Talk:Super Smash Bros. Brawl/Archive 18

This is an archive of past discussions about Super Smash Bros. Brawl. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

→

Sonic in Brawl

Theres a rumour going about that Sonic's already included in Brawl, but Sega are taking to long to reply. From some mexican mag.

But thats it, it's a rumour, the sources are devious at best. Looks like a hoax. --ACE Spark 04:33, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Well I suppose we wait till the 26th, thats all we can do.--User:Atomic Religione

Interesting...Well, like Atomic said, only time will tell if its real or not. 6 more days... --Kenny2k 05:56, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

The 26th would be a Thursday, and big announcements are usually on Friday, but again, we'll just have to wait. Depressio 06:03, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, there have been some pretty good Thursday updates. But then again, that was during E3. --Kenny2k 10:22, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

It was also stated on Sonic Stadium, whcih is very reliable. But the artcile has since been taken down, not a good sign. MindWraith 11:00, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

It was taken down from there because some comments proved that it was fake by linking to the original source. Gurko 12:09, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

The original source? Jeff Silvers 14:28, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Is this a website that gives fake information The Wii Guy 03:44, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

I suggest we hold all questions about this and simply wait till the 26th. Then we'll know, until then lets not fill up this talk page anymore. --User:Atomic Religione

How about we note the spelling errors in the posted article, the fact that there's no such magazine as "Ventendo", and that they used screenshots far too recent to be thrown in to a recently published magazine, and forget this ever happened? --Guess Who 06:11, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

How about we wait, and see like I said. If there isnt anything on the 26th, then we'll know that it was a hoax. Its so simple yet i find my self repeating it time and time again...--User:Atomic Religione

apparently people suck at reading. at the cost of lengthening this page... STOP DISCUSSING and WAIT. why would a Mexican mag share something that the Dojo didn't tell us? 07:53, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Why is everyone repeating what everyone already said? We get the point, any further comments are pretty much fourm talk. Why is everyone repeating what everyone already said? --Kenny2k 10:02, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

I got news from a real website that Sonic is already in the game but Sega has to say yes. They have till July 26 to decied. [1]The Wii Guy 17:09, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Your "real" source's source is the same source: the Spanish interview. So nothing has changed, just where the information is being presented. -Sukecchi 17:39, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Let's just wait until the 26th and see what happens. We can't really do anything with it right now. Depressio 18:14, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Let's hope SEGA agrees because Mario, Sonic, and Solid Snake in Smash Brothers Brawl would be the greatest thing ever.

This rumor on the same site sort of contradicts the Sonic revealed on the 26th. Unless it's another Sega character...or there all just untrue rumors. (Zojo 17:18, 23 July 2007 (UTC))

Now this —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.53.210.29 (talk • contribs)

That's the exact same article. And honestly, why are we still discussing this? Arrowned 22:06, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

It has been discussed in the other talk pages here, but I highly doubt that Sonic will be included. Brawl's to far in production, so Sanke might be the only 3rd Party character... for now. --Pezzar 06:59, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

The rumor has been proved false. There was not a Sonic update today. End of discussion. --Kenny2k 07:17, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

to far in production? its going to be realeased 7 months from know! and they promised 2 or 3 3rd party's snake and pit might have been taken out of melee but third partys out of brawl? come on! its been over a year and a half- Smashing legs

"This World" update

I know someone already asked about the purple robot in the most recent addition, but I have to wonder if we should do something about the Friday update.

"In this world, tropheys fight. They know nothing but fighting, fighting is the sole reason for their existance. Being turned back into a trophey, being unable to fight, is much like death. These are the rules of this world. But, if someone or something breaks these rules, the world will pay a terrible price."

We should give a little mention about this to the article. Like saying

"The site on july 19 the site gave a very confusing update stating 'In this world, tropheys fight. They know nothing but fighting, fighting is the sole reason for their existance. Being turned back into a trophey, being unable to fight, is much like death. These are the rules of this world. But, if someone or something breaks these rules, the world will pay a terrible price.' There is no answer to this confusing statement, but it seems as if not only will Brawl be explaining the purpose of Super Smash bros, it will be changing it entirely."

Sign your posts please. We can't really say anything about it because most of it would be baseless speculation. We know nothing about this thing. -Sukecchi 14:18, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

This really looks more like a setting. If a plot comes out of it, it'll be given its own section. You Can 't See Me! 19:55, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Should we note in the article...

