Talk:Super Smash Bros./Archive 12

Archive 5

←

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Created new archive

Looked really long to me. So I created a new archive. (11) --haha169 (talk) 01:34, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Template for playable characters

Per template guidelines, a template that would be used on only one page is not necessary. Thus, it is simpler to just have the contents of the table appear on this one page instead of having a separate template for it. Axem Titanium (talk) 19:16, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Then it should be transcluded here and deleted, we don't need a template that all it does is redirecting here. -- ReyBrujo (talk) 19:19, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

The template mentions Lucario and R.O.B. as playable characters. I'm pretty sure that neither of them are... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.61.91.22 (talk) 01:46, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

They are. -Sukecchi (talk) 01:55, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Snake and Sonic

I'm kind of confused. Saruki said that all 3rd party characters would be hidden, this article marks them as hidden, and the picture of the roster from the Dojo doesn't show them, but then they aren't listed under hidden characters on the Dojo, either. To be fair, on one of the updates, only part of the initial stages on the stage selection screen were shown. Does anyone know for certain if those two are hidden on the Japanese version? -(Vert Bandit (talk) 20:30, 4 February 2008 (UTC))

The Dojo showed them before the game was released, and it was already known that Snake was in and Nintendo was negotiating with Sega. Ness, on the other hand, was revealed on February 1. -Jéské ^{(Blah v^_^v)} 20:39, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Also, the starting roster on the NA Dojo does not include those two characters. Coreycubed (talk) 20:57, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I believe they informed everyone of these two secret characters in order to promote them. It would have been unfair to the 3rd parties not to give them some press coverage before the game came out. Also I know Sonic at least was made immediately playable in demos.24.240.65.82 (talk) 01:56, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Snake and Sonic aren't unlocked from the start, according to the pictures Masahiro Sakurai released about the standard Brawl mode. So, yes, they are hidden, and Sonic was playable at E for All. I'm sure Snake was, too; I wasn't there, I just watched videos of SSBB at E for All (with two ANNOYING girls in the background giving the players fake enthusiasm). Link 486 (talk) 14:32, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

I think the original question was regarding the Japanese release, which has already been made self-evident with the release of the game. Coreycubed (talk) 15:07, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

R.O.B.'s series

Since the previous discussion of this was archived, I put this here to discuss it again. Now, as much as R.O.B. is a NES accessory, it isn't a game series. Moreover, this accessory was only used for the Robot Series (Gyromite aka Robot Gyro and Stack-Up aka Robot Block.) The R.O.B. even became REAL game npcs in various games not as an accessory. So an accessory isn't the appropriate "series" for this character. I'm thinking we set it to the Robot Series as that is where it is the main character along with the Professor. Other than that, what should we do? deecee (talk) 02:08, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Once again...it's fine. The character R.O.B. is based on an accessory. It's fine. Why over complicate things? -Sukecchi (talk) 02:38, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Because "NES Accessory" isn't a game series. What's so complicated with the Robot series? It doesn't do any sort of complication except we just don't know where to link it. The Robot Series never got a Wiki Page of its own because it only consists of 2 games. Now, the easy proposal is just to link it to one of these games. And there have been videos showing R.O.B.'s icon. Isn't that a Gyromite icon and not a NES icon. Shouldn't we use that as a basis?deecee (talk) 03:42, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

But R.O.B dosen't come from a game series, yes it's a game accessory, but who cares? that's where he comes from!Onepiece226 (talk) 04:38, 5 February 2008 (UTC)Onepiece226

If you're that upset about it, why don't we just change "series" to "origin"? -IG-64 (talk) 07:54, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I think we changed "origin" to "series" before to be consistent with their symbols ingame and such. I think it is fine as it is so unless ROB's trophy says a specific game or something or Dojo does when it announces him then it be changed I guess. The Light6 (talk) 08:20, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

IIRC, Trophies (at least in Melee) showed the first appearance of a specific character in a footnote at the bottom, so the Trophy descrip would have to do. -Jéské ^{(Blah v^_^v)} 08:56, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

As the guy who came up with the entry for R.O.B. in the (series) article, maybe I can shed a little light on the matter. I originally came up with Nintendo (accessory) as the Wikilink for his series of origin. This was based on trying to stay consistent with the other characters' links to series pages and also based on the opening sentence of R.O.B.'s page that states he is a Nintendo accessory. I know that we don't take the original appearance as series of origin, obviously -- but he is an NES accessory, that's for sure. Also, I need to edit some of the series pages links, they redirect to the character articles (Yoshi for example). Coreycubed (talk) 14:29, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

If we're talking game series, ROB is actually from Mario Kart. That was his first offical game appearence. -Dancingcyberman —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dancingcyberman (talk • contribs) 18:07, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Now that's COMPLETELY inaccurate. Coreycubed (talk) 18:17, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Not really. mario cart DS was the first game R.O.B was in, (and called R.O.B). although one could make the case he was in star fox 64 first, although that virsion was just based on rob and not the real deal.--68.150.17.145 (talk) 01:36, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

There's absolutely no way that R.O.B. is "from" Mario Kart DS. ROB 64 is based on R.O.B. in name only, and even then, only in the NA release. Coreycubed (talk) 01:39, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I never said from. the guy above me said so, true, but not me. Heck I still have my own R.O.B, and that was long before the DS came out. All I said was that Mario Kart DS was the first game to have R.O.B in it.--68.150.17.145 (talk) 01:51, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Coming back to this after a few days and lots of editing of other articles, I'm starting to think deecee is right. It's right on both of his NES carts, and it's an established series (even if it is only two games). If the only obstacle is his series page, I can check for a previous AfD, and then create one. I've been working on (series) pages for the last day or two, so I'm happy to do it. Coreycubed (talk) 21:06, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

ROB was in F-Zero GX before Mario Kart DS. It is also in the original WarioWare. Not playable in those games but it's definitely in that game--147.226.40.50 (talk) 15:06, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

