Talk:Super Smash Bros. Brawl/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

→

Archive 10

Headers vs. lists

In early June, there was a little mini-war over whether the "Confirmed characters" section should have headers or not. Right now each character is presented like so: ===Mario===. I changed it to ;[[Mario]] : but that was changed back twice. On the second time HighwayCello (talk · contribs · count) recommended that I take it to the talk page. So why not. The question: Should the confirmed characters be changed to lists?

• Headers - how the article currently looks
• Lists - see User:Hbdragon88/Temp

Pros for lists:

• Discourages anons and other users from editing each individual section one-at-a-time; result is a cleaner edit history
• Not as much as an eyesore on the TOC (there are more "confirmed characters" headers on that section than there are in the entire TOC)

Cons for lists:

• It looks "daft" HighwayCello
• Harder to edit (HighwayCello)

Hbdragon88 22:40, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Survey

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

• Oppose Since my point has been POVed, why bother. Voting is evil. Highway ^Batman! 23:07, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose.--DarkHero 23:05, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose Sorry I couldnt vote earlier I was away for a while, but I have returned(obviosly) to say...who cares that much about the headers but cant see that the old way was neater?Qwerasdfzxcvvcxz 12:19, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Discussion

Add any additional comments

• I personally think that the fact that individual sections are edited is a PRO, not a con, of headers. It makes it more clear what the user is editing, and actually makes the history easier to read because you can browse each individual edit more efficiently. This one of the reasons why we encourage people to leave the automatically produced section header in the edit summary. I do understand your point about cluttering up the TOC. However, once the confirmed list gets expanded more, it'll probably be worth it to move the confirmed characters to its own subpage, and make the confirmed characters section a single paragraph of prose. EWS23 (Leave me a message!) 23:17, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

• I've seen many instances (not specifically in SSBB) where new users or anons rack up a ridiculous amount of edits because they're making changes to each individual section (sometimes 2-3 edits per section) since they don't know that it's easier and cleaner to go up to the main section header. This is why I consider it to be a pro to simply remove the edit sections and make them make all major edits under major header and not each individual one. Hbdragon88 23:23, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

• Having anons "rack up a ridiculous amount of edits" because they edit each section individually doesn't do any damage. Also, at the moment, we have the header, then a link to the main article of that character. With these link things, the header is the link to the main article, which in my opinion is confusing for the casual reader. -- Steel 23:27, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

• Well, of course it doesn't do any damage - it just makes the history more cluttered up. Re: the links - confusing? It's a blue link...blue, underlined links have been the default since the inception of the World Wide Web. On the flip side, I think the current way it looks - I think naming the character three times - header, main, and in the actual text - is overkill. Hbdragon88 08:49, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

• The history thing is really a non-issue. We're not in charge of the history, nor is it our responsibility to ensure it doesn't get "cluttered" (whatever that means). Also, about the overkill business, we could easily rephrase the beginning of each paragraph so the character is only named in the header and the main article link. -- Steel 10:05, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

• I'm afraid that I can't decide because of the equality of the pros and cons. The Table Of Contents will look better if it's in lists, but it will be a bit tougher to edit like that.--The Ninth Bright Shiner ^talk 03:06, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

• Just to clarify, what are we "Supporting" or "Opposing" in the poll? It would make a lot more sense if it said, say, Poll for changing character section to lists or something. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 06:06, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

• Presumably, we are supporting or opposing a change. Supporting no change would be opposing a change, the latter of which makes a clearer sentence. But it would be better to clarify.--The Ninth Bright Shiner ^talk 21:06, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

• "Should the confirmed characters be changed to lists?" If you want the characters as a list, support, if you don't, oppose. Is everything clear? Highway ^Batman! 21:09, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

• Keep in mind that the entire page, from content to structure, would be completely different by the time the game is released, so I suggest when we decide on this structure issue we think about the future. Erik the Appreciator 23:20, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

• The characters would probably be moved to List of characters in Super Smash Bros. Brawl, at that point. Highway ^Batman! 23:52, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

• With the ammount of controversy involved in teh charaqcter selections and rumors of the game, I think it might be a good idea to include a section atleast noting the rumors and controversy. Not to say specificaly stating any of the rumors though but the evidence of the controversy it's self and the magnitude of the controversy aswell as the many confirmed hoaxes. This is not sugesting that we futher this controversy or rumors but to note that there is one, and possibly one of the biggest ever surrounding a videogame. --Magosis 03:44, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
  • See, the reason that hasn't been done is because there is no evidence. There is no conspiracy. There are just a few minor fansites with people who enjoy making up rumours, and others who enjoy believing any made up rumour that people tell them. It's also almost certainly not "one of the biggest ever surrounding a videogame". I'm sure the Pokemon fans could give you a run for your money. That doesn't matter though. Speculation like this does not belong in the article, period. (See: WP:V, WP:NOT) -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 06:29, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
    • My point is nto to include the specualtion, But i think it would be a good point to note that said speculation exists. I may have not been clear enough it my prior post --Magosis 22:45, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Super Smash Dojo

Name Change! the official site now lists it as Super Smash Dojo —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.162.147.208 (talk • contribs)

I, in fact, have no idea what this person is talking about. I am, however, plopping it into its own section so it isn't confused at part of the above discussion. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 06:06, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