That all 8 original starter characters from the first Smash Bros. have been confirmed? Or is this too trivial? --Kenny2k 09:27, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

No, because there was four more, (Luigi, Captain Falcon, Jigglypuff, and Ness). Plus it sounds to trivial. OBEY STARMAN 15:23, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, actually, starmen, that's 12 when you include the unlockables, also, the Melee article mentions that all characters return from the previous Smash Bros. game, plus it can cut down the example list, so I don't see a problem. But at the same time, we could wait a little longer before adding anything like that. magiciandude (Talk) (review) 16:18, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Why though? Why is that important to make a note in the article about it? -Sukecchi 16:26, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Good point. magiciandude (Talk) (review) 16:45, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

I guess a little trivia is ok and can be encyclopedic like this. Yea, i guess it would be fine to add it. 68.195.110.145 17:08, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

No trivia sections. -Sukecchi 17:24, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

WHY!? Why would we add that, it doesnt matter, and can be readily seen on the page with the character list! DurinsBane87 17:15, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

The page is fine the way it is and it only gives a few graphical note examples of some of the returning characters and some of the new characters too. It won't need any mention that the original eight starter characters are back (Note the hidden characters from the original game do not technically apply to the whole original 8 concept). Lastly I agree there is there is no need of the mention of the original 8 since it does sound too trivial. -Adv193 20:26, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps when we know all the characters we could say, "All characters from Melee make a return except..." (Zojo 22:14, 24 July 2007 (UTC))

That's unnecessary as well; the character article already covers that. Arrowned 22:18, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Plus that that is along the lines of trivia or fancruft as well. -Adv193 22:36, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

I did not want to add any examples, but I think it would be best if someone added the "Pokemon Trainer". He has a lot of new qualities that Smash has never seen before. Someone add him in the "Character" section please. -Latteran 9:08, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Stages

The people who keep speculating on this game should stop. They have no real idea what arenas are included. To see what arenas are confirmed look here.(http://www.smashbros.com/en_us/stages/index.html)Feared One 19:44, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

go to this webpage and they have info a picture and proof that the stages been confirmed because they were revealed in the trailer. Dojo doesnt show Meta-Knight, only some characters and stages. here (http://nindb.classicgaming.gamespy.com/rvl/ssbb.shtml) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wik656 (talk • contribs)

we are NOT putting a list of confirmed stages. it's been discussed numerous times, you can search the archives, and probably the FAQ at the top of the page. DurinsBane87 23:32, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

you an put them with a picture rite now the article luks like garbage im just helping you out! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wik656 (talk • contribs)

No. The article will be rewritten when the game comes out. — Malcolm (talk) 23:51, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

This article needs a rewrite

The article sucks. Everything is just thrown together in a mess of paragraphs! What happened to the original, more neat article? Dark Ermac 03:42, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

If you hate it so much, why dont you, instead of complaining on the talk page, rewrite it. I think its fine. --User:Atomic Religione

Isn't the talk page for discussing how to improve the article? It's better he asks here first than completly changing the article without saying anything. --Kenny2k 04:16, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Either way, at least be more specific on what's wrong. magiciandude (Talk) (review) 04:18, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, what's wrong with it? Looks fine to me. --AgreeneyedFox 04:37, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

i suggest we focus on keeping rumors and speculation out. when it's released and the info is settled, then we clean it up. you have to wait for the cake to finish baking before you can add frosting. FyreNWater 05:21, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Dark Ermac. It does need a rewrite. What happened to all the stuff on development and music? --Pezzar 07:03, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

There's a whole section on development. The article is fine as it is for now. Wait for the game to be released. --AgreeneyedFox 07:23, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

We do keep speculation and rumor out. That's one of the main things we look out for. -Sukecchi 10:54, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

I've wanted the article changed too but if it's one thing I've learned it's that the way you want it might not be the right way. And besides, I guarantee you that if you rewrote the article perfectly to your liking, in a few weeks it'll be a mess because of the daily updates. People add and delete stuff as they see fit and until the game comes out, it'll be hard for the article to be perfect to everyone. (Zojo 17:08, 25 July 2007 (UTC))

We definitely need to wait for all the facts to come out before doing a rewrite. However, I completely acknowledge the fact that a rewrite is needed. But, like Zojo said, it'll just keep getting messed up as people add and subtract facts from the daily updates. We have to wait before doing a rewrite. Laptopdude 18:22, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

I also will acknowledge the need for a rewrite but I will also agree that it will be a long and harsh wait with numerous users and IP's, excluding myself of course until all the facts are confirmed to avoid adding in new additional facts from the official website. Until then I keep a vigilant watch over this page and make sure that the character section stays the way it is unless if someone notable has a better idea.

Game modes

Can anyone say how this section is necessary? 1) It already says the kinds of controls and the custom names in the infobox and gameplay section respectively, in the infobox 2) They may be listed as "modes" on the site, but how the heck could "Four kinds of control" and "names" be modes? — Malcolm (talk) 23:50, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

it's not priority, seeing as there aren't really any confirmed modes yet. i say sit and wait. FyreNWater 07:59, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Any other catagory would make even less sense (Zojo 17:01, 28 July 2007 (UTC))

Adding info on pokemon, assist trophies, etc

I'm new and I have some interesting things about this game that I got from the website, but I'm not allowed to edit the page, just wanted to ask if I could be allowed to edit it. Thanks. Danziink 20:43, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Anything from the website we have already. -Sukecchi 20:59, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Well, I thought about putting next to the information on poke balls, assist trophy information because they seem like a brand new idea. Doesn't matter if you don't want this though. Yeah? 21:05, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Assist Trophies are mentioned in the Brawl article. We do not need a list of any kind for either Pokeballs or Assist Trophies. If people want that information they can go to the site. -Sukecchi 21:45, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