*mutters something about how he spent hours working on WarioWare (series) links yesterday* But that has no relevance to his series of origin; you couldn't say that he's from any of those games. Coreycubed (talk) 15:08, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

That's what I was thinking. I am pretty sure that apart from being an accessory, R.O.B. is also a PC along with Professor Hector on both Gyromite and Stack-Up, which constitute the Robot series. I also saw that the main conflict is not having the Robot series as a Wikipedia article. Since series pertains to the game origin and not the console origin, I see it fit that we use the Robot series. I think we could make a stub first of the Robot series and we'll contribute to it or we can just put both Gyromite and Stack-Up there even if it's a space waster. Any other ideas are welcome. This is Wikipedia and we need to be correct and saying a NES accessory is a series is wrong. deecee (talk) 16:25, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Or, we could do what we did with Yoshi. We link it to R.O.B.'s article but directly to the area where his games are mentioned. Another way is to link it to the List of NES games and let it pinpoint towards the Robot series. It's all up to you guys. deecee (talk) 16:30, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, and my mini-project-for-today-while-at-work is to get said article up and running. Although, to be fair, though NES accessory is not technically correct for a series, he IS the only character in SSB who is actually a piece of Nintendo hardware. (G&W was named for a piece of hardware.) Coreycubed (talk) 16:49, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

If that is noteworthy, R.O.B. being a piece of hardware could be a footnote too. However, if it's too trivial, we might as well not put it. deecee (talk) 17:05, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

The footnote would only be necessary if I can't get this page off the ground (so far, it's coming along well). The footnotes are only really there to prevent first time visitors from going, "Hey! Sheik is NOT a character like the others!" or "Why aren't Charizard and Squirtle on this list??" Coreycubed (talk) 17:22, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

• huff huff* I did it, picked up the Robot Series page. Still needs work, I'm trying to make sure the content is evenly spread around that page, Gyromite, Stack-Up and R.O.B. We'll see how it goes. Coreycubed (talk) 04:58, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Great job on the article. It does need more input but I think that would suffice for now.

Hopefully this doesn't kick things into too much of a issue, but I noticed that Toon Link has a footnote that his English name hasn't been officially revealed. Yet the table refers to the Robot character as "R.O.B." I've been trying to keep up on Brawl news, so correct me if I missed the confirmation...but isn't he called "Robot" in Japan, and has yet to have its American name confirmed? I mean, yes it's R.O.B....we all recognize it. But is that confirmed as its Brawl name? TRTX (talk) 15:32, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I do understand your point and we all are trying to stick to officially announced info (per WP:OR), but what else would it be? He's still referred to as R.O.B. in recent Nintendo works (such as WarioWare) and the official Smash Bros. website refers to the R.O.B.s in the Subspace Emissary mode as such. I doubt they're going to go and call him Robot in the NA release after all of that. Coreycubed (talk) 16:49, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. That's actually what I was looking for in regards to explanation. If its been referred to as "R.O.B." in Sakurai's blog than that's verification enough. TRTX (talk) 19:02, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Template once again

This page is not the only one which uses the playable characters table. The Smashbros task force also uses it.Smashbrosboy (talk)

It's not even necessary to have it on that page, and if it is, you'll just have to recreate it -- it's not hard. --Coreycubed (talk) 03:16, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

# of Melee characters

This article says Melee has twenty-six characters, while the Smash Bros. Melee article says twenty-five. Last I counted the number was twenty-five as well, but I'll let a regular edit it. 152.7.200.169 (talk) 16:16, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

It is 26 because Sheik counts as a separate character to Zelda however it seems the people working on that page have made up their own personal opinion (as opposed to the creators which can be shown to think of them as two characters due to spilt profiles on Dojo [1] [2] and the Melee site [3] [4]) so that page should be changed not this one. The Light6 (talk) 16:36, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Tell you what, when we come to a consensus, we'll update all SSB pages as necessary. Coreycubed (talk) 16:45, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Consus is just inacheivable with some many points of veiw on this touchy subject. Just like with ssbb we use offical links (like the ones The Light6 just listed) to determine whats character or not, So according to the offical site there are 26 characters.→041744 13:18, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

The fact that a character has a profile page does not indicate whether or not the character can be designated as a separate character or not. If the official site says "Players can choose from 26 characters," then 26 is the number that can be used. However, in reality the player can choose from 25 different characters, one of those characters having two distinct in-game appearances and almost twice as many moves as the other characters in the game. oobug^talk/_contrib 19:15, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Please, look at the offical link, 26 characters, from the offical site. There is no debating the offical site unless you put yourself as more knowalageble to their work then the creators themself. In this reality (wikipedia) we use offical sources.→041744 22:42, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

26 character profiles, not actual characters. I've not seen an official source yet that has stated the number of characters available to choose from. The fact is, the character selection screen in Melee allows the player to select from 25 characters, and, naturally, the actual game is the most official and notable source we have available. Saying that there are more characters than the player can actually select is just deceptive. oobug^talk/_contrib 16:39, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

A character profile is a profile of a character, as in each profile represents one characrer. The offial site is as reilable as the game, the game has seprate trophies for sheik, and seprate winner stances and a sheik icon when you play her in a stock match. Infact the only thing that suports your claim that their are only 25 characters is the select screen. While the opposing 26 character has the back up the offiacal site, the creators and all the other facts from the game I prevously listed.→041744 22:47, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Alright, so just as I seggested in SSBB talk page I will say here too. How about we say somthing like this in the article:

"The offical site lists 26 character profiles, but a player can only choose between 25 characters at the selection screen, one who has two personifactions."