There was a discussion here talking about Brawl's name being changed to Super Smash Bros Dojo. He's just confusing the site name for the game name. - Zero1328 _Talk? 11:27, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, this is pretty common from people who don't take a good look at what they're talking about. Even though the smashbros.com website clearly refers to the game as "Brawl" many times over, the name of the site itself is the "Super Smash Bros. Dojo". No name change for this article necessary. --HeroicJay 19:58, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

"Dojo" is the name of the official site, and "Brawl" is the name of the game itself. they wouldn't change the name after making the logo and releasing the trailer under that name. FyreNWater 21:08, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

This page was on Nintendo.com, but it got pulled (this is a mirrored version): http://wii.nintendo.com.nyud.net:8080/wifi.html. Scroll down to the section labeled "Fun", and you'll see this: "Join the Nintendo worldwide community! Play the coolest titles around with gamers from around the world via Nintendo Wi-Fi Connection. Whether you're thrashing with your friends in Tony Hawk's Downhill Jam or hammering the competition in Smash Bros. Dojo, Wii opens up a world of fun through online play!" What does that mean? Who knows. Max22 04:52, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

ZOMG! It couldn't mean that maybe the authors of a site containing a small note about SSBB's online play which no longer exists (the mirror doesn't work either) made a mistake or something...or could it? Let's take a look at the official site:

From the opening paragraph: "As for future updates to Smash Bros. Dojo... What should I do? I haven't given it much thought yet.

From the latest update: "When Super Smash Bros. Brawl is completed sometime in 2007, I plan to post more information for you. " Case closed. Xubelox 05:20, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

super smash dojo is the name of the official internet page of the game!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! solidsonic

Ratings

Supposedly, it will be rated B in Japan, T for Teen in the U.S., and 12+ in Europe. --PJ Pete

Could you provide a source, please?--The Ninth Bright Shiner ^talk 01:21, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Considering he said supposedly, it's probably not a very good one. Xubelox 21:15, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

It's not going to have too much content in it, and it will not be equivalent to films rated at least "R" in the U.S., "15" in the U.K., and even "R-15" in Japan.

While those ratings sound plausible (I think it'll be E10+, but whatever), it's not confirmed, so don't add it. RememberMe? 01:24, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Three new characters?

I heard this and was going to add this to the article, but then decided that it might not be true.

I have just found out that three new characters--Young Wind Waker LInk, Ridley(is that spelled right?), and Bowser Jr.-- were added to Brawl, and two character--Ice Climbers and Mr. Game and Watch-- were cut from Brawl. I have no idea if this is credible or not, so I wanted to ask if anyone knew.

I found this on Youtube(just search for "three newcomers"), and, if you watch the video, you can understand my doubts.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Superbub (talk • contribs)

Exactly why we're going to go ahead and not include it. This rumours has already been passed around the article repeatedly, it's pretty dumb. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 01:17, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I say anyone who posts stuff like this should be shot on site. But since the technology doesn't yet exist to kill people over the internet (though hopefully it will someday), maybe we should settle for deleting it, much like "forumish" topics are treated. Xubelox 01:29, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I thought this rumor was a foruminsh comment. --DcPimp 15:20, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

*Backs away from Xubelox* Let's all hope. The Sonic fake shot has been the best fake so far, this is just dire now. Highway ^Batman! 16:15, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh, come on. Not only is this rumor all but proven false, but the video in question involved scenes from Wind Waker, Super Smash Bros. Melee (for Ridley), and Super Mario Sunshine in its "NEWCOMER" intros. --HeroicJay 23:24, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I just found an article about the "three newcomers", but it sounds like they doubt it too...http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3151290 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.156.236.24 (talk • contribs)

"According to the French-based site LiveWii". -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 14:01, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

That sight is getting a little annoying. Highway ^Batman! 14:04, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

They can't even spell "Ridley" correctly on that site. It's a load of BS that someone put up to freak out people. Also, don't believe ANY videos that aren't on official sites. It would be there unless it was accidentally leaked. In that case, it'd be up on official sites within a few hours. So STOP BELIEVING THESE FAN VIDEOS. FyreNWater 20:13, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Any honest person maing a fan video (ie not trying to trick someone) should put a warning at the beginning saying it's fake. I made a video and I did that. RememberMe? 01:40, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Arnt the vast majority (if not all) the fan videos blatantly fake? No offence intended Topic Creator but pay some more attention to the source.Qwerasdfzxcvvcxz 12:23, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Alright. First off, I would like to thank you people who simply told me that this was false. As for the rest of you, the ones who insulted me, grow up. You even suggested my case was worthy of death. Excuse me, but I metioned at the beginning of this section, that I had doubts(perhaps I should have put serious doubts) of the video's credibility, due to it's representation. The only reason I suggested it at all was because we need to keep wikipedia up to date, so I quickly came over to wikipedia after viewing this video, because I wanted to know if someone had heard this somewhere else. --Superbub

It's fine that you want to keep Wikipedia up to date, Superbub, it's just that this topic has already been thrown around before, including YouTube. I mentioned that site before, but that section of the talk page has already been archived. I don't think that people were purposely trying to be mean, and I'm pretty sure that no one really wants you to die. So even though you meant well, talk of those characters has become annoying now and no one wants to talk about it until they appear on the Dojo page (that is, if they even do at all). -SaturnYoshi 14:25, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