The article is okay as it is now. We don't need to put in every single detail about the game. However, it will be rewritten when the game is released. --Kenny2k 22:00, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

If every post was added, this page would fill up fast. If you feel the need to add something, you can edit the article within a few days of when you created your account, but remember that not every update is encyclopedic. You Can 't See Me! 22:15, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

What's wrong with filling it up? As long as it's INFORMATION.The Wii Guy 22:31, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Not nearly all information is encyclopedic. — Malcolm (talk) 22:32, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Maclom said it best. This is supposed to be an encyclopedic article. If we put everything in the article, then whats the point of having an article at all? It would just be a copy of the site. --Kenny2k 05:15, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I see your pointThe Wii Guy 15:46, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Well since you're new, did you check out the FAQ already? magiciandude (Talk) (review) 05:57, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

There is always a clash of opinions on what should be in the article. And since there is such an inconsistancy within the article because of it, it'll be sloppy until the game is out. (Zojo 17:01, 30 July 2007 (UTC))

Regarding the pitfall and it's icon

I noticed that the Pitfall item is out of all the other (normal) items in the game to have the Animal Crossing leaf icon. Sorry, kinda new to this wikipedia thing and I'm not this was the place to discuss such a thing (Btw I know it's not a forum, don't hurt me)66.133.192.156 07:24, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

hm, well first of all, the talk page is generally used for discussion of the improvement of this article, not for general questions, however, its pretty much used for that anyway. and, now for an actual response. The reason why it has the animal crossing leaf, compared to the other items that dont, is because that item is specifically from a game, and not an original creation from smash bros. the other symbol, the circle with two intersecting lines cut out, is the symbol for smash bros native objects. i hope this answers your question. C. Pineda 07:43, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

You sir are wrong. Dr. Wright has the HAL circle symbol, yet he is not "native to smash". However, this isn't the place to discuss such things. RandomGuy42 12:21, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok, thats the ONE exception, but that's only because Dr. Wright, really has no other home, since SimCity for SNES was never really that big, nor did it have a lovely little symbol like all other games have. Check everything else, they all have symbols from their native game. C. Pineda 07:13, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm pretty certain that any icons besides the SSBB circle refer to a playable character's game series and not simply any nintendo game series, popular or otherwise. That's just speculation so far, though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.169.163.192 (talk)

Online Functionality

I noticed that the article says that it will definitely be online. When I came here to discuss this, I read the FAQ and the FAQ confirmed online functionality from two sources: the first, a two year old article that states Brawl was to be a release game for the Wii, and the second, a year+ old article that shows Sakurai "plans" to have online. The point is, Wi-Fi is by no means confirmed. It's planned, and will probably happen, but there's still room for doubt.75.67.206.173 15:58, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, there's room for doubt, but until Nintendo or Sakurai plainly say "There will be no online", we go by what has already been said in the past. Arrowned 16:00, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I go by what the website states, and no where on it does it say that WiFi play is possible. So until it states that on the Dojo website, I don't think it should be included in the article. C. Pineda 17:52, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

So a direct quote from Sakurai in an interview that another website hasn't confirmed or denied (not to mention a website in which we get new updates daily, so there's clearly a load of things they haven't yet discussed) is automatically wrong? Arrowned 18:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

The point is, things change. Online play hasn't been mentioned in a long time. A long time ago, everyone thought the Wiimote and Classic Controller wouldn't be compatible with Brawl, but now we all know they are. I am in favor of removing mention of online play from the article, until we get some up-to-date information about it. -- Powerslave^T_C 20:06, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

No need to change it. Brawl's online possiblity has been a hot topic between fans and Nintendo's power players. The article kind of needs it. And, trust me, you'll get a lot of people complaining in here if there's no mention of online play (not me) Zojo 22:24, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

No update?

Smash Bros.com didn't update today, what gives? 84.13.114.229 08:23, 1 August 2007 (UTC) Mojanboss

No, its just late. Monday's update was also late (1 hour and 3 minutes, to be exact.) Sakurai must of lost his password again. --Kenny2k 08:47, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, it was just late. It's Ike, from Fire Emblem. --Guess Who 09:51, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Now that the update is here, the question is weither or not we should put Ike into the article. --Kenny2k 10:11, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Maybe we should just stick a mention of him with the other newcomers. Teamrocketspy621 12:06, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

But if we do that, then I'll bet that people will try to add every other new character that shows up on the Smash Bros. website into the article, making it long and ugly. Disaster Kirby 17:40, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Remember, article can't be perfect until the game's released and we have ALL the facts. (Zojo 17:52, 1 August 2007 (UTC))

Alo note that once the game is released and we know everything about the game, this article will undergo some major changes, so any mention about character's will likly be temporary. BassxForte 00:53, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Castle Siege (Stage First!)