Does that satify everyone?→041744 13:05, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

If there are 26 characters in Melee, then are there 39 in Brawl? Besides, Sheik and ZSS are listed seperately on the Dojo, meaning there will be a total of 37 profiles eventually (Pokémon Trainer info is all in his profile though) SuperLink9 (talk) 13:24, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I like 041744, I say we go with it. The Light6 (talk) 13:56, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Strongly disagree. I think you mean "personifications", and anyways it's overly wordy and doesn't fit. Get a proper number via consensus or omit it entirely. Coreycubed (talk) 15:17, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

This disscussion should be "merged" to this one, "Merged" as in whatever the consensus is there will defualt to this one for consistancy.→041744 05:01, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

About Toon Link's footnote

Under Toon Link's footnote, it mentions that he has "the exact same moveset as Young Link". I don't know how to source this, but according to multiple people who have played the game, this isn't true. He does have mostly similar moves, but he also has several of his own, unique moves (mostly his aerials). Should the article be changed to reflect this, or should it be discounted until a proper source can be found? 206.132.133.129 (talk) 16:17, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Hopefully the whole thing will be moot when the localized version is released, but until then let's see if a less specific footnote can be used. Coreycubed (talk) 16:47, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Saying that Toon Link has a "moveset similar to Young Link" would be far more accurate. oobug^talk/_contrib 17:07, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Also, on a sort of related note, the game has been hacked, and the trophy descriptions that are being used in the English localized versions have been found (in the data of the Japanese game, for whatever reason). Toon Link's trophies confirm that his English name is, in fact, Toon Link and has not been changed, so does that affect any kind of argument about his name? The only source I could provide for this is a page where the trophy transcripts have been put up, but since the info is ripped straight from the game, I think it might count as a valid source.206.132.133.129 (talk) 19:56, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

It's not something that can be easily reproduced as part of the natural process of playing the game, though. And there's no evidence to suggest that it's the final English localized version, either. No, it's best not to use that. Coreycubed (talk) 20:20, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Reality check, is a note for Young Link/Toon Link even necessary? That Toon Link has replaced Young Link is not too different than the fact that Lucario replaced Mewtwo and Ike replaced Roy; the only difference is in the degree of similarity between the two characters. I imagine that a note for Toon Link is not as vitally necessary for comprehension compared to ZSS or Sheik and that the note can be simply removed. Axem Titanium (talk) 22:30, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

It's important at the moment because it discusses the differences in Japanese name and how we don't know what it'll be called when localized. Naturally when Brawl is released on North American shores, we can ditch the note. Arrowned (talk) 23:39, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok. Will do. Axem Titanium (talk) 01:43, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Listen people this is stupid. does Toon Link look like Young link from SSBM at all? THEY"RE DIFFERENT CHARACTERS.-LyokoTitan101 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.99.97.140 (talk) 23:30, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I guess we will just have to wait for DOJO to announce the name. -- User:Mkalv —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.65.85.237 (talk) 17:04, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

The thing about "Character replacements" is that Toon Link is so similar to Young Link, it would probably be the case that if Toon Link was not in Brawl and Young Link was, Young Link's moveset could have been updated in the exact same way as Toon Link's was from Young Link. This is why Toon Link "replaces" Young Link (and is arguably the same character with a different art style anyway). Lucario & Ike on the other hand, have movesets that are almost completely different from Roy & Mewtwo's movesets. They could be called "replacements" per se, but they cannot be connected in such a way that they are the same characters with minor differences. If anything, Toon Link's footnote should say "Has a moveset very similar to Young Link's". He is the only "newcomer"(?) with a moveset almost identicle to an old non-returning veteran. SuperLink9 (talk) 10:58, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Just like Ocarina of Time Link and Twilight Princess Link are diffrent, so are Ocarina of Time/Majora's Mask Young Link and Wind Waker/Phantom Hourglass Link. Also, I feel we need to need to mention that Link is based off Twilight Princess time around, unlike the last two smash games, where he was based off Ocarina of Time. As for "Toon Link", leave it as is. They can easily change stuff in 4 weeks, definitely. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnknightone (talk • contribs) 06:49, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Hold on there, cowboy. Even though the Link in Brawl uses the TP design, the Dojo recognizes him as a veteran. OoT Link and TP Link are both called "Link." So in the world of Smash, it's been the same Link in all three games. With Toon Link it's different because he and Young Link have different names. Also, four weeks? The game comes out next Sunday... Satoryu (talk) 17:55, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

New findings I guess. First of all, Lucario was revealed on the Dojo. He is a newcomer, yet there is no mention of him being a newcomer, nothing saying "Challenger Approaching" as usual. This makes it impossible to tell if Toon Link is a veteran or a Newcomer (unless it mentions "Young Link returns as Toon Link!", which I doubt). Also, via some strange series of events, some people have already gotten their hands on the US version of Brawl, and his name is indeed Toon Link. I cannot prove this completely, and don't intend to, but here is a screenshot anyway.

http://img139.imageshack.us/my.php?image=dsc00133xc1.jpg

SuperLink9 (talk) 19:44, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

We noticed a while ago that the newcomer/veteran theory won't work. So we're going to have to wait for more info. Satoryu (talk) 19:48, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Since this can possibly never be solved, I propose Young Link or Toon Link have a footnote to say "While Young Link is not in Brawl, Toon Link is an alternate reincarnation/version of the same character, shares a very similar moveset and could be considered to have replaced Young Link". I'd be happy with that, since I think it's important people know they are not entirely different, however if others would disagree strongly I do not object. SuperLink9 (talk) 19:51, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I feel that any connection made between Toon Link and Young Link would step dangerously into the realm of original research. As far as verifiability is concerned, their similarity is a coincidence that does not need to be noted. Axem Titanium (talk) 20:54, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I disagree, if we made a footnote saying Mewtwo had been replaced by Lucario then it would be. But with Toon Link and Young Link they are both different incarnations of the Link from the Zelda series, so common sense can see drawing a relationship between the two characters isn't original research as people of sources can be called upon to prove the previous point (about them being different incarnations from the series). Then again it would just be my point of view making me think it is common sense so whatever. The Light6 (talk) 06:27, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