And I apologise if my first comment there insulted you. I was talking about how dumb the rumour itself is; badly faked, unsourced, etc. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 15:11, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I didnt mean to insult you either (I said it in my message) I was just saying that people that blindly beliieve those things are not the brightest people. bye the bye I'm QwerasdfzxcvvcxzDooD 12:52, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I thank all of you for your apologies. You're forgiven. I will also apologize for not noticing this topic before. If only I had looked....but, bah! Let's leave this stuff behind us, shall we? --Superbub

Umm, Check out the site; there are five new characters: Wario, Meta Knight, Pit, Zero Suit Samus, and Snake. I'm assuming that these are all of the new characters, and all of the characters from Super Smash Brothers Melee (Mario, Fox, Link, etc.) are also going to be in the game. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.242.104.7 (talk • contribs) .

• I added a rumour section so that people can see some false rumours being passed around I added the 2 I have seen the most —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 60.229.18.250 (talk • contribs) .

I'm curious as to whether the YouTube person got the "info" from 1Up or vice-versa (or neither). Either way, I can think of two things to quell any rumors about this that might remain. First, Ridley gets around by flying and never seems to need to stop, which would give him more than a slight advantage in a game where the only way to lose is to fall off the ring. Second, IGN, Gamespot, and Nintendo are all devoid of the news. -Unknownwarrior33 06:17, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Ergh, it really is too bad that Sakurai's site had decided to be defunct right after being opened. We have to wait until 2007 when the game is released instead of updating regularly along with the site and actually giving this page some action. I would've sold Highway's cello for that. And remember that we most likely still have several months of this "dire" torture to wait through until something happens in the news. Erik Jensen ^{(I appreciate talk!)} 17:48, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Stages, Items and Abilities.

I don't think we should have sections on stages, items and abilities at this point since all we have to go on is an early trailer for a source. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 07:47, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Even at this early point, there is still enough info for these sections. We known they will have "Super Smash Atacks", that there are new stages, and that new items will be used. Those things were shown in the trailer, so unless they drastically change the game (which there is no evidence of) the sections can remain. It would just start an edit war if you try to remove them, and the sections are going to be there when the article reaches a "finished" state after the game is released. JQF 14:13, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

I have no problem with them in the article when the game is releaesed or even before then, but at this point we have no info other than a few announcements that take up 6 paragraphs between them, much of which concerns analysis of the trailer, not a report of what is in the game. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 06:10, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

We can reorganize it or make it shorter without getting rid of it. -Unknownwarrior33 06:18, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

I'm noticing that a LOT of people as of late are constantly vandalizing several of these Nintendo pages. The comment I read on this article really annoyed me. I'm thinking that this page should be locked from outside users from editing it because it seems that reverting the page just isn't enough. I know Wikipedia is supposed to be user friendly but all these unknowns think that it's just some joke site or they don't care that a lot of editors spend most of their editing reverting dumbass comments made by stupid people on the main articles. Maybe Wikipedia should change it's policy so that only registered users can edit any pages and any users caught maliciously vandalizing any articles should be booted off forever. - SaturnYoshi 06:58, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

It's just something Wikipedians have to put up with, at least for the moment. It could be a good idea to semi-protect this page again, but... well, any Internet site will get its fair share of trolls, and to my mind it's too much effort to be annoyed by any but the most persistent. Don't sweat the vandals too much - just think of them as the village idiots. That's what I do, anyhow; laugh and revert all their 'hard work' with three mouse clicks. --Sparky Lurkdragon 07:58, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

if you had to be a member to edit, it wouldn't be the "Encyclopedia anyone can edit" now would it? --DcPimp 03:09, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Expect anyone can become a member. If a=b and b=c, then a=c.—ウルタプ 04:48, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

It's supposed to be casually editable and inviting. The only reason I created an account was so that my opinions would be respected more in AfDs, and I now use it because of the watchlist and being able to be contacted by people and whatnot. If I wasn't one who liked to vandal patrol and such, I probably would have remained an anonymous editor. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 07:52, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

What if only people in the Wikiproject Nintendo could edit it? Is it possible to do that? I see that as a viable solution, as people in WP Nintendo are probably extremely up-to-date on the topic. And I doubt they would vandalize the page. --Belugaperson 13:43, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

That's not possible with the wiki software, and even if it was, that feature would never be used. At any rate, the level of vandalism to this article is not actually that high. -- Steel 13:57, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I mean real vandalism, not good faith edits. -- Steel 13:57, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Indeed. In addition, anyone can join the WikiProject, so the feature would not be effective for persistent vandals. Thank you, though, for the suggestion, Belugaperson. --Gray Porpoise 03:00, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I remember having somewhat of the same thought process with vandalism and protection as SaturnYoshi a while ago. What I had concluded is that once the game is released (who knows how long that's going to take), the vandalism should tone down, or at least switch from speculation to cruft. Erik Jensen ^{(I appreciate talk!)} 05:08, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

True enough, although I can't say that switch is much of an improvement. Nintendo is a topic that creates a lot of flaming on message boards (and I should know; I've been insulted, made fun of, and threatened for being an avid Nintendo fan) and a look at some edit histories will tell you that it's carrying over to Wikipedia. I don't know if there's any viable solution that wouldn't violate the definition of a wiki, and there hasn't been enough as of late to warrant locking it. We just need to keep an eye on it. -Unknownwarrior33 06:27, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

As long as those who consistantly edit the page continue to watch out for vandals, we'll be fine. There's really nothing else anyone can do, annoying or not. Jjam189 19:01, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Solid Snake's Symbol Fan Info?