Okay, this stage should be mentioned somewhere, and heres why.

This stage has three different areas. You fall to the next area after a amount of time/damage to the stage (its unknown exactly what causes the stage to collapse). I think this is the first multi-area stage in the Smash Bros. Series, and I think it should be noted.

Then again, maybe its too soon, and we should wait until the game is out. --Kenny2k 10:17, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps. Besides, we don't really know if this is the only stage that acts in this way; & it's not really all that unique anyway.

I mean, Melee had Rainbow Cruise, Pokefloats & Mute City; which, if you want to get technical; also had several different "areas", Pokemon Stadium transformed into three different fields (excluding the basic one); plus Icicle Mountain & Big Blue scrolled through a series of randomly arranged platforms which were never the same twice.

And furthermore, it could be argued that two (if not all) of the stages that have thus far been revealed for Brawl have "different areas." Does Delfino Plaza not have "different areas?" Does Rumble Falls not have "different areas?" Are the subtle, progressive changes which take place on almost every other stage not enough to be considered "different?"

Once again; I don't really think it's unique enough to deserve special mention, if no other stages do. - Jishmeister 12:36, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I think the Battlefield stage is pretty straight forward, just changing backgrounds. I'd support the addition of a stages section as seen in Melee. While not all the stages are known, 9 is more than enough (for me) to have a separate section now. --Son 13:56, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't know. With the limited information we have, any section detailing the few revealed stages (elements of which we know have been purposely kept secret) might just end up feeling tacked on. - Jishmeister 14:42, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Unless you're planning to list all confirmed and unconfirmed (Mario Circuit, Halberd, Metal Gear stage), you can't fill in much a section about stages now. (Zojo 15:37, 2 August 2007 (UTC))

Adding unconfirmed stages to the list would be speculation. --Kenny2k 17:07, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Read the Melee#Stages section. It's not very long. All we have to say is that there are 9 confirmed, and several were seen in previous games. Just like the Melee article. --Son 22:40, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Shiek and Ganondorf

http://www.gameinformer.com/News/Story/200708/N07.0802.1741.54921.htm ChozoBoy 03:32, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

That's awesome. But still, there's not much we can do until they're formally announced on the Dojo.. -- Powerslave^T_C 04:11, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

If its not on Dojo, it dosn't exist. --Kenny2k 04:13, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Thats a little extreme, it exixts it just doesnt belong on Wikipedia. --User:Atomic Religione

Let me reword that. If its on Dojo, it is 100% fact. If its from anywhere else, there is room for doubt. --Kenny2k 05:33, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Not everything has to come from the Dojo website. GameInformer.com is a reliable source and could be used to verify. Tinkleheimer 05:51, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it's not an official source. Reliability =/= Official-ness. InsaneZeroG 06:04, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

It's an interview with Eiji Aonuma, director of the Zelda series. Interviews with high-ranking Nintendo employees are reliable and official sources. Jesus, do you people know how to read? --Guess Who 07:26, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Just because we read your words doesnt mean we cannot feel their bite. --User:Atomic Religione

I agree with Eiji being reliable, but I also agreed that it should not be in the article, rather, the list of characters should be updated. magiciandude (Talk) (review) 07:31, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

It doesn't actually say they're going to be included; it says he submitted designs. Until they are actually confirmed on the official site, that's all they are; designs. - Jishmeister 11:32, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh, right, and Sakurai would ask for character designs because he's not putting the characters in. Teamrocketspy621 13:30, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Where does it say he asked? The way I see it, they were submitted for his consideration; & until he says otherwise, he's assumed to still be "considering" them. - Jishmeister 13:48, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Lets wait and see if this interveiw is true or not, or if any other statements are made, until we put this in the article. Eiji is a pretty official source, so if this interveiw is real then its probably true. Still, lets just wait~sdhonda

GameInformer is an actual credible magazine you know, I have four issues of it in my room right now. -Sukecchi 16:35, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

But unless it comes directly from the keyboard of Sakurai himself, it's not "official." - Jishmeister 16:37, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I disagree with this. While the only way we'll know for sure is to wait on Sakurai, GameInformer fits all the requirements by Wikipedia of being a reliable, third-party published source. And there are hundreds of other video game articles on Wikipedia (more than a few for games not yet released) that similarly cite print magazines or gaming websites for information. I'd suggest adding a note saying where the info came from and that it's not absolutely confirmed, but since it showed up in a magazine/professional website, this isn't original research or anything, meaning there's not really a good enough reason to leave it out of the article. Arrowned 16:41, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps, but until they appear "in the flesh (or "in the pixels" as the situation may warrant)" they're not officially "confirmed." - Jishmeister 16:51, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Entirely true. But I'm not arguing over its truthfulness or not; I'm arguing over whether its notable enough to go in the article. The GameInformer article is a valid secondary source, and as WP's article on verifiability mentions, "the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth." Arrowned 18:24, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

C'mon, ease up a bit. Seems like we can check Peach, Shiek, and Ganondorf as playable on the list. (Zojo 22:26, 3 August 2007 (UTC))

