Video summary

The Smash 6 Problem

Main summary

Key takeaways

News and Commentary

Overview

The video argues that Smash 6 faces a structural problem caused by Smash Ultimate’s unusually massive roster and the “Everyone is here” expectation it created. The presenter claims each Smash game has tried to surpass the previous one by expanding character count, culminating in Ultimate’s 89 fighters—far larger than most modern fighting games (e.g., Tekken 8’s 44 and Street Fighter 6’s 30).

The core claim is that this scale creates second-order problems: more roster pressure means less development time for everything else—including new stages, new modes, and single-player content. Ultimate is presented as an example of how content can be deprioritized when the team focuses on adding fighters and DLC.

Key arguments

“Everyone is here” isn’t repeatable

The presenter argues it’s impossible to top Ultimate’s crossover moment. Therefore, Smash 6 must choose between:

  • Repeating Ultimate’s formula, or
  • Changing direction

Ultimate as a logistical nightmare

Beyond the Nintendo-owned characters, every non-Nintendo fighter requires negotiations and legal arrangements. The video also claims the newest DLC characters demanded highly unique movesets, increasing both pressure and cost.

Roster size tradeoffs reduce quality across modes

The video argues Ultimate’s roster scale led to compromises, including:

  • Disappointing single-player content at launch
  • A continued lack of beloved earlier modes (examples cited: traditional All-Star mode, events, trophies, Smash Target)

The presenter’s framing is blunt: with a roster this large, “you’re going to have to lose most of the rest of the content.”

Four possible futures for Smash 6 (speculation)

The presenter outlines four hypothetical paths, including likelihood and tradeoffs:

  1. An “Ultimate again” port (e.g., a Switch 2 Edition)

    • The video claims this is unlikely because it would feel like an outdated version of Ultimate (few character redesigns).
    • It also argues pricing logic doesn’t fit: Nintendo wouldn’t bundle expensive DLC while charging only for technical upgrades.

  2. A sequel built on Ultimate’s base (“soft reboot” / renewal)

    • Presented as the most realistic path: reduce the roster substantially while improving character fidelity and side content.

  3. A more complete refresh (“renewal”) with fewer fighters (≈60)

    • The main thesis: cutting the roster allows deeper moveset work and better new modes/stages.
    • The presenter also criticizes how many veteran kits feel dated relative to their modern source material.

  4. A full reboot (wishlist/prediction framework)

    • This would strip Smash down to basics and use only Nintendo characters, implying a much smaller roster (≈26) and massive overhauls for every character.
    • The presenter emphasizes this as more hypothetical than expected.

Content desires and quality complaints

Stages and presentation

  • The presenter wants new stages and dislikes Ultimate’s reliance on returning stages, comparing pacing to Brawl/Melee, which more clearly separated new and returning content.
  • They also complain about recycled presentation elements, such as reused announcer and victory/results music from older entries.

Spirits

  • The presenter detests Spirits and argues they’re widely unpopular.
  • They would accept Spirits only if treated as secondary/complementary rather than central.

Trophies (strong demand)

  • The presenter strongly demands that trophies return, describing trophies/collection as central to Smash’s identity since Melee.

Why roster reduction is framed as necessary

The presenter argues roster cuts are painful but required:

  • They predict moderate cuts, not full elimination of all older content.
  • They criticize the community instinct to “add everyone back,” saying it makes the rest of the game suffer.

“Template” roster analysis for a hypothetical soft reboot / sequel

The presenter also provides a template-style roster analysis, including franchise-era representation and character inclusion logic. Examples mentioned:

  • A more franchise-era-based approach for Zelda (e.g., referencing Twilight Princess vs other eras).
  • Keeping all 64-era “original 12,” with the presenter arguing none should be removed (within their personal framework).
  • Keeping Pikachu and Jigglypuff, while adjusting Pokémon representation beyond Gen 1.
  • They stress they don’t treat placeholders as valid (the script notes this even with later announcements).
  • Decisions are justified as based on representation and uniqueness, repeatedly clarified as predictions/wishlists, not claims about what Nintendo will do.

Final prediction

The presenter concludes that Smash 6 is most likely to be a soft reboot / “renewal” with:

  • a smaller roster than Ultimate
  • more focus on updating veterans
  • rebuilding side content (new stages and modes)

They end by arguing that if roster growth keeps sidlining celebration content—new modes, story-style experiences, events, museum-like items—then a smaller roster is preferable, even if it means losing some characters (they jokingly mention Min Min as an example of someone they’d cut).

Presenters or contributors

  • The video’s single on-screen narrator/presenter (no other contributors are credited in the provided subtitles).

Original video