Why is information on Snake's symbol being treated as "fan information"? All the other new characters have descriptions of their symbols, and Snake's being left out for this reason doesn't make any sense. Could someone please explain to me how this could even be considered "fan information" when it clearly shows that his symbol is the FOX symbol on the official Brawl website? I'd just like to get this cleared up. Comrade Pajitnov 15:50, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Personally, I don't think anyone pther than a fan would find the information particularly interesting. I can see it have minor notability, but their only use is to group characters in the game, which we're not even describing. I wasn't singling Snake out, I just saw it being added and didn't realise all the new characters had it. And I was trying to avoid another edit war. Highway ^{Return to Oz...} 16:04, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok then. Could we add the fact that it's the FOX logo, and leave out the whole Kojima bit? Comrade Pajitnov 16:27, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

It's not the FOX(HOUND) logo. Looking at its article, you can see that Snake's symbol doesn't match either of FOX(HOUND)'s logos.--the ninth bright shiner ^talk 19:35, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I never said it was the FOXHOUND logo, I said it was the FOX logo, which is also the logo of Kojima Productions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Kojima_Pro_Logo.jpg Comrade Pajitnov 19:49, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh, alright. I don't know squat about Metal Gear Solid, anyway. It would seem reasonable to leave out the bit about Kojima Productions; the characters' symbols are based on their franchises, not who made them.--the ninth bright shiner ^talk 21:49, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Super Smash Move Name Change

No longer are Super Smash moves reffered to as "Super Smash". Most forums have switched to calling them "Brawl" moves. Now, normally forums are full of specualtion and BS, but one in particular caught my attention: Nintendo's NSider forums. with the regular updating, and the fact it often recieves info well before other sites, their may be some stock in this. At the very least, we should say they are being called Brawl moves for the time being. --DcPimp 15:57, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't feel like sifting through that, care to provide the direct mention of it?Thursday Postal 06:41, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I can't give an exact link at the moment, so for now you'll kind of have to trust me. However, I should have a few links, or at least quotes from the pages, sometime tonight. --DcPimp 23:12, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Got some links here.

Brawl Attack Idea

Newcomer: Ike Fan page containing numerous refferals to "Brawl" attacks.

I'll try to find some others while I'm on the forums. I'm there a lot, so it shouldn't take too long. --DcPimp 23:22, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

In my eyes, it's a fan term one way or the other. I, personally, prefer "Super Smash". Calling them "Brawl" moves implies that they won't be in the fourth game. --HeroicJay 02:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Regardless, I've primarily heard it called "Brawl" as of late. If nothing else, can we mention it in the "Items and Abilities" section? You know, put it in parentheses and say that many fans and forums are calling them that? --DcPimp 02:46, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I've attempted to integrate it into the article. --Sparky Lurkdragon 18:20, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. --DcPimp 21:19, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

The article says that Nintendo themselves have called the orbs smash orbs in the Nsider forum. Is this true? Xubelox 21:54, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I dunno. --DcPimp 22:11, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Internet Play

Sorry for bringing this topic up again. I still solidly believe that Brawl has no confirmed online play. The reference you have from E3 2005 is unreliable, as it is out of date (at the time, it wasn't even called Brawl 0_o). Also, I was recently at the Nintendo DS Connection Tour in my local area in Australia, and I specifically asked them about online play in Brawl. Their reply was "Sorry, online play isn't actually confirmed, although everyone wants it so they will try to put it in there." Again, I won't edit it myself because if anyone disagrees they can just revert, so I'm doing my best to convince everyone =D Bringer 04:42, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Their answer was a non-answer. The game is not being made by the Connection Tour personnel in Australia, but by Sakurai's team in Japan. And I'm quite certain that Sakurai has said that online play is in. But I'm too lazy to look up proof at the present time. --HeroicJay 15:52, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

While there is no definitive solid proof, there are quite a few hints, as well as the obvious argument, "Well, why the heck NOT put it in?" I say leave it. RememberMe? 01:17, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

RememberMe, hints and such are not good enough to include in the article. I THINK Sakurai might have mentioned it in Toukoken that there will be (probably barebones) online play, however I'm not sure. If he didn't mention it there, then Bringer may be right, and that it isn't 100% officially confirmed. But HeroicJay is also right about Connect Tour not being the most reliable source either. Xubelox 01:34, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Online play has been confirmed. I read it in an article on smashboards.com. It will use a friend-code system just like DS WiFi does. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.211.211.115 (talk • contribs) .