Peach, maybe, but not Ganondorf and Sheik, because for all we know, they could be background characters or Assist Trophies. magiciandude (Talk) (review) 22:28, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I'd have to disagree with you there. The only character I wouldn't stamp as confirmed is Palutena. Might not be Palutena, might just be part of the story, and she wasn't even there (she was transparent). (Zojo 22:40, 3 August 2007 (UTC))

Peach, maybe, but not Ganondorf and Sheik, because for all we know, they could be background characters or Assist Trophies. magiciandude (Talk) (review) 22:28, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Because removing a major reoccurring Zelda antagonist from the roster and having him an assist makes perfect sense. This comment is retarded even by Wikipedia standards.--ChibiMrBubbles 16:20, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

No personal attacks. It's likely Ganondorf will be a PC, and maybe Sheik. The thing is, we don't know, and won't put it in the article until we do. — Malcolm (talk) 16:26, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Except it wasn't a personal attack. Reading comprehension helps. And stop making things up. I never said Ganondorf should be put up on the list. Your assumptions lack any merit and are there for annoyance. --ChibiMrBubbles 16:33, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair use images

I removed a few fair use images from this article and Super Smash Bros. Melee. Please note that images should be informative, not decorative. Also, the situation on the image must be covered in the article. In this case, the article merely showed four of the characters with a pink background, so I removed the image. Please review WP:FUC. Mel sa ran (formerly Salaskаn) 15:52, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Plot section

I'm beginning to think we might be able to put in a rudimentary plot section into the article, given that the single-player mode now actually, well, has a plot. Obviously most of this will be surmised from "This World", but we can also ascertain a bit from the latest update too, right...?

Something along the lines of this:

For the first time in the series, Super Smash Bros. Brawl features a story mode with cutscenes and an ongoing plot. Presently, all that is known is that the game takes place in a world where statues exist solely to fight, and to lose a fight and return to statue form is to essentially succumb to death. However, early on, when Mario helps Kirby return from such a form, the apparent masters of the world begin to fight back in an effort to set things straight, and from there, a large battle begins to determine if the statues must fight eternally, or will eventually gain freedom.

It's not exactly the best ever, but it summarizes basically all I know (well, I glossed over Peach and Zelda, but that one detail probably doesn't matter in a summary this early, anyway). Thoughts? --Shadow Hog 16:03, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

You are copying the text from the Dojo and speculating. As of right now, we don't know the actual plot of the game. We'll add a Plot section when we actually know the plot.--Satoryu 17:02, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

We should seriously just wait. We will get more detailed information soon enough. --Kenny2k 23:55, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

I suggust we wait until we play the game and grasp all of the story, then give the story a section here. BassxForte 00:16, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

To be honest, pretty much every OTHER game page has a story summary based solely off of what the promotion material has put out. And, while I can understand waiting for another update to clarify the plot before we add a section, I don't think waiting all the way until the game's release is anywhere near necessary.

That and the plot summary simply doesn't belong exclusively on the page for the entire series, especially when it has little to no bearing on the N64 title or Melee. --Shadow Hog 03:30, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

What is this "However, early on, when Mario helps Kirby return from such a form, the apparent masters of the world begin to fight back in an effort to set things straight, and from there, a large battle begins to determine if the statues must fight eternally, or will eventually gain freedom." Was there ANY evidence of that that immissed, or was that made up fromthat single video that didnt say anything like that? DurinsBane87 05:40, 5 August 2007 (UTC

The former part was derived from "This World", where it's heavily implied that that's the situation. I suppose that the latter part might be more speculation on my part, however... But considering that the trophies apparently team up to fight the creatures that appear when Mario saves Kirby, it's a fairly logical conclusion (regardless of whether it can be put on the page or not). --Shadow Hog 01:58, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't see how that's a logical conclusion at all, since the blurb says that the characters will have their own stories. It doesnt say anywhere that they're fighting for freedom, or that they don't like fighting. It's isn't implied ANYWHERE that they don't like their current lives, it's complete speculation. DurinsBane87 02:04, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Presumably Mario doesn't, considering the sequence of images depicts him bringing Kirby back to life instead of leaving him to "die". Which, as the blurb states, is against the rules, and causes those robot enemies to show up, which causes the gang to group together and fight against them. Obviously there's got to be SOME discontent with the "rules" in here, otherwise they wouldn't be breaking them nor would they be retaliating when the rules are enforced. I fail to see what's so objectionable about this conclusion.

