Talk:Super Smash Bros. Brawl/Archive 24

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 20

←

Archive 22

→

Toad

In the above link, we give an explanation on how Toad could be playable, but afterwards we say we don't want speculation. Even with the speculation rule being stated afterwards, it still seems that we are encourging them to speculate by giving an explanation on how Toad could be playable. Shouldn't this be changed???Claycrow 17:05, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

The FAQ exists in WP's talk space, and is not bound by the usual policies and guidelines for verification, original research, and speculation. The idea is that that FAQ is to help cut down excessive discussion that occurs on this talk page as to avoiding using this talk page as a forum about the game, instead of being a forum about how to improve the article. --MASEM 17:09, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

It still sounds wrong for Wikipedia. Claycrow 17:13, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

As long as it's not articlespace, it's fine. OR, speculation, verifiability, applies to article space. The FAQ is intended to help people editing articles. --Son 19:08, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Toad won't be playble, he's still one of Peach's attacks. 68.81.252.24 (talk) 18:52, 23 November 2007 (UTC)68.81.252.24

That could be a generic Toad

Besides, if there can't be more than just that Toad, how do you explane having 4 Mario's at once, things arnn't always that logical. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.165.49.236 (talk) 15:04, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Editing the Page

I gotta say, I'm kinda tired of this whole thing about 100% absolute verification on stuff, and all the things we have to leave off the page. There are plenty of articles on wikipedia that tell things such as that whole Ganondorf/Shiek design thing. I think we need a trivia column. Other articles have em, and it'd allow for more of the little things there isn't room for right now.

On another note, I feel some people are far too controlative about putting supposedly trivial info. The people who need this page the most aren't the guys who even know that there is a site for the game. All the info here can be found there anyway (kinda obsoleting the article). The people who need this page are the people who just learned about the game or took an intrest in it and want to know things like what's different and who's new. Why not have a list of NEW characters on this page? Just an idea. Seriously though, 1st paragraph, important.

Ragingtsunami726 03:05, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Other articles have them because they haven't been integrated or removed yet.DurinsBane87 03:34, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

WP:Trivia :) Trevor "Tinkleheimer" Haworth 03:07, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

^^ What he said. Trivia sections are discouraged under Wikipedia policy. Dengarde ► Complaints 04:32, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Ragingtsunami, I think this article is too toned down. Look at Mortal Kombat: Armageddon, it has all the characters listed and it has 63 characters, and it doesn't look cluttered. This page is too simple and the only information here can be found easily anywhere else. But if someones curious and doesn't now anything about it, they should be able to rely on wikipedia for a well-organized yet complete article on everything known about Super Smash Bros Brawl. They shouldn't have to search for information about SSBB outside of the SSBB page, and within that page, it should be easy to find.--Adam 05:11, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually, if they want to look for info on Brawl, they can just go to the Dojo!!. All of wikipedias info on the game comes from there or Nintendo anyways. Wikipedia is not a game guideDengarde ► Complaints 05:25, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

"...They shouldn't have to search for information about SSBB outside of the SSBB page..." Yeah, they should. We're not your one-stop shop for information on the given subject -- we're just the first stop :) Coreycubed 12:25, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

WP:Trivia is a guideline, not a policy. Small trivia sections are okay; large trivia sections should be merged into the article. Also, by using WP:NOT, are you suggesting that the MK: Armageddon violates Not a game guide? Because, I don't. A game guide would be telling you step-by-step how to play through the game. --Son 13:20, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

We dont have to put all the new characters, thats why we already have them in the Super Smash Bros. Series article. Atomic Religione 13:23, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Failed "good article" nomination

Upon its review on November 2, 2007, this good article nomination was quick-failed because it:

has been the subject of recent ongoing edit wars or is the subject of a future event

thus making it ineligible for good article consideration.