It has not been confirmed, this is a case of smashboards getting ahead of themselves. I can't be arsed to sift through some articles, but Sakurai has said that he believes that online play will be "very hard to pull off with 4 people" because of lag ruining the experience and that he "might not include it". I'm paraphrasing here, but look around enough and you'll find the article. -Super Genus 00:20, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I believe that, whether it was said directly or not, Brawl's online functionality has been de facto confirmed. To make my point, I happen to know a thread on the Nintendo NSider Forums that copies a translation (from GameFAQs) of some of Masahiro Sakurai's comments he made on the official Smash Bros. website (the Japanese version, of course). The relevant part of this translation is as follows:

#141-150: Sakurai says that to be able to put online battles in the game, there are many high hurdles they must overcome. And if they are able to overcome these hurdles, Sakurai states (verbatim) " 'The winner is great [Also read as celebrated, famous, etc.]' kind of system is not planned to be added."

I'm assuming Sakurai means he's just going to add basic online functionality to the game. He also says his reason is to keep the game fun for the same reasons that melee was fun, or something along those lines. This doesn't mean that wins/losses won't be recorded, but we probably won’t be seeing any rankings.

Full translation

Original Japanese website

So, that suggests that Brawl will indeed be online, but it just won't have rankings. And that's coming straight from the top, with hopefully nothing lost in translation. Keith Davies Lehwald 18:56, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

By the way, the translation above was posted on June 17, 2006. I just forgot to mention that before. Keith Davies Lehwald 18:58, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Even if it seems likely, that still doesn't mean it's completely confirmed. The translator (I think that was SamuraiPanda, but nonetheless doesn't seem particularily good at translating) even said he's assuming that it meant he will. Looking at the original Japanese text myself, I see nowhere where it says it's confirmed. Therefore, I think the article should be changed to say that Sakurai INTENDS to add online play. Xubelox 22:58, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Aye, the translation says that this will be so if they add the online functionality, and that there are still problems that need to be overcome. It doesn't say anywhere that it's guaranteed, only that he really wants it to succeed. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 23:13, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

What about this from IGN? Doesn't this confirm internet play for Brawl? "...Even better, the game will be fully online playable in addition to featuring a robust multiplayer mode. 'My plan is to include Wi-Fi connection compatibility and online functionality. One of the primary reasons Super Smash Bros. Brawl was created was that Nintendo, when taking Wii online, wanted to have Smash Bros. to do that,' added Sakurai." Jjam189 20:47, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Anticipation

I added to the introduction that this game is ranking extremely high in anticipation. I figured this was newsworthy as it was #1 on an IGN list. If somebody wants to add a referance/footnote for the comment to this link (http://games.ign.com/topgames/), then that would help it seem more lagitament. Tbkgm79 22:31, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Sora Ltd or HAL Labs?

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the video shown at the post-E3 conference confirmed that the copyright for the game is shared between Nintendo and HAL Labs (as were the previous two Smash Bros.) games... didn't it? And, thus, doesn't that mean that HAL Labs is developing the game and not Sora LTD? (If I'm wrong, I apologise in advance.)--NP Chilla 14:16, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

It is a special studio, according to an interview with the developer. One thing is almost sure: it is not Sora. However, it was agreed to add that notice to prevent a further war editing. -- ReyBrujo 18:56, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

...I see. So, although Sakura-san has left HAL Labs and says his company (Sora) is doing the developing, it is officially a HAL Labs collaboration with Nintendo, yes? (At least, I think that's right...)--NP Chilla 19:51, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Seeing as how SSB was created while Sakurai was still part of HAL, HAL shares the copyright (much like GameFreak and Nintendo share copyrights on Pokemon). However, HAL is not developing this game, and as far as we know, isn't taking any part in it. However, I have some doubts that it is Sora seeing as how Sakurai had said before that the company had just finished working on a big project. Sora was formed in September, and production of SSBB started in October. It doesn't quite add up. Unless Sakurai was just lying. Xubelox 00:28, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

We could always add both Sora Ltd. and HAL, and then when we're sure one way or the other take the incorrect one out. Jjam189 21:30, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Hal has nothing to do with it, Sakurai's indapendant company Sora is making the game. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 60.229.18.250 (talk • contribs) .

Wrong. According to the "How This Game Came to Be Made" section on smashbros.com, it says Sakurai is working with "a 'particular team' that had just completed a large-scale game", that is currently known simply as "The Studio". This is not Sora. --70.136.28.62 18:54, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, exactly the type of vagueness that makes me want to have it as "Unknown" in the infobox. This was changed to Sora with a link to the talk page due to a previous debate, though. It's somewhere in the archives. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 21:19, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Also a mentioned earler Sora was formed a month before work on the game was stated. There is no way they (or anyone) could have created a large-scale game in that amount of time. --Edgelord 05:47, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Well I can't completely rule out that it's Sora. After all, Sakurai formed Sora AFTER he knew he was going to be developing SSBB. So if he knew that he was going to be making a very large scale and time consuming game with another company, I don't see why he'd suddenly start a new one. But like Consumed said, the info is too vague and I agree it should be put as unknown. Xubelox 23:27, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I really agree that we should change this back to unknown. As I said 2.5 months ago [1], I don't think calling it Sora meets our verifiability policy. While it may be fairly good (and perhaps ultimately correct) speculation, it still really seems like speculation. EWS23 (Leave me a message!) 23:49, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