Also, there is only one story (or, at the very least, no evidence of multiple stories). The site states that the multiple characters have their unique histories and so on, but that's no different from your average run-of-the-mill RPG, and we don't generally classify those as having different stories; just one. --Shadow Hog 04:08, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

It also says they'll have unique burdens. But this is far beside the point. It's obviously far to vague, and we can't just fill in the blanks based on our inferences. So we should wait. DurinsBane87 04:21, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

There, I suppose I can agree. I HAD kind of wanted a preliminary one up, but obviously I'm hardly in the majority, so, no big loss. :) --Shadow Hog 04:44, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Wait. It seems very hard to piece together the information in This World... and Subspace Emissary. Even the name is hard to figure. An emissary is someone who is sent on a special and secret mission. Does that mean that there is some new character who is the Subspace Emissary? Or is the Subspace Emissary the character you choose to play as? It's very confusing and deserves time to unfold. (Zojo 23:09, 6 August 2007 (UTC))

Question regarding the FAQ

Wi-Fi is still unconfirmed to be in the game, isn't it? So why does the FAQ say that it does? Unless I somehow missed a major announcement, which I doubt. Disaster Kirby^Talk 19:51, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Good question. The only time I saw anything about Wi-Fi for Brawl, was in an old article on IGN, and they were just assuming. I think we should find a more up-to-date and reliable source that can confirm it. -- Powerslave^T_C 20:10, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

This was discussed above in topic 11. DurinsBane87 20:11, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh, whoops, I can't believe I overlooked that. But as that section points out, both of those sources are considered ancient, so whether they're still considered true or not is unsure. But let's not repeat that section over. Disaster Kirby^Talk 20:14, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

What about at the official website, Official Brawl Website androo123 20:09, August 7, 2007 (ET)

The official website is updated at a snail's pace (one update a day, two if we're extremely lucky), so if they were to even mention Wi-Fi capabilities (which they haven't on the site yet), it'll probably take a while before that update comes around. Either way, we currently don't know the status of the inclusion of the feature. Disaster Kirby^Talk 00:14, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Snail's pace? We're getting info at a good rate considering that we went a few months without any new info. BassxForte 00:16, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

fix'd. now back to patrolling for vandalism. FyreNWater 00:40, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

confirmed characters

i noticed that this website hasnt put sheik and ganondorf confirmed when in a interview the designer of the zelda series he said that he was called in to design ganondorf and sheik75.16.35.106 03:06, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

The interview said that he submitted the designs, it never even mentioned that Sakurai asked for them. This doesn't mean they will be used in the game. Leave them be until they are actually comfirmed by Sakurai. Depressio 03:19, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Even if they were to be featured in the game they might end up as assist trophy summons, which might be unlikely but AT's do add a new dimension to character addition potential. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.169.163.192 (talk • contribs)

MOTHER

I saw the new item from the Mother universe. Is this something in which we can be more sure about Ness's appereance?? Jeff Silvers 13:39, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Nope, at this point anything Mother-related character-wise is speculation. Remember, they were going to replace Ness with Lucas from MOTHER 3 in Super Smash Bros. Melee, but didn't because MOTHER 3 ended up being delayed. Now that MOTHER 3 is out in Japan, it's hard to guess what Nintendo is planning to put in Brawl that is MOTHER-related. Disaster Kirby^Talk 15:33, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Don't forget about the Flipper item in Melee. It was there, but Balloon Fighter was not. Granted, they planned on his presence, but in the end, he did not show up. The same thing might happen with the Mother Series here. You Can 't See Me! 18:23, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Clean Up "Characters"

I really think someone should clean up that section because it's just clutterd and a big mess. I was thinking maybe like this?

Mario: Info
Kirby: Info
Link: Info
And so on...

99.246.215.192 19:14, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

The article doesn't need a description of every single character. People can go to each specific character's own article if they want to read up on info about them. Disaster Kirby^Talk 19:17, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

The article acutally was like that at one point, although TTN got rid of it. BassxForte 19:18, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

It still needs at least a minor clean up (Same person with IP address just logged in)Robert Coombs 19:19, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

The amount of characters known by the time the game is released would be too large to do it as a list. It's okay as of now, maybe a bit of sweeping and tidying here and there, but for now its fine until the game is released. InsaneZeroG 19:27, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

A list might not be a bad idea just because of the fact that not all characters are returning. The list of characters isn't just growing, it's changing. (Zojo 23:06, 10 August 2007 (UTC))

A list is fairly unencyclopedic. Also, There's already one in Super Smash Bros. (series). - Zero1328 _Talk? 23:46, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree, there's NO reason to be so redundant. Any new info that can't be put on the characters page probably shouldn't be on wikipedia. DurinsBane87 23:53, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

If you want a list here, then we might as well have a list for the characters of the other two games on their respective pages as well, just go here and do what you want. BassxForte 23:51, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Why should there be lists on all three pages if there's already one on the series page? DurinsBane87 23:56, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Correct, just go to the link I provided and you have a character list right there, and you can expand it if you wish. BassxForte 23:59, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I misunderstood your meaning. DurinsBane87 00:00, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Wait, you thought I meant we should make a character list in this article? BassxForte 00:06, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

That is kinda what you said there. Anybody who reads it would read it like that. Joiz ^A. Shmo 01:38, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Well it's not what I meant. BassxForte 01:45, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

the characters will remain chaotic until everyone is released. that's just the way it works. now please lengthening the talk page! FyreNWater 07:20, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