In any case, the current footnote is unimportant now, since his localised name is also Toon Link. That being said, any players of the Super Smash Bros series, who would likely make up a large part of the page views, would appreciate the knowledge that Toon Link is essentially "The new design of Young Link". Anyone who has played as both will be able to instantly tell how similar they are, especially since Toon Link is arguably the biggest clone in Brawl, which also sets him apart from "clone pairings" i.e. Ganondorf/Captain Falcon, Mewtwo/Lucario (hardly "clone" at all anyway). In any case, you do not need to research to know that the 2 are closely related. As soon as you see them, it's clear they are both younger versions of the Adult Link presented in the Smash Bros series. SuperLink9 (talk) 09:22, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

But they're not the same Link. If they were, they'd be named as such. As far as we know, the game never implies that they are the same. Perhaps the trophy description could mention something. Or Sakurai could make the comparison on the Dojo. Wait for that. And if nothing comes up, they're seperate. Satoryu (talk) 14:19, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

At which point, we'd remove the footnote entirely, right? --Coreycubed (talk) 16:05, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Yet the 2 Adult Links, while clearly different in appearance, are named the same. TP Link is a redesign of OoT Link, Toon Link is a redesign of Young Link, with a new name.

So if Link's name was "TP Link" in Brawl + no moveset changes, would there be a cross next to Link for Brawl, a whole new character added, and no footnote whatsoever? SuperLink9 (talk) 23:31, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

That's the idea. Remember, these are works of fiction and fiction is not necessarily continuous (eg, a character here is not necessarily the same character elsewhere; or there is some hidden SSB storyline where between SSBM and SSBB, Link, the SSB character, finds a new outfit; we don't know and we can't assume continuity). We can only go by the names. Axem Titanium (talk) 23:59, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Young link and toon link are different but have almost the same move set. Young link came from Majors(not sure if spelled right) mask, and toon link came from wind waker the two have different story lines like toon link has a grandmother and sister and young link doesn't. there is a very big difference.--Lbrun12415 00:08, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

That's not the right way to go about it. SSBM Link and SSBB Link are also completely different. SSBM Link is from Ocarina of Time and was brought up as a Kokori only to find he was a Hylian and ends up as the legendary hero of time, while TP Link starts out as a normal rancher and has a lot less ties with the Triforce, he also has a life planned out ahead of him and has grown to be an old teenager, unlike OoT Link who was forced to an Adult. While I guess I have to accept Toon Link and Young Link are different from this article, you can't really use that argument, since the same could be used for any 2 Links, most of them are the same. Also, as Toon Link's costumes show, he's also based on Four Swords Link, so not just Wind Waker, but also Four Swords + Minish Cap. Link in SSB represents all Links, just in his most recent design. (Also Young Link is from OoT, there's no Deku Shield in Majora's Mask, and he looks a lot younger than in MM too.) I guess I should accept their seperation in the article. No footnote at all then? :( SuperLink9 (talk) 23:47, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Come March 9th when it's official that the name is indeed Toon Link, then yes. No footnote at all. Satoryu (talk) 02:28, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Toon Link keeps his Japanese name in the English version of Brawl. [5] Takuthehedgehog (talk) 23:49, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Not a reliable source. Just wait till Sunday. Then it'll be official. Satoryu (talk) 02:28, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Zelda is a transformation of Sheik

In Melee and Brawl, you can start off as Sheik, and can press B-Down to transform into Zelda.

Therefore, she is a standalone Character, and not just a transformation of Zelda. So I'm going to change her footnote to mention that you can start off as her in both games. --Pluvia (talk) 14:54, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Standalone means that she STANDS ALONE -- and is not a function or part of another character. Zelda and Shiek are integrally connected, much like Pokemon Trainer's Pokemon. This is the rational behind her footnote. --LordHuffnPuff (talk) 17:21, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Sheik is a transformation of Zelda and Zelda is a transformation of Sheik. Why don't we just footnote both Zelda and Sheik and say they transform into each other?VatoFirme (talk) 00:52, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

You can't just say That!!!!! Zelda uses Shiek as a Disguise! just saying that they both transform into each other is missing the point! Zelda is a character that can transform into Shiek. And the only reason you can switch them on the menu is because some people prefer using Shiek.Onepiece226 (talk) 02:30, 7 February 2008 (UTC)Onepiece226

Yes, fan flame wars aside, Sheik (in the context of SSB) is clearly a transformation of Zelda; Zelda is the true form, and Sheik's transformation to Zelda is just a reversion to that form. Coreycubed (talk) 15:12, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Personally I have found that when I play this game, I can pick either one to start with, and can transform them at will. Have we been playing the same game?VatoFirme (talk) 23:41, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Melee does not give you the chance, and in Brawl and Melee, Sheik and Zelda do not maintain separate damage totals, coin amounts, stock, or score. -Jéské ^{(Blah v^_^v)} 08:45, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Melee does let you start as Sheik, you just hold A before the match starts. I do it all the time because I prefer Sheik to Zelda.VatoFirme (talk) 23:42, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

When you choose Zelda on the character select screen in Brawl, the voice over does not say "Sheik, or "Zelda and Sheik" it just says Zelda. You can start a match with Zero Suit Samus too, but she is by no means a standalone character. Same goes for all of Pokémon Trainer's Pokémon. SuperLink9 (talk) 13:23, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Good article nomination

I have declined the good article nomination for this article as it is fundamentally unstable and under heavy editing. I recommend renomination only after the game is released worldwide and the editing has reduced significantly. Stifle (talk) 15:24, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

That's fine, I wasn't expecting this article to reach GA until after March anyways. I'm not even sure who nominated it... Coreycubed (talk) 15:15, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Lucas and Ness's series