To be honest, it looks like only one editor (HeroicJay) was really pushing to have it be Sora. The arguments didn't completely support Wikipedia:Verifiability, and were possibly original research. As we seem to have more agreeing to change it to Unknown, we could do so and still keep the dispute icon, if it's really necessary. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 00:05, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I support the decision to change it to "unknown" for the time being. Jjam189 21:55, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Ridiculous edit war

What the hell is going on between Sukecchi and tj terrorible? It takes up almost an entire page of history. Since it's incredibly counter-productive to improving this page, I ask, no, I plead, even though it seems somewhat futile, that Tj terrorible stop editing until he comes here to explain why he thinks his edits are useful. Xubelox 23:22, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

He kept saying the Japanese was useless, and that the notices and stuff weren't needed as well. He said he would still follow them, but they're there for everyone and not just him. >_> Even when his edits were reverted as a Good Faith edit he still did it. I appologize for the edit war. I asked him many times to stop and he just kept going. -Sukecchi 23:43, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Ah well. No worries. Looks like he stopped for good. Or maybe he'll be back... Xubelox 00:12, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Please, next time you see this behaviour, inform in their talk pages about the three revert rule, and if they continue, report them to the administrators. -- ReyBrujo 04:55, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Why can't Zero Suit Samus have her own bio?

Why can't we have two different bios for Samus Aran and Zero Suit Samus. If this were Zelda and Sheik we were talking about, they'd have their own bios. Plus, Zero Suit Samus has her own bio at the official website and, even though they said she is not a "pure character addition," she was still introduced as a "newcomer." So by all rights, she should have her own bio. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tj_terrorible1 (talk • contribs)

But Zelda and Sheik don't have their own bios... --SaturnYoshi 15:41, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Zelda ans Shiek on the the list of Melee characters is listed like this: "Zelda/Sheik – from the Legend of Zelda series" and even on Zelda's article Shiek and Zelda are in the same section. -Sukecchi 16:12, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Sheik isn't an important enough character in The Legend of Zelda games to have her/his own article, plus she/he is technically the same person as Zelda

They both deserve to have their own bios. They have different stats, abilities, etc. And like I said about Zelda/Sheik, didn't they have their own stats in SSBM, didn't they each have their own trophies. And more over, they both have their own movesets.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Tj_terrorible1 (talk • contribs)

But we don't know how Zero Suit even comes out. So until we do, it needs to stay we Samus. -Sukecchi 17:02, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

But we do know she's seperate from Samus Aran hence her being a newcomer—Preceding unsigned comment added by Tj_terrorible1 (talk • contribs)

Regardless for now she's the same person, and until we know more about her, Zero Suit Samus will be kept with Samus, like she has been.-Sukecchi 17:10, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Well if i'm not mistaken, the first heading reads "confirmed characters." And Zero Suit Samus is a confirmed character.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Tj_terrorible1 (talk • contribs)

Samus is a confirmed character. ZSS is a confirmed form of an already existing character. Xubelox 23:16, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Besides, even though Zelda and Sheik have their own trophies, the player would obtain both of them regardless of whether they beat the game with either one. They are the same character, just as Samus Aran and Zero-Suit Samus are the same character. --SaturnYoshi 23:38, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I however doubt that Zero Suit Samus would have been described as a newcommer if she was simply an alternate form for Samus like Sheik was for zelda. I think she will more likely be a clone like Dr. Mario. --Edgelord 04:55, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

What would she have been described as then? Transformation? Not actually a newcomer? It would just have been akward any other way.Tuesday42 13:13, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Samus and Zero-Suit Samus are both Samus Aran in different suits so she will have the same biography.Nimrod1234 06:49, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't matter that her abilities are different without the Power Suit, it's still the same person. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 23:34, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Mario and Dr.Mario, Zelda and Sheik, and Link and Young Link are all two variations of the same person, and they all have their own trophies in Melee. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tuesday42 (talk • contribs) .

It is confirmed that one starts as regular Samus and she will shed her Power Suit under "certain conditions", similar to how you start as Zelda but turn to Sheik, only without being able to change at will. Except for their moveset, they are the same character. --70.141.140.63 23:15, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

You assume too much. The "certain conditions" could easily be "complete Adventure Mode with Samus in under half an hour" or something. It never states or even strongly implies that you transform her during battle through any method. --HeroicJay 23:58, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm not assuming; look at how her suit falls apart in the trailer after performing that gigantic charge shot. That's really heavily implying that it happens during battle. --70.141.140.63 04:41, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Very shortly prior to Wario riding into battle on a motorcycle. Do you really believe that Wario fights with his motorcycle? How about at the beginning with Mario, Link, and Pikachu get graphical updates (and Kirby acts surprised that he doesn't); do you think that happens in battle? It could very easily have just been done to make the video more dramatic. --HeroicJay 05:15, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

If you recall, the original Smash had intros played as the characters came in to the arena. It's entirely plausible that they could've brought that back, explaining why Wario rides in to the level on a bike (yes, he could come in mid-level, remember the Adventure fields in SSBM?). The graphical updates were certainly shown just to show the difference in the graphics. As shown in the trailer, the suit fell apart as a result of the huge blast. It's quite possible that shedding the suit is just a side-effect of her "Super Smash/Brawl" attack, which the huge blast appears to be. --70.141.140.63 22:06, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

There isn't really enough information for Zero Suit Samus for her to have her own bio. When the game is released her moveset will probably be enough for her own bio.Tuesday42 13:13, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

This whole "Samus shedding her suit" argument sounds kind of familiar  ;) Besides, given the fact that Zero-Suit Samus does not have a seperate backstory from "Chozo-suit" Samus, it's ridiculous to have them listed as two separate characters because they have the same identical history. --SaturnYoshi 06:11, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Why do we need Japanese translations?