How about create an article about the playable characters itself? Mr. Mario 192 09:32, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

That already exists. DurinsBane87 20:55, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

It does? Where? Unknownlight 03:24, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Here. -- POWERSLAVE

Mario, Link, Samus, Meta Knight, Pikachu, Donkey Kong, and so forth. Granted, some don't have pages, but that's because they're not notable enough on their own. You Can 't See Me! 03:32, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

they have sections on the character's main page. it's not notable enough to have a separate page just for Smash Bros info. if you wanna work on that, just go to the Smash Bros Wiki[2]. problem solved, now get back to work. FyreNWater 08:19, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Japanese Release Date and Wifi Battling

Now, CoroCoro is a very reliable magazine (which can be confirmed by most Pokemon fans). Should we consider this news? -Setherex 06:59, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

never heard of the site nor the mag. how do we know whether if it's true? at this point it's still speculation. just wait- Dojo!! will eventually release info. FyreNWater 08:16, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

What I mean by the reliability is that during the beginning of most of the Pokemon games, CoroCoro announced release dates / new mechanics / new Pokemon before anyone else. Should it be considered a reliable source in this situation? Setherex 16:44, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Release dates should wait for official confirmation, imo. Nifboy 17:07, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

If it's run in a magazine, it's pretty much official. CoroCoro's no less reliable than Famitsu, whom none of you would dispute.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 18:23, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

CoroCoro is definitely a reliable magazine source, per everything pokemon. Tinkleheimer 19:31, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

So, are we agreeing it's legit or... Setherex 17:05, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Sora Ltd.

It's really pretty likely that Sora is developing this game. Otherwise why would Masahiro-san be credited with (Sora, Ltd) next to his name on the DOJO site if Sora had no involvement? Probably better if we label the developer as either Sora or Nintendo rather than "The Studio" (w/c is likely Sora anyway.) Nintenboy01 01:31, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

We've been over this enough. Sora could be developing the game, but it's not confirmed. — Malcolm (talk) 01:33, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

I know, but it just seems rather awkward to have the sinister-sounding "The Studio" as the developer... Well, that's just my opinion. Nintenboy01 01:39, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

This has been argued out, and plenty of reasons have been given as to why he would put his name with sora. It's in the archives. But after lengthy discussion, we arrived at what it is now. DurinsBane87 02:25, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

[3] Acording to this article, Neither Sora nor Nintendo nor Hal Labs are devoloping the game. Instead it seems like they made a brand new studio made solely to make Smash Bros. Brawl. Just pointing it out. Unknownlight 03:38, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

If you look closely at the credits of the E3 2006 trailer, it says it's developed by HAL labs. →Pezzar 03:58, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

No, it gives HAL Labs copyright credit because HAL Labs created Smash Bros. --Guess Who 12:52, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Regarding Pokemon Trainer

Does the Category, Super Smash Bros. fighter fit under Red (Pokemon) or Pokemon Trainer? Also, where does the fighter info go? magiciandude (Talk) (review) 07:49, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

What do you mean by "fighter info"? I think it should go under Pokemon Trainer. The design shown is definitely Red, but the site refers to the character simply as "Pokemon Trainer". If labelled under Red, we're implying that it's that specific character from Red and Blue. - Zero1328 _Talk? 07:55, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

By "fighter info", I mean how there's an info that a "x" character appears in Brawl on their articles. magiciandude (Talk) (review) 07:57, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh, well, I would say Pokemon Trainer again, for the same reasons, mentioning that the design is similar to Red's design. - Zero1328 _Talk? 08:05, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Alright I can agree with that. :) Case closed. magiciandude (Talk) (review) 08:07, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

What if his costume changes allow him to become Lucas? or Gold? or the pokemon could change?Shouldn't go under Red untill release of alt costumes/release of game and he could have no other costumes. Beating a dead horse but still. Pine27 13:40, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

He neads his owin subsition. 69.202.119.212

He needs what? His own subsection? I'm sorry, but I highly doubt that anyone would agree to the article having a section for a single character in the game. A sentence describing how the character is controlled, maybe, but not a whole section. Disaster Kirby^Talk 17:18, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree that the Pokemon Trainer (now Red but could later change due to wardrobe options) should be explained in the article. He's a nonplayable character, but he'll be on the character select sceen. Really, for that list of Smash Bros. characters, you'll have to add Squirtle, Ivysaur, and Charizard as playable characters. (Zojo 17:38, 13 August 2007 (UTC))

Even though you play as Squirtle, Ivysaur, and Charizard, they still show Pokemon Trainer as the playable character. The pokemon are more of "his attacks". If you were to mention Pokemon Trainer in this article, you should not mention each of the pokemon as individual playable characters but just mention Pokemon Trainer as the character who uses Squirtle, Ivysaur, and Charizard to attack. Depressio 17:45, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Depressio, Squirtle, Ivysaur and Charizard are just attacks of Pokemon Trainer, so they do not count as playable characters. Im just confused at one part, do we control the pokemon or is it automatic?