Under the character table, Ness and Lucas are listed as having come from the Earthbound series. However, the article for that series calls it the Mother series, and official screenshots from the Dojo show that the localized version of Brawl refers to the series as Mother and not Earthbound. So to keep consistency between Wikipedia pages and to be accurate to the localized version of the game (since I assume the only reason the series is listed as Earthbound is because that was the name of the one game released in America, but more recent sources like the Dojo show that that name doesn't apply to the entire series), shouldn't Ness and Lucas be listed as having come from Mother?206.132.133.129 (talk) 16:22, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I suppose so. My only hesitation would be the lack of any official NoA released of Mother games besides 2, which is referred to as EarthBound. Given Lucas' status as a Japan-only character, much like the Fire Emblem characters in Melee, I'm not sure one way or the other. Who knows if they'd call it EarthBound 2 if they release Mother 3 Stateside? Given the info we have, going by Dojo, I wouldn't object to changing the series name. Coreycubed (talk) 16:59, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I made the change on the table now. Due to the fact EarthBound is called Mother 2 in Japan and that Mother 1 is not called Earthbound 0. The correct series name is Mother. I don't know why I didn't notice this. deecee (talk) 17:03, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Mother is the Japanese name for Earthbound, if I'm not mistaken. And, since it is known as Eartbound stateside (and Lucas is from the only Earthbound game that never was released in the US), it should still be Earthbound. Or, we could label it as Earthbound/Mother instead. Link 486 (talk) 14:28, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Mother/Earthbound is technically correct but I don't think it's necessary. Kid Icarus isn't listed as "Kid Icarus/Palutena's Labyrinth", right? I guess "Mother/Earthbound" could be used, but I'd say just using "Earthbound" is incorrect, because we have official Dojo shots of the English version of the game showing that Mother is used for the name of the series in the English version. There's absolutely nothing to support that Earthbound is the correct English name for anything except the second game in the series, but there is evidence supporting Mother as the correct name of the series in all regions (or at least both Japan and America). 206.132.133.129 (talk) 15:08, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

EarthBound is only the localized name of Mother 2. Without another release in the series Stateside or official word from NoA, the series is still Mother, as Lucas' game was NEVER referred to as EarthBound. Coreycubed (talk) 15:37, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Need to do something about the Zero Suit Samus details

I know that Wikipedia is not supposed to be a game guide but would a User do something about the Zero Suit Samus footnote especially since both Dojo and Gamefaqs have now placed out the details on the two seperate methods, before or during a match. I would be sastified if someone were to condense it down into something simpler that would not be making it sound like a cheat code was being posted on this site and if possible to use Dojo's Zero Suit Samus page as a source since it has the details. One thing I would suggest is saying something like Samus can become Zero Suit when her armor is destroyed from performing a Final Smash or through a certain button combination.-71.59.237.110 (talk) 03:14, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

It is important information but like you said, it sounds like a strategy guide so I changed it. I think Sakurai used the correct term when he said under certain conditions so we're keeping that. People need not know that they have to do a final smash, hold a button or press a succession of buttons so it's better condensed that way. deecee (talk) 04:41, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

I did update a link to reflect with this new information on the Samus's page for Dojo's updates to their Zero Suit Samus page. -71.59.237.110 (talk) 04:59, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Spoiler Warning?

This page contains spoilers, perhaps someone could add a warning? I don't want to add the warning because I'm trying to avoid spoilers and I'm afraid I'll read something in the process. 69.117.64.161 (talk) 19:15, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

No. There are no spoiler warnings. You're coming to an encyclopedia where there are bound to be spoilers. You risk going anywhere and being spoiled. If that happens, sorry about your luck. -Sukecchi (talk) 19:35, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

In fact, feel free to read WP:SPOILER. Arrowned (talk) 21:42, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

In fact, how about you read Wikipedia's Disclaimer. I'm sure you'll find that particularly large spoiler warning sufficient. .:Alex:. 16:19, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Non-Playable Characters

Nowhere on wikipedia can you find a single mention of "assist trophies". I think that there should be a short section on that topic in the above mentioned section because it is indeed an important addition to Brawl. (Pokeball description is in the Pokeball article). There is no Assist Trophy mention at all, however. --haha169 (talk) 05:43, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Check the Brawl page again. There is mention of ATs towards the bottom of the Gameplay section. There's no reason to mention them here on the series page; they're not THAT important.Satoryu (talk) 06:00, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

This discussion has been had before. See archive 26 on the Talk:Super Smash Bros. Brawl page, section 2. --Epass (talk) 11:45, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Agree, per above. Assist trophies are just items; they're not terribly more significant then others items except for that characters are used instead of actual items. Poké Balls have their own article because of their significance withing the Pokémon universe, and not Smash. Coreycubed (talk) 13:58, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

No, I meant the pokeball article described its use in Brawl with quite a lengthy description. And I also saw that discussion. I was merely pointing it out. But If you guys don't want it, its fine with me. Also, the picture on the main Brawl article, the one with the English Starting Character Select Screen is getting a serious hit on vandalism recently. Someone might want to check that. --haha169 (talk) 04:44, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Master and Crazy Hand

An analyst on Youtube noted that some of Master Hand and Crazy hand's moves are based off of the final boss of The Great Cave Adventure of Kirby Superstar, shown here (http://youtube.com/watch?v=Koqtl4DYNmU&feature=related). I wish to note this on the article, but this page is barred for non registered users. Would a registered user be so kind as to add this info?