They're a waste of space and make the page look ugly. They're useless. That's why the wikipedia home page has different languages to select from. The translations might be helpful to someone who's bilingual that can speak English and Japanese, but for the rest of us, its just confusing. Again I ask why?

Perhaps you should focus on the Zero Suit Samus section question first. -Sukecchi 16:56, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

And there was discussion about the Japanese, it was decided to keep it to make it look profesional. -Sukecchi 17:05, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Short answer: Because the game and characters originate in Japan. And Tj (assuming it's you, as you don't sign your comments), PLEASE stop with this annoying edit war. It's extremely disruptful. Xubelox 23:14, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I have to agree...not totally, though. THe user could just click on the link and see the real character page that has the Japanese name. None of the other SSB character pages has the Japanese translation, either. But I was defeated on the headers vs. lists issue, so I'm hands-off on any controversial issue on this article. Hbdragon88 18:16, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Stop Changing After Me (Tj terrorible1)

Please stop changing the page back to what it was. You guys wanted to keep the Japanese translations--they're still there. You guys wanted to keep the notices--they're still there. All I did was make the bios sound more professional instead of like they were worded by a kindergartener. I took out useless word, which does not mean I took out any important information, that just means I took out words like "also," "so," and other words that make the bios and other parts sound repetitive and nonprofessional. So please stop changing after me. Just read my bios and read the ones you guys keep putting back up there. Mine sound much more professional and always will and that's just the bottom line. You people don’t want to admit that. SO STOP IT, NOW. I want this page to look just as professional as you guys do (since that's your reasoning for Japanese translation). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tj_terrorible1 (talk • contribs)

Big baby! Do you know how many times I've changed something and then other people changed it back.--Rat235478683--

First of all, I'm not a baby. I'm trying to be professional about the matter. If I were a baby, I would've vandalized the whole goddamn SSBB page by now. And if someone changed anything after you, baby, it's probably because you made it worse and write like your in the first grade since your probably one of the people who keep going behind me changing the SSBB page back to that second-grade-sounding shit, while I, on the other hand, am making the page better. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tj_terrorible1 (talk • contribs)

Now you see, you just proved our point. If you were doing anything to assist the article, we would keep it, but you're not.-Sukecchi 16:18, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm NOT A BABY! If you were smart, which you aren't, you would stop, and you also should of said you were making the page worse.--Rat235478683--

Please be mature about this. Please. -Sukecchi 16:22, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

He started it.--Rat235478683--

That doesn't mean you have to continue it. -Sukecchi 16:28, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

You know what. I'm tired of trying to explain my point to you people. But what would I expect from people who don't see the difference between my much more professional bios and the second-grade-sounding ones you guys keep putting up there. You people obviously haven't taken the time to compare my SSBB page to the one you guys keep putting back up there. I guess I have to break it down to you fools: Think of me as an editor, you know, for a newspaper. I go behind you guys and take out non-needed words and revise sentences to make them sound better, still with me, and more professional instead of sounding kiddy-ish. Got it?Tj terrorible1 16:30, 17 August 2006 (UTC)tj_terrorible1

I'm taken over this page. As far as I'm concerned, I get the final say. Sukecchi, I don't know who died and made you king, but you don't deserve to manage the ssbb page.Tj terrorible1 16:30, 17 August 2006 (UTC)tj_terrorible1

Excuse me? Who do you think you are? You don't "take over" an article. If you're working with other people we have to AGREE on large changes, and many of us DON'T agree with your edits. We tried to explain to you and you just change it back, or in the case of your talk page, you removed them completly.

I don't "manage" this article, I help with it.-Sukecchi 16:38, 17 August 2006 (UTC) I don't know, but I hope you will.--Rat235478683--

Tell me one thing that I've removed completely. Yes, I originally removed the Japanese and the notices, but they've been put back. Since then, all I've done is made small edits to the bios and rest to make the page more professional and for some unfound reason, you guys keep changing back.Tj terrorible1 16:49, 17 August 2006 (UTC)tj_terrorible1

From where I stand, most of what you did was the removal of whitespace. This resulted in short, easy-to-read paragraphs being transformed into long chunks of text. Too much whitespace is bad, but no whitespace at all may actually be worse. The rest of it largely included the removal of pronouns (which make the article easier to read), a bit of POV on Samus's "Super Smash", and a few other minor edits that largely didn't affect much or added tiny amounts of POV. --HeroicJay 18:31, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Interesting. Volt M 18:33, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Nobody owns this article. Anyone reverting valid edits is ignoring that policy. The edits Tj has been doing doesn't appear to be bad faithed, thus some of them can be accepted. I noticed someone reverted Tj's edit from "E3 2006" to "E3". That is an invalid revert, as "the official website" to "the website", "but Brawl's director, Masahiro Sakurai, stated on the official website" to "Brawl's game developer Masahiro Sakurai has stated on his site", etc.

