning that idea — I’d like him to explore in what ways that could be done. It’s kind of a neat compromise that I think a lot of people could really get behind.

Arthur 97

To be honest, Ganondorf is Fine the Way He is is an article I don’t really feel proud of. I sat on it for awhile, but I couldn’t find ways to improve it so I just went ahead and published it. My main goal was to try to rationalize why Ganondorf doesn’t really need to be changed as it’s a viewpoint that doesn’t get a lot of coverage. It’s a pretty hot button issue in the Smash community, and the article got over 40 comments. Anyway, I think there gets to a point where if you have to change so many of the properties that makes an attack what it is to make it work in Smash…it loses some of its’ appeal. If Dead Man’s Volley was a simple projectile…would it still feel like Dead Man’s Volley? I think the answer depends on the person.


You make a fair point. I sometimes wonder what Wario’s moveset would have looked like had he gotten in Melee. As you mention, Ganondorf most certainly would have gotten into Brawl. I do agree with’s Spiral’s reply to this comment about confusing casual players (featured below).




Let me discuss your “contrarian” point first:

My goal with Source Gaming is this: first, provide the sources without any extra information. We don’t add commentary or editorialize translations nor interviews. We essentially provide those ‘sources’ with as little bias as possible. It would actually be in our best interest to editorialize the interviews. More people have read our translations on outside of Source Gaming than on it. Walls of text intimidate some people, and we often get the “tl;dr” comment. But…I feel the community deserves the full context. Too many times have quotes been taken out of context and given the wrong impression. Providing the full translation helps combat that.

Then the second step is to use those sources, and come up with conclusions. Pure opinion articles are marked by the purple capsules, more fact based articles are indicated by green capsules (Orange is for translations, blue for interviews, light blue is for site, character/stages are red, and news is yellow). Nirbion and I came up with that system in order to make it easier for the audience to visualize what kind of information is being presented. We are in the process of rethinking the site’s design/organization so that might change sometime next month…but that’s the system we have now.

We don’t turn down articles that offer a different point of view. My only requirement to be published on Source Gaming is to provide evidence for the argument the poster is presenting. In fact there’s a guest article that is being worked on right now that is very anti-Sakurai. After reading it, we told them ways to sharpen their argument, and I’m really looking forward to reading the 2nd draft. There’s a lot of times where I disagree with the other staff members. We’ve been in day long arguments over a ton of topics in the staff chat before. I have disagreed with Soma about the competitive nature of Smash in the past…I have disagreed with SmashChu and TheAnvil on other topics as well, such as Gematsu. A couple of other bloggers have actually asked me why I allow so many different viewpoints on Source Gaming as they feel it detracts from the ‘site having a core message’. One thing that I have constantly fought is the ‘echo-chamber’ in the Smash community. In my eyes, it’s a pretty big issue, and has caused the fan base to be blindsided when they really shouldn’t have been. Wolf not coming back was clear as day. The fact that we weren’t getting a ton of DLC characters should have been clear, but a lot of people were still predicting an outrageous number of additions to the roster. To be frank, I want people to have actual conversations, and not blindly circle jerk each other. The only comments we don’t allow on the site are comments that flame other users. Otherwise, we don’t censor comments for not agreeing with us. If I find a writer doing that, then they would get in trouble (and it did happen in the past, and I fixed it).

Obviously, I do have my own bias, and I think it’s pretty clear for anyone who has read my opinion pieces/ heard my on the podcasts. I do think Sakurai is a great director. I don’t think I would run Source Gaming if I didn’t think that. That being said, I don’t believe he is perfect. Kid Icarus: Uprising is essentially unplayable for me because I’m left handed. The random equipment/ custom drop system in Smash for Wii U/3DS isn’t very well thought out. Tripping. His obsessive personality can be a good thing, but it can also be a huge drain on development. As I discussed in Our Dear Leader, I think understanding  is a critical step before meaningful criticism can occur. We’ve been trying to provide that understanding as it wasn’t readily available before SG started. Mettaur kind of hit the nail on the head in his reply:


I’m not sure if it would ever improve in a meaningful way. Like I said, we are caught in a difficult position as video games are forms of entertainment. The rise of unprofessional gaming journalism (YouTube, blogs) will help combat this, but the number game (Focusing on relations with the biggest sites/channels) can still provide a bottleneck of control for publishers.