New sections go at the bottom, and sign your posts with four tildes: ~~~~. Anyways, I can't look up the YouTube link right now, but if there's a connection to the Kirby Super Star bosses that can be verified, I'd love to note it here. It shouldn't be a hard link, since both games are directed by Sakurai. Coreycubed (talk) 20:35, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

The similarities are unmistakable, especially considering Masahiro Sakurai developed both SSB and the Kirby series. However, YouTube videos do not count as reliable sources. If you can find an outside citation for it, it would be a great addition to the article. Axem Titanium (talk) 23:25, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually, Youtube has helped pretty much most things on the article, I belive that this maybe at least a good footnote to mentionOnepiece226 (talk) 00:20, 15 February 2008 (UTC)Onepiece226

Youtube has helped in that it has shown us footage from the game that was confirmed to be real by hundreds of thousands of Japanese players, but it's still not a suitable source to cite. That said, what we can do in this situation is limited. It's blatantly obvious to anybody that's played Kirby Super Star that Wham Bam Rock is the basis for Master Hand (they're the exact same boss gameplay-wise except WBR is made out of rock, and his Aztec-ish face is in the background), but saying so could be interpreted by somebody as original research without a citation from a legitimate source saying it. And in a cursory Google search for such a citation, all that came back were fansites and forums. Arrowned (talk) 00:40, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I can't believe that people still think Youtube is not suitable to cite. It is blatantly impossible to post fake images of gameplay, so I think that as long as it looks real, it can be cited. --haha169 (talk) 04:47, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

It's not that simple. Youtube probably can be cited... but only when the user's account is that of a corporation connected to the article in question, making it a primary source, or the account of a well-known and respected journalist source with "a reputation for accuracy and fact-checking", which would make it a secondary source. Tertiary sources, regular users who are just recording their own stuff, can't be counted as proper citations because it is possible (believe it or not) for them to fake things. See WP:SOURCES for more information. Arrowned (talk) 04:55, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I found it here. http://smashwiki.com/wiki/Kirby_Super_Star. Would it work? Epass (talk) 21:02, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

No, you cannot cite another Wiki. -Sukecchi (talk) 22:28, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

It should not be mentioned, the two bosses may have some common attacks but stating that master hand was based of the rock boss just by this video is intirely unbacked OR.→041744 12:58, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't have to say it is based of Wham Bam Rock. The article already says:

Master Hand also makes several appearances in Kirby & the Amazing Mirror as a miniboss, and partnered with Crazy Hand as the bosses of Candy Constellation. It also makes an appearance in Kirby: Squeak Squad as a gray hand that can shift its shape to form swords and the like.

Just add that he resembles Wham Bam Rock from Kirby Superstar. Epass (talk) 11:32, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

<unindent> I could agree to that. just mention that both games were made by the same person to make that statement noteable.

It's still OR though since you are introducing the comparison. Axem Titanium (talk) 21:52, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Dairantō's official translation

Dairantō is translated to "great melee" (it used to be "great fray") on this article and the individual game articles, but in the Japanese version of the games the anouncer says "battle royal" when you select Dairantō Mode. So do you think it would be a good idea to change the translation to "Battle Royal Smash Brothers"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.197.184.114 (talk) 01:21, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

...No. -Sukecchi (talk) 01:26, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

...No...X2...SLJCOAAATR 1 (talk) 04:21, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Was that really necessary? I am not amused. -Sukecchi (talk) 15:11, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

See, this is the reason why it's not "Go! Fight! Ouendan".—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 05:41, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I believe "Battle Royale" was used in the Japanese version, while "Free-for-all" was used in the English version...either way, it's still not a translation of Dairantou. Coreycubed (talk) 15:10, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

The original Super Smash Bros announcer says "Free For All" when playing the main battle mode (as opposed to Team Battle) does this mean that the first game's title should be changed to "Super Smash Bros Free For All"? Calling it "Melee" in SSBM doesn't mean that it always refers to the game's title. SuperLink9 (talk) 11:04, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Dr Mario: In or Out?

The character roster has a cross next to Dr. Mario for Brawl. Is this because he hasn't been announced or you're waiting for an announcement? Pezzar (talk) 09:48, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Dr. Mario is not in Brawl. Period. The game is out in Japan, and the entire character roster has now been revealed. No more, no less. Yellow Mage (talk) 10:28, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

On that note, however, the lead-in paragraph to the table used to read something different, explaining how the ? meant neither confirmed nor deconfirmed. While it seems self evident to me, would a short sentence noting that the N means does not appear in that game be appropriate? Or is this just one of those "we can't dumb it down that much, some people will just have to figure it out" things? (no offense to Pezzar!) Coreycubed (talk) 14:11, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

No offense at all, Coreycubed! Pezzar (talk) 06:43, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

A sensible sentence or two on the function of the symbols would be helpful in a case such as this. Though the symbols are just pretty straightforward, i don't think it would be considered dumbing it down. 24.186.101.182 (talk) 17:19, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, figure it out people. A retarded 2 year old can, why not random people just trying to get info. of the game?SLJCOAAATR 1 (talk) 20:14, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Just A hypithetical question. If Dr. Mario was an Alternate Costume for mario in brawl, would he still be checked on the list? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.100.95.85 (talk) 20:36, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

No. But he's not an alt costume anyways, so it's irrelevant. Arrowned (talk) 20:44, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Final Smash characters

When some characters do a final smash they become a "differnt character" such as Sonic becomes Super Sonic and Bowser becomes Giga Bowser, and I believe Samus becomes Zero Suit Samus. Do we want to Include these on the charcter list or has a consenous already been reached on this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cubbiesfan644 (talk • contribs) 22:30, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

No ZSS is the only charcter who becomes a diffrent character after her final smash according to the offical site's character screen. There are sevral disscussions over this in the archives, also look at the FAQ, that is what it is there for.→041744 22:35, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

ZSS can arguably be "selected seperately" too, and can last for as long as the duration of the match, while Giga Bowser and Super Sonic only last for a matter of seconds. Also the character's icon at the bottom of the screen does not change in these transformations. SuperLink9 (talk) 11:07, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Master Hand VA = Announcer VA?

I know that this is just a hunch, but isn't Master Hand's voice (at least in the original and Melee) the same as the announcer's? There's no real confirmation for this (unless one counts IMDB, which isn't the most reliable source on the planet), but if you listen to the announcer and then Master, there is a similarity. If this was true, then wouldn't Master Hand (and Crazy Hand, whose voice in Melee is pretty much the same as Master Hand's) be voiced by Jeff Manning in the original, and Dean Harrington in Melee? ChromeWulf ZX (talk) 02:11, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't know about that stuff. But I do know that it's irrelevant to this article.Satoryu (talk) 03:20, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Eh, fair enough. ChromeWulf ZX (talk) 03:56, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

GA push

I started a reception section in an attempt to model the article after Kingdom Hearts (series), one of only two video game series articles. I'll start filling it in soon, and it would be great if we could all work on it :) Also, we should start a Development section, detailing how the series was concieved, and how it has developed; you know, behind the scenes type stuff. With brawl likely to pass GA once it is released in the United States, it would be another big step toward a featured topic to get this to GA as well. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 04:00, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I've copied some paragraphs from the game articles that overveiw the reception (just like the paragraphs that overveiw the games) they still need to be fitted to accomadate the whole series but at least now we all have a platform to build of off on that section.