This article did not receive a thorough review, and may not meet other parts of the good article criteria. Future video games, films, buildings and events in general cannot become GAs due to stability issues. For example, once the game is released, there is going to need to be a whole section on "Reception" that will need to be added. I encourage you to remedy this problem (and any others) and resubmit it for consideration. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to a Good article reassessment. Thank you for your work so far.— Cheers, CP 15:18, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Someone should nominate it again, but after the game has been released and additional further details are available to help handle the structure of this article. My personal judgement is that it was too early to nominate it for GA assessment since there are still a lot of details that need to be found first. -Adv193 —Preceding comment was added at 01:16, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, the peer review request was probably all we needed, honestly. Arrowned 02:06, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Krystal

I know this has been discussed already, but I found an excellent source. It was noted in Jeux-France that the VA of Krystal confirmed her appereance on Brawl on her site. It even gets to another source showing this. If you want the translation, press on the Babelfish English Translation on the page. Before you dissagree, please check the site. I would be waiting for your opinions. --Mr.Mario 192 20:16, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

That matters little. As has also been discussed earlier, even if she does turn out to be in the game, besides being added to the (series) character table (if she's playable), neither that article nor this one would change. Arrowned 20:23, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Why don't you ever give links or sources to anything you bring up? That would help a lot. -Sukecchi 20:25, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

First of all, I don't know how to do that. Second, then may I add to the SSB Series table of PC? She confirmed it as one. --Mr.Mario 192 20:27, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

[http://www.Wikipedia.com Wikipedia]=Wikipedia. Just follow that formatting. Second, no, not untill we actually see what your talking about and determine if you're right.Dengarde ► Complaints 20:30, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

And anyway, if Jeux-France is just talking about her website, then I can tell you from having seen the website myself when the reference was there (she's since removed it, assumedly at Nintendo's request) that all it said was Krystal was in the game. She could just be an assist trophy, especially since this same woman is voicing Knuckle Joe, who we know is just an assist trophy. Until it shows up at Dojo or someone high up in Nintendo confirms her playability, there's no point in adding her. Arrowned 20:32, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

<ec with Arrowned>What he said. She also confirmed that she's voicing Knuckle Joe, yet he's not a playable character, he's an Assist Trophy. Just because it was listed on her site for a very short amount of time, that doesn't mean Krystal is a confirmed playable character, simply that she's in the game. Dengarde ► Complaints 20:36, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Like this? Jeux-France --Mr.Mario 192 20:38, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Exactly. Now, I can't even read French, but it seems that Jeux-France is just stating what they saw on her site. Which didn't confirm much, and was eventually removed. Dengarde ► Complaints 20:40, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Excatly has Dengarde said. What little French I know, and what cognates I can bring out, it states the same as the site. Trevor "Tinkleheimer" Haworth 20:41, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Click on the Babelfish English Translation link on the page. And thank you very much Dengrade. --Mr.Mario 192 20:52, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Bablefish states the exact same thing. That she announces the presence of Krystal in Brawl. Which, it does not anymore. And even if it did, still no proof if she's an assist trophy/playable character/Subspace extra or whatever. Dengarde ► Complaints 21:00, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

I must agree with dengarde. He's right theres no official proof, and if there was, the dojo would have been first to confirm that. Mr.Mario, i'm sorry but you seem a bit childish to persist so much effort into proving this.

SSBB name in Japan.

To the people arguing about the name: State what other names the game goes by. Do not put "Super Smash Brothers Brawl (Japanese Name)" as that would infer that the Japanese name is a translation, when it is not. Please state the Japanese name in a separate sentence. (Ex. "Super Smash Brothers Brawl is a game. In Japan the game is called Whatever (Japanese characters here)") This format holds true to most other video games released in different countries.