The number of paying jobs for gaming journalist is extremely low. I’ve heard a lot of gaming journalist will do writing for other publications in order to make ends meet. It doesn’t pay well, and with YouTube and blogs, it pays even less than it used to. Going on your own is the best option it seems.


Thanks for sharing the information about the UK rating system. I never knew!



I believe I actually read that paper in college. If I remember correctly, they had respondents fill in words missing a letter/ a couple of letters in order to measure aggressiveness. So for __unch could be “bunch” or “crunch”, etc. “crunch” would give the person a higher aggressiveness rating in the study. There’s some issues with the methodology, and one study on its’ own doesn’t prove a point (especially if it’s not peer reviewed). I’ll have to see what else has come out. I’m still reading On Killing!


I think this is a good comment to end on. At the end of the day, I do think the other side has valid points and isn’t “wrong”. It’s an opinion on what you prefer.


Share this!


  1. I do think the Deam Man’s Volley attack could still feel right. Give it an angled aerial trajectory (ala Ness’ PK Fire), maybe give it some stun, and you could make it work similar to Dedede’s Gordos just reflected straight instead of bouncing.

    In any case, that is all I will say on the matter here.

  2. To be fair, I guess most characters would probably have come out differently had they been added in a later Smash game, not just Ganondorf. The Smash series seems to be getting better and better at portraying character true to their source material as well as allowing for more unconventional movesets and gimmicks. Its interesting to think about what a lot of characters might have looked like had they been added a game or two later.

    Would Samus have been a more ranged focused fighter similar to Mega Man?

    Would Kirby pull from a wider variety of his abilities rather than primarily just using Fighter’s moves outside of his specials, once again akin to Mega Man?

    Would Fox utilize any weapons from the ground based portions of Assault had his moveset been conceived after that game’s release?

    Would Ness still need to borrow offensive moves from other characters in his game, or would Sakurai have figured out a way to make a moveset centered around his status inflicting powers?

    Would Captain Falcon have still gotten a moveset (possibly) inspired by Dragon King if the concept hadn’t been so fresh in Sakurai’s mind?

    Would Zelda’s strong associated with the Light Arrows in recent titles lead to them being a more prominent part of her moveset, beyond just being her final Smash?

    Would Pit use more of his Uprising weaponry if he had been added in Smash For?

    As you said it works the other way too, with characters like Wario who were long overdue, and others who just weren’t major enough to warrant an appearance in earlier games.

    Would Bowser Jr. use his paintbrush more if he had been added when Sunshine was still the most recent 3D Mario Platformer?

    What would Diddy Kong have looked like way back in Smash 64, before he got his popgun and jetpack from Donkey Kong 64?

    How would Olimar have worked with a more conventional moveset in Melee?

    What on earth would Palutena have pulled her moves from in a pre-Uprising world?

    Obviously a lot of these scenarios probably never came close to occurring while we know Wario and Ganondorf very nearly did and didn’t make it into Melee. Regardless, I think its interesting to consider how different some characters might have turned out if they’d simply been added at a different point in time.

  3. I like Mettaur’s comment.

    It’s near impossible to provide an opinion without coming across as contrarian to someone. As a result, I think it’s important to acknowledge both sides of a subject when writing about it, like the above mentioned Ganondorf debate. For instance, I might give a positive review to Federation Force but I do acknowledge glaring flaws the game has which prevent me from enjoying it fully. To me, balance is key when debating.

  4. It seems it’s hard to talk about Ganondorf in Smash without causing some debates. But as long as things stay civil (and of the comments I’ve read, they are, so I’m not calling out anyone), then discussion is great. It often seems that people are either strongly for or strongly against his current representation, but even in those broad categories, there’s variation. I think Ganondorf is fine right now, while Frostwraith would like an overhaul that keeps his playstyle similar, just with updated animations to match his newer incarnations. On the other side, some people argue for giving Ganondorf a sword or his trident, while others would base his moves more on his appearance in Ocarina of Time. There are a lot of ways to look at it, and I’ve come to respect all those other ways more now.