Devolpement would also be a nice touch, I could do the same for that too if that is okay.→041744 22:53, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

That will help a lot, especially any information on how they came up with it. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 23:16, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Show/Hide

I was thinking that it would be nice to have a show/hide button for the character table in the article. It's not necessary but the table is huge and it would save space. I don't know how to add them, so if it is really hard, don't bother. Epass (talk) 11:36, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

My friend put one up a long time ago and they took it off.--Lbrun12415 03:32, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Do you know why? Epass (talk) 13:08, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

If I remember right the text after it said reverted said " Why all you did was add a show and hide bar

its better the way we have it."

I have one on my page I believe it look a little better but we have to go by what the "top users" want.--Lbrun12415 15:12, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

I think it would uprubt the flow of the article. As bad as it may sound, I think the show/hide would not be the best for the article.→041744 15:28, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

That's fine. I just wanted another opinion. I'm glad I asked first. Epass (talk) 16:41, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

If you wanted to see what it would look like go on my page.--Lbrun12415 16:53, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

It looks kind of....squished. IF it was in the article, would it look like that? Epass (talk) 17:16, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually I gave it a show hide bar... but it covered up the table and everything under it so I reverted it. This is only if you use Lbrun's method though.Smashbrosboy (talk) 02:16, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Is there anyone way just to have the button and not the bar? Epass (talk) 11:37, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Collapsing#Sortable_collapsible_table -Sukecchi (talk) 11:57, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I like that way better than the bar and how it is now. What do other people think? Epass (talk) 19:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

References

8 of the references don't work. I suggest someone fixes them. Epass (talk) 11:39, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Okay, thank you, whoever fixed them. Epass (talk) 17:27, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Semi-Protected?

It says this article is semi-protected when I'm not logged in, but there is no padlock in the corner. What's going on? Epass (talk) 20:54, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

The image is not automatically added when a page is semi-protted; a bot usually comes along and adds / removes the padlock icon after the fact, if the admin doesn't add the image. *makes a face at Jéské* Coreycubed (talk) 20:56, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Anyone can add the padlock template if the page is semi-protected. For future reference, the code is {{pp-semiprotected|small=yes}}. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v +2 Pen of Editing)} 21:04, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh, durr. Semi-prot, not full -- us regular editors can continue editing as normal (obviously that extends to the template). Right! I'll, uh, do it next time, and stop blaming Jéské... Coreycubed (talk) 21:10, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

The "the" was nessesary.

User Satoryu recently edited out an "Unnecessary 'the.'" But, you see, in the Pokémon Trainer profile, every occurance of the character in question's name was preceeded with the word "the". So I say the "the" should be kept.

Then again, Sakurai also claimed in the Subspace Army update that the word "Primid" is pluralized as "Primid", while the image of the Big Primid trophy pluralizes the word as "Primids". I haven't checked the Subspace Army page since before the Trophy Stand update, so I don't know if he changed it or not (like he did with images such as the character selection screen image in the Names update, or Wario-Man doing a perceived "Nazi-salute"). — NES Boy (talk) 12:35, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

I think that they just want him to be nameless, if that's the case it would be like saying The "person" .... But in any cass this is really not worth fighting about, either way should be acceptable.→041744 13:34, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

In prose, especially when writing in-reference to the Smash universe, I would think that using "the" would be appropriate; but this seems to be just part of the character table. I doubt that Zero Suit Samus is referred to in-universe as anything other than Samus, yet it's used in sentences pertaining to the character table for obvious reasons. Coreycubed (talk) 13:39, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm going by the character select screen. The announcer doesn't call out "The Pokemon Trainer" when you select him, he calls out "Pokemon Trainer." That's also how his name is written on the character icon. Satoryu (talk) 17:51, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

There isn't only one pokemon trainer, there are many. If you played against three other pokemon trainers would you say you were playing against The Pokemon Trainers? You don't call Kirbys The Kirbys or Zeldas The Zeldas or Luigis The Luigis, so you don't call Pokemon trainer The Pokemon trainer, going by my logic. He is a Pokemon trainer. The makes him sound like the only. Epass (talk) 11:48, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

To Satoryu: By that logic, we should rename "Pikmin & Olimar" to just "Olimar", as per the character selection screen. — NES Boy (talk) 22:58, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Except the announcer calls out "Pikmin & Olimar". Clearly it's no different from "D.Kong" and the like; the names are shortened on the character select screen boxes due to space requirements and have nothing to do with the naming scheme. Arrowned (talk) 23:20, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Stage Builder

I don't see stage builder mentioned in the Brawl section. Can I add it in, or is it not important enough for here, and it can only be in Brawl's article. Epass (talk) 12:24, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I think it would only be important enough for the Brawl article I don't think it needs a mention here. The Light6 (talk) 12:27, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I thought so. Epass (talk) 15:44, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Unless its the first one with a stage builder, then it might be notable here, so was it? Judgesurreal777 (talk) 15:58, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

It is a new feature. Neither SSBM nor SSB have it. Epass (talk) 17:57, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

It is a new feature, and quite interesting too. Maybe we could add a couple words to an existing sentence? It might work, I'll see about that. --haha169 (talk) 04:38, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Full Protection on March 9th