That you had had problems with him before doesn't mean you will have them again if he continues editing. Assume good faith. -- ReyBrujo 18:39, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

The unfortunate problem is that most of his edits (whitespace removal, pronoun removal, and POV addition) are difficult to wade through to find the juicy good parts. But I'll see what I can find. --HeroicJay 18:46, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

PS. Okay, I've re-done any of terrorible's edits that looked like good ones (except maybe to Development; thanks to the whitespace removal, I'm having trouble telling just what else he did do there.) I also put edit summaries on the ones I thought might need explaining. --HeroicJay 19:06, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Now, if Tj agrees not to mess too much with the space removals, I think everything has been settled. I am not completely sure if there had been before a similar case, but there is a similar precedent when someone changed a british word with an american equivalent (if I recall correctly). The consensus is implicit, though (I don't see a poll to see if the spaces should stay or leave), but if several different editors begin trimming spaces, you may consider that as a valid option. -- ReyBrujo 19:14, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Nope; an IP simply re-did all of his edits. I changed back the whitespace removal, some of the silly POV, and some of the awkward language he added (Like the overuse of the passive voice.) --HeroicJay 20:30, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, good to see this war/dispute over, that's for sure. No disagreement here or any fighting for now, that being said, finished. Volt M 03:17, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

character pictures

We should have pictures of regular Samus and Wario from the trailer.

Please sign your posts. The article has Zero Suit Samus, and Samus and Wario's articles have their Brawl images in them already...so ::it's not really necessicary. We had a problem with too many images before and we've brought it down to this. -Sukecchi 02:54, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

I still think if it can be done without the section being a mess we should go for it.Tuesday42 16:53, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Nintendo Rumour | Sonic Does Smash Bros. Brawl?

http://www.cubed3.com/news/5734

The official Nintendo boards are the source of the magazine’s text, which reads:

"Nintendo hopes that Snake's appearance in Super Smash Bros. Brawl will encourage other publishers to allow their characters to join the Smash Bros. line-up, and is already actively negotiating for the rights to include at least one other non-Nintendo character. Both Sakurai and Mario creator Shigeru Miyamoto have stated that Sega's Sonic the Hedgehog is the character that Smash Bros. fans have requested the most and... well, it's hard to type these words with our fingers crossed!" MetalBladeX4 16:35, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually, reading the boards this info came from, it was from an article from Tips&Tricks magazine. --SaturnYoshi 16:38, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

As someone who posted alot this summer on Nintendo's boards, let me just say that 95% of the info they come up with there is usually unnfounded or in the worst case, made up. Cosmic Larva 19:07, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Which? Tips and Tricks, or the Nintendo forums? :P --Shadow Hog 21:53, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

New Screens

Um, new Smash Bros Brawl screens were posted on IGN from GC. if you want to put them in the article.--Nimrod1234 04:59, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

They're all from the existing trailer; nothing new there. --Shadow Hog 21:04, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes there is there kind of the same thing just from different angles but its less movie and more gameplay but there diferent from the trailer.--Nimrod1234 21:28, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I have every single screen in that gallery. I downloaded them from Nintendo's press site in May. Yeah, they're just reposts. --70.141.140.63 04:38, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Sakuri's List

Can someone please give me a link to this list, and is it important enough to include in the delvopment section?Tuesday42 13:02, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

What list?--the ninth bright shiner ^talk 16:03, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

If you edit the article, it's mentioned in the warning to not add unconfirmed characters. I've also heard about it elsewhere. From what I've heard I think it's from the japanese site about some of the suggestions from the poll.Tuesday42 20:04, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

There is a consensus not to show that list of suggestions. It's very long and potentially misleading. --HeroicJay 21:03, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

O. K., but I would like a link to it. I haven't seen it.Tuesday42 00:05, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't have an English link to it. It can be found on the Japanese version of the official site (but not the English version for some reason...) --HeroicJay 05:16, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

I think English-speaking fans would be upset over not being able to participate. Not posting one on the English site is either very wise or very lazy.

...likely the latter.—ウルタプ 05:25, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Smash Article Multi-Focus?

Since it'll probably be a good deal more time until something new actually occurs in Smash Bros Brawl-related news, and the page itself has practically run out of content to improve, I'm posting a reminder that all of us should continue focusing on developing and fixing the articles on all the characters themselves while we're waiting. (Articles like Marth (Fire Emblem), Roy (Fire Emblem), Mr. Game & Watch, Falco Lombardi, and Pichu, not to mention the previous two games' pages, probably can be improved article-wise) That way, we won't have as much work to go through for those articles when Brawl is about to be released. I assume that's what many editors who've worked on this page have been doing the past couple months, but this is more of a message towards new editors and anonymous IP addresses; For the time being it's best if you all focus on improving those other articles because clearly this page won't be getting much better until Sakurai unloads a bunch of new Brawl content for us to write about. Thanks. Erik Jensen ^{(I appreciate talk!)} 21:05, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

MetaKnight's Jump

Sentense stated that MetaKnight's multijump hasn't been confirmed yet, yet it is shown in the official trailer (in an actual gameplay fight, not a cutscene fight, such as the very beginning of Pit and MetaKnight's fight).

Correct me if I'm wrong.