  5. A couple possibly incoherent thoughts about “bias”.

    First of all, I feel the distinction between fact-based and opinion-based articles is clear enough (just look at that huge disclaimer at the beginning of the recent Ganondorf article). That said, opinions are what they are, and carry an inherent bias by definition.

    I don’t see this a a traditional news site (you all don’t even get direct monetary compensation for this), one which should be as neutral as possible all the time. I’m mostly under the impression that this site is ran by a group of friends/acquaintances which happen to share several opinions and are brought together by them: if said opinion is (I’m generalizing a bit here) that Sakurai is doing something right, would it be “fair” to request – or even force – the inclusion of different writers with an opposite point of view, so that a specific (small? large?) group of readers feels represented? Would the team like having to do this? (Note: these are not rhetorical questions.)

    (For the record, my previous comments weren’t mean to belittle the idea that Ganondorf should get new moves; I see it as a definitely valid position which, like others, has several pros and cons.)

    1. I think (generally speaking) everyone on the article team is here because they love Nintendo and consider themselves big fans of Nintendo, and they also love Smash. Of course they won’t all have the same opinions, but that is how I would describe everyone on the article team (including guest writers). I think everyone at least respects Sakurai, even if they may not agree with certain choices he makes. They also tend to care about how characters are represented in Smash, to varying degrees.

      Also, funnily enough, I think a “should Sakurai return as the director of the next Smash” article series is in the works. Obviously with a better title than that of course.

      The translation team is a bit different, in the sense that, well, I am the majority of the translation team (at least at the moment :P).

  6. “Last thing I will mention: Frostwraith mentioned in the Discord chat an idea to overhaul Ganondorf, but keep his playstyle the same, giving him new animations and utilizing his more recent design in Hyrule Warriors, but keeping the his moves functioning similarly. That was an idea I could get behind, since it would ‘de-clone’ him while keeping his playstyle intact.”

    Agreed. I want Ganondorf to play the same. Granted, I still wouldn’t mind dual swords & trident like in Hyrule Warriors – but as long as he still has the same playstyle Ganondorf currently does only with new animations and a slight change to compensate for his new weapons, I wouldn’t mind it either…

  7. Sorry this is a really late reply, but these days there’s a lot of sites I read and I tend to put things off to get others out of the way. I’ve been meaning to reply to this for a while.

    I apologise if I came off as rude with the “contrarian” comment. Perhaps I thought the word was stronger than I thought it was. I think the article’s name was what rubbed me the wrong way as it kinda came off as a bold statement rather then an opinion, and an attention-grabbing one at that (I don’t mean clickbait, but just something that people are guaranteed to reply to). I’m a very opinionated person and I’m too argumentative for my own good.

    i really do appreciate all this effort put into translating sources to provide facts, I truly do. For example, because of this site I learnt the “Pit and Meowth were planned for Smash 64” thing was a lie, and that Leif wasn’t planned to be in Melee before Roy showed up. It’s a great thing that this site exists, and I hope it continues to exist for many more.

    I didn’t know the capsule’s colours were coded. That is a pretty neat system. In hindsight, it does make sense looking back on some articles sharing colours with similar topics.

    I’m not asking for anti-Sakurai content, as much as I’ve disliked his decisions with Smash 4. Make what you want. I just sometimes can’t help but feel that there’s some times where it feels like it’s trying to be justified only because it received criticism. But maybe that’s the point.

    I really don’t see how agreeing that Ganondorf needs changing is a circlejerk though, because everywhere I have talked about the subject there are people who disagree on that. Even if it was widely agreed I don’t see the problem it regarding something as fair as just wanting a faithful Ganondorf.

    And regarding Mettaur’s comment, I understand, yes, there are reasons why certain decisions have been made, and maybe it isn’t clear to some people, but at the same time I feel just because something has a reason behind it, doesn’t mean it’s a good reason.

    Anyway, I’m sorry if I was being a bit obnoxious with that comment. I’ll try not to say something like that again.

Leave a comment below!