Is this article going to be full-protection on March 9th? I know Brawl has already been released in Japan and all that, but this is the English Wikipedia and this is the English release, so I'm guessing there will be a ton of vandalism in the first week of release. Any thoughts? Epass (talk) 18:26, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Somebody called Gotroe or something thinks its funny to blank the page. There is going to be even worse vandalism on the 9th, so I think it should be fully protected from then until the 11th at the latest. Jeske? What do you think? --haha169 (talk) 18:32, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Declined – Pages are not protected preemptively. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v +2 Pen of Editing)} 18:41, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

However, I wouldn't be surprised if it became protected within 24 hours of launch, the Brawl article for sure. I, however, won't be dealing with it, I'll be playing the game. Useight (talk) 21:49, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, all the fans will be playing the game. Once they are done, and decide to check around Google for Brawl, they might run into the wikipedia article and begin describing the SSE in lush detail with poor grammar. That's my prediction. However, I won't be around to see that happen. --haha169 (talk) 23:54, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I, however, will be since I don't have a Wii. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v :L10 Lucario Cleric of Mew)} 00:26, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

That's a pretty good prediction, Haha169, lots of gamers with poor grammar and spelling turning up suddenly to add their own insights. Jeske, thanks for volunteering to monitor the page while us Wii-owners familiarize ourselves with the game. Useight (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 04:23, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Null persp. It's a break from Mudkip Mania. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v :L7 Kacheek Defier)} 05:09, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't recall if Mudkip makes an appearance in Brawl, but if it does, I'll be sure to smash a few for you! --Coreycubed (talk) 13:41, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

He doesn't (thankfully). And actually, I'd prefer it if you found a 4chan Brawl group on Wi-Fi and just smashed the tar out of them for me for SIHULM and FYS. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v :L13 ½-Raichu Soulknife)} 19:21, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Is this a forum or are we just ignoring all rules? :) Logan GBA (talk) 22:02, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

We were talking about preemptive protection until I mentioned SIHULM. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v :L13 ½-Raichu Soulknife)} 22:47, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

This discussion has been decided on the SSBB talk page. Epass (talk) 11:50, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Why Sheik but not Charizard, Ivysaur, Squirtle?

Why does Sheik have a character space and the 3 pokemon don't? Sheik is as important as these three. I suggest changing Zelda to Zelda/Sheik, and taking off Sheik's file Berisha (talk) 21:19, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

The Pokémon don't share one because they are all under the control of the Pokémon Trainer and are interdependent on one another (due to their "stamina" trait which requires they be swapped out every so often or else become weaker). Sheik/Zelda, on the other hand, while not independent of each other, do not need constant swapping. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v +2 Pen of Editing)} 21:31, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Besides; the Dojo refers to Sheik and Zelda as separate identities. Pokemon Trainer is not. Granted...the game does give individual victories to Squirtle, Ivysaur, and Charizard...but I'm still in the ball park of keeping the list the way it is. -Sukecchi (talk) 22:44, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, I've always fought to use the offical site to define charcters, a I'm glad that this is now common consensus.→041744 03:58, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. This definitely seems to be the best way to do it. .:Alex:. 08:42, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Its been the common census for a long time. I don't even remember when it wasn't...--haha169 (talk) 19:33, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Another good reason would be because as far as we know, PT's 3 have always been part of the same character, they make him up. However, Zero Suit Samus is new, whilst Samus was still in the first 2. How would you propose to merge them? It just wouldn't work, without an unecessary in-depth footnote. The same goes for Sheik, as it was a huge possibility that Sheik would not be a part of Zelda this time around. As it stands, in the occasion of a 4th Smash Bros, I find it likely that PT's 3 will remain the same, while Sheik still has the risk of not returning (while the risk is somewhat lesser now...) SuperLink9 (talk) 19:44, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it's been this way for quite a while now. Useight (talk) 04:21, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Preventing the Links from beiong linked

I have added hidden notes to the Young Link and Toon Link rows on the table as anons seem to like merging the two together. Comments? -Jéské ^{(v^_^v :L7 Kacheek Defier)} 20:16, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Good idea. Axem Titanium (talk) 21:21, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

It is a good idea, although nobody ever pays attention to hidden notes anyway. Epass (talk) 22:52, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Metal Mario

You cannot get a player character as Metal Mario, unless you use a ROM hacker, like Gameshark. 76.10.151.33 (talk) 22:53, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Ever heard of a Metal Box? While Metal Mario is not playable in Smash Bros. 64, he most certainly is in Melee and Brawl. Along with metal versions of every other character. But it's best that you removed the tidbit of Metal Mario from the Giga Bowser paragraph. The way it was worded, it was misleading. It was already stated in the paragraph above Giga Bowser that Metal Mario is "playable" in Melee and Brawl anyway. Satoryu (talk) 23:08, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, Jéské Couriano seems to think that comment was good enough to put back. It's very misleading. We should mention that you CANNOT become Metal mario in 64. PEople seem to think you can. It's freaking annoying. THey think spinning the cursor around 100 times does the trick... 76.10.151.33 (talk) 23:14, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, a sentence in the Metal Mario paragraph says that he and Giant Donkey Kong are not playable in the first game. So there you go. Satoryu (talk) 23:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

New comers

In the chracter list can we make it easier to show which was a chratcher's 1st game?--User:NFAN3|NFAN3 (talk) 15:47, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

No. It's easy enough to infer with how the table is. Satoryu (talk) 20:09, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I doubt it's possible to make it easier to find out anyhow, I mean you just find the character and then find the first tick. The only way I could think of making it more obvious would be using a different tick symbol for a characters first appearence which would propbably serve to confuse people more then to help them interpret the table. Then of course you could colour code the squares of the first game the character appears in however this would be redundant as it would be just as easy to find out now and would interfer with the colour coding which is being used now. The Light6 (talk) 23:36, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it's simple enough now, we don't want to make the table too convoluded. Useight (talk) 23:47, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Archive

I think it's time to archive this page again, as of making a comment above and making this new section the page is 72 kb. The Light6 (talk) 23:36, 7 March 2008 (UTC)