1. Remember to sign your posts. 2. The character you play as is technically supposed to be the trainer, although what the player actually controls directly are the pokemon. BassxForte 18:39, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Technically, the player is controlling the Pokémon (attacks, jumping, etc.), but from a visual in-game standpoint, the Trainer is giving the Pokémon commands. In a sense, the player is effectively controlling the Trainer, who is controlling the Pokémon. Disaster Kirby^Talk 18:42, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

I also agree with Depressio as well due to two things. A. The character select screen is for Pokémon Trainer and his Pokémon are meant to be used as attacks, and B. His Pokémon meant to be used for different battle styles similar to the differences between Samus and Zero Suit Samus or Zelda and Shiek from the previous Smash Bros. game, but are used like interchangable equipment instead of a seperate character. -Adv193 18:58, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

The creators always said Melee had 26 characters. They counted Zelda and Shiek as 2 characters. So far, they're counting Samus and Zero-Suit Samus as 2 characters. They will absolutely count Pokemon Trainer as 3 characters! It took them just as much work to create Ivysaur as did Pit. I can absolutely guarantee that Squirtle, Ivysaur, and Charizard share none of the same moves except down special. In idea, yes, the Trainer is the one in control. But, technically it's 3 new characters and they should be written as such. (Zojo 22:42, 13 August 2007 (UTC))

jeez, technicalities. just write in new characters and stop flooding the talk page! FyreNWater 01:10, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually we do not we to mention EVERY new character, yes is exciting but not necissary in this article. And if the the creators intended for "Pokemon Trainer" to be 3 seprate characters there would 3 diffrent characters on the character's table, if the makers of the game is not enough to convince you, nothing will.

About the topic but more about Ivysaur really. Ivysaur is the first strictly quadrupedal character(sub-character whatever). Pikachu and pichu will occassionally run on all fours in Melee but only when running. Should a mention be put somewhere about this?Pine27 13:21, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

That's not really important enough to mention...-Sukecchi 14:04, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

On the Smash Bros. series character list, the 3 Pokemon should really be listed as characters and not Pokemon Trainer. And, yes, the official site has pokemon trainer on the table. To keep us waiting with all the updates, 3 of those will be specific profiles of Squirtle, Charizard, and Ivysaur. (Zojo 16:24, 14 August 2007 (UTC))

The site refers to trainer as the actual character. BassxForte 17:59, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

There's a difference between the Pokemon and the Trainer. The trainer is the one (sorry for speculation technically) who will be involved in the plot not his pokemon. THAT IS LIKELY BUT IS SPECULATION. At any rate, If the site lists him as 1 character he should be one character. Besides it is Pokemon Trainer. Name suggests more pokemon maybe/costumes maybe?(Speculation again, but there's really no other way to get the point across) Pine27 22:51, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

He's still a NPC. You can't run around and jump with the trainer. You can with the pokemon. Anyhow, if I can't convince anybody this section will end with this comment. (Zojo 22:59, 14 August 2007 (UTC))

The website lists the trainer as the character, not the pokemon. BassxForte 01:43, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I hope I'm not the only one who's wondering this, but...What would Pkmn Trainer's Final Smash be? In other words, since you only directly control Ivysaur, Charizard, and Squirtle, does that mean each has a different Final Smash, or do they share the same Final Smash? Also, if the former were to be true, would that mean that you could technically use three Final Smashes in one battle? I assume this would also apply to Samus / Zero-Suit Samus and (possibly) Zelda / Sheik.Leprechaun Gamer 03:14, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

If you read the note at the very top, it says that this is not the place to talk about that kind of stuff. Go to a forum or something for that, this is a place to talk about improving the article. - Zero1328 _Talk? 03:19, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

And this is also not the place to post speculation theories on anything including things that haven't been revealed yet. -Adv193 03:48, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

There are too many external links to Dojo

Wikipedia says that long lists of links are not appropriate and that they should be kept to a minimum. Wikipedia also says avoid linking to multiple pages from the same website, and there are multiple links to the Dojo in the Reference section of this article. Instead, Wikipedia says to find an appropriate linking page at the website, so the main page of the Dojo is sufficient.Tj terrorible1

Except that the info in each specifically linked page contains its own specific information that needs cited? A single reference to the site as a whole wouldn't cut it, because people might not know where exactly to look for the specific information that they are trying to find. Disaster Kirby^Talk 19:41, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

To clarify, those count as citations rather than external links. When it comes to citations, regular restrictions to external links do not apply, since citations need to be accurate and frequent in order to verify nearly every fact on the article. You Can 't See Me! 19:43, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

i've seen pages with a scrolling box for external links. can someone do that to make it neater? FyreNWater 22:15, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

No, see Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 June 11#Template:Scrollref for specific reasons. — Malcolm (talk) 22:25, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Just an idea, but instead of linking to individual stages, you could have each with the same citation to the stages page. This could work with characters too, or anything. Depressio 03:49, 15 August 2007 (UTC)