Welcome, fellow warriors of the fray, to Super Smash Brothers: LIFE ITSELF!
We are the original SSB RP forum, and are a dedicated, friendly, community.
Years after the Subspace Emissary collapse, a mysterious explosion forced Nintendo Universes to a planet called Li.
A mystical force is said to be the cause of bringing everyone into a trap of noxious gas known as Starvia.
It is up to the new Smash Brothers of Li to step up and change the world through their actions.
Will you make the right choice?
Find out more here: The Origins
All characters are fictional.
All visual media displayed belongs to its respective owners.
All written content by the community is solely theirs.
The site staff are not responsible for any misguided conduct relating to franchise characters.
The staff will intervene if plagairism is discovered.
SSB: LIFE ITSELF 2011-2021
So, Kingdom Hearts for a long time has been in a weird place where a bunch of prominent and important characters from it haven't been ligal due to being from Disney. We are officially considering giving Disney a ligality exception, with the primary purpose of rectifying this somewhat frustrating predicament.
I would like to present an argument generously donated by TartoonHand94 to argue in Disney's favor. You are all familiar with Disney's mascot Mickey Mouse, I'm sure. Well here's the thing. Mickey Mouse has a longer history with Nintendo... than Mario. Yes, that's right. Before Mario even existed or Donkey Kong was tossing barrels around, Nintendo had a relationship with Disney and was producing Disney merchandise. Nintendo's relationship with Disney predates the Game & Watch. It goes all the way back to their original playing cards. How's that for some history?
Let me put it this way. Animated characters, especially ones that have actually been in video games, I think they should be on the site. However, I think any live action Disney characters is drawing a line. I know that might go without saying, but since it wasn't mentioned, I thought I might say it. Other than that, sure. I don't mind having Disney here.
You make a good point, Cynda. We actually have a blanket ban on any depiction of a celebrity on the ban list which makes most live-action adaptations suspect. Though, it occurs to me that a lot of people refer to CGI movies with a "real" aesthetic like the new Lion King often get referred to as Live Action, which wouldn't be covered. Were you including those? =o
Well, considering the fact that the "live action", in this case in quotations, movies are basically just remakes of the original movie, I mean... I kind of think including them would be a little redundant? I mean, unless you want Dumbo to have the backstory he had in the live action one. But for the most part, the live action movies seem to be just the original moves but with new polish and not as well done. I mean, my vote would be for just the ones considered animated versions, since the animated version don't have back stories with live action people. With the exception of the ones that follow the animated version to a T, and... again that's redundant. But that's totally up to you guys.
Post by Maverick Hunter Zero on Jan 31, 2020 21:51:15 GMT -8
I would be for this... The only drawback is that not all of the Disney characters haven't been in a game as of yet.
There are exceptions though, seeing as Mickey Mouse was such an example.
Then there is the aforementioned 'Live Action' films which are not so good as Cynda put it. Ironically enough this clause will include the Star Wars franchise and the Marvel Cinematic Universe since both were bought out by Disney in the later years of their growth before they did the live action movies.
Either way, I am for the animated Canon characters getting a potential shot at this...
Okay, so I had to think about this for a bit, and yeah, Zero kind of has a point. Disney does own Star Wars and the Marvel Movies now, and I think they both have had video games (I know Star Wars has). I still think the fact that they're played and made to look like the actors they play might potentially be problematic, but again it's up to the staff. Really, whether anything in Disney gets in or not is not really my concern if it doesn't ruin the atmosphere of the site (which, again, the people who made it will have a better understanding of that than I do).
When it comes to Star Wars and Marvel, just for the sake of sticking to my guns when it comes to live action, I'm gonna vote no on those cases. (And believe me, I love the Marvel characters except Captain Marvel so it's not an easy decision to make.)
Yo! We've reached a consensus on the Disney White List test! Given the concerns raised by others in this thread, we have decided to ... partially ligalize Disney. We're not going to be inviting Star Wars or Marvel to the site, as we do have rules against Live-Action characters. And to be clear, the Ban List takes priority over the White List, so series such as Pirates of the Carribean will still be illigal despite being present in Kingdom Hearts due to the lack of an animated adaptation to take from. However, we will be opening up the site to quite a few other things. What we will be White-Listing is:
Any Disney IP that has appeared in Kingdom Hearts or Epic Mickey.
To be more specific, series ligalized by Kingdom Hearts are as followed:
101 Dalmations Alice in Wonderland Alladin Bambi Beauty & The Beast Big Hero 6 Chicken Little Cinderella Dumbo Fantasia Frozen Hercules Lilo & Stitch Mickey Mouse & his extended universe (Donald, Goofy and more) Monster Inc. Mulan Peter Pan Pinocchio Sleeping Beauty Snow White Tangled Tarzan The Hunchback of Notre Dame The Lion King The Little Mermaid The Nightmare Before Christmas Toy Story Winnie the Pooh Wreck it Ralph
And the series ligalized by Epic Mickey that aren't already in Kingdom Hearts are as followed:
Oswald the Lucky Rabbit The Princess and the Frog Silly Symphonies