Template talk:SSBTiers

Is this legitimate?

The new tier list, I mean. I don't see how it's much different from the Smash 4 tier list, anyone could vote on either. Nyargleblargle (Talk) 15:05, 13 May 2015 (EDT)

As far as I can see, I think we could agree with this "fourth tier list" being the new list. The nearly four year old tier list seemed a bit outdated and there no longer an Smash 64 backroom anymore. Besides, Samus isn't that bad of a character, and Donkey Kong and Ness in my opinion are not even that any good in the first place (Ness also ranks second last on my personal Smash 64 tier list). Dots (talk) The Pokémon 15:28, 13 May 2015 (EDT)

It's similar but different, and to me the differences make it at least "not invalid".

1. SSB64 has been out for 16 years. SSB4 was updated last month. The SSB64 metagame is comparatively very stable, especially with much fewer characters and basically no stage variety, meaning that peoples' opinions are far more likely to be well-founded.
2. Compared to SSB4, the ratio of "skilled players of known expertise" to "noobs" in SSB64 is much more condusive to a public pool being worth something.

I think it's fine, if not optimal (although it's not like it's the first SSB64 tier list exception we've had to make). Toomai Glittershine The Altruistic 15:32, 13 May 2015 (EDT)