Also, about the caption under the Pit and Mario picture... List the characters in order as they appear from left to right so that any newcomers may not become confused, so put it as "Pit and Mario...". Kalidascorp 00:51, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

We've run into a similar problem over at the Super Mario Galaxy article. Since there's no official consensus on how Japanese names should be handled, we've been working on a proposal for the video game article guidelines. The current proposal is to include the Japanese name when it differs sufficiently (i.e. it is not a transliteration) of the English name, but we have yet to hammer out how exactly it should be presented. One of the participant in the discussion pointed out the recent edit war on this topic over at this article, so I dropped by to let you know that it's being worked on and invite anyone interested in participating in the discussion to do so here. --jonny-mt^(t)_(c)Tell me what you think! 08:51, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Should we add that there is a dojo for the information?

Maybe we should say that Sakurai has a blog for the information on ssbb.--Smashbrosboy 00:41, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Uh, we know that, and, it does. Dengarde ► Complaints 00:42, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Was the oversized font really necessary? Why not make it normal size?--Clyde (talk) 02:33, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Super Smash Bros. Brawl/FAQ

On the Super Smash Bros. Brawl/FAQ, should we add a small section, about how even though the voice actor for Krystal, has accidentally shown that Krystal is in Brawl in some form, it may not be a playable character? (66.203.32.62 15:42, 6 November 2007 (UTC))

Good call, I will add it now. Trevor "Tinkleheimer" Haworth 16:01, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Items

Shouldn't there be mention in the article that some weapons have changed appearance and ability? If a characters change in appearance is note worthy, then in theory that applies to items too, e.g. the beam sword has changed from purple to blue, and now has even longer reach. **BM** 18:20, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

No. We don't need a list of items or anything like that. Characters are important. Items are not. -Sukecchi 18:41, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, it's just an item..not like it completely changes the game. (66.203.32.62 19:42, 6 November 2007 (UTC))

I believe it would be worthwhile to say that some returning items have changed, and then put an example or two, such as the longer beam sword. However, it does not need it's own section, so we should integrate it into another. Kalidascorp 22:42, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

OK, I integrated it into the Gameplay section, the last paragraph. Kalidascorp 22:49, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I think it has been removed for some reason, I don't know why, but what you had wrote did sound about right. I am not argueing for a list or table of items, just acknowledgement that returning items have changed appearance and ability e.g. like I said before, the beam sabre is now blue instead of purple, and has longer reach. **BM** 12:51, 8 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by BM-1988 (talk • contribs)

So it's a little longer and a different color. Hardly notable, even in th game. DurinsBane87 14:57, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

It is not notable because of its features, but because it has changed from the last game. Because Link has changed design/appearance along with other characters, it is notable. Therefore if an item changes appearance from the last game, it should be notable too. I am not asking for anything big, hey I could just add a sentence, but it would be deleted like Kalidascorp's comment. Just something saying although many items have returned from the last game, some like the beam sword have changed in appearance. **BM** 17:48, 8 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by BM-1988 (talk • contribs)

There's a huge notability difference between a playable character who stars in multiple games and a single weapon with slight appearance changes. DurinsBane87 17:51, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

It's not a single item which has changed. If you even bothered to read through the page cited, you would see that the update states that many returning items have been refurbished. I'm not listing every one, I'm just mentioning it in the article, or else newcomers would believe it was always like this. The item itself isn't notable. The general change among many items is. Kalidascorp 22:32, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I did read it, I read EVERY update. They're very slight changes on nonnotable items. DurinsBane87 22:42, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

The changes are notable, the items are not. The solution is to state in one easy sentence that some returning items have been changed. We are not listing every change which has occurred, we are just generalizing the fact, which is what should be done, especially to facts such as these. While a single change to a single item does not need to be mentioned, the combined weight of many returning items becoming refurbished makes the fact notable. Kalidascorp 23:43, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

That sounds perfectly fine to me. A sentence is all we need.Satoryu 23:58, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

rayquaza, should we add some mention of him in the FAQ?

I am afraid that people will jump to a conclusion and consider him a boss. Fangz the Wolf 17:39, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

They already have, but I don't think it's caused enough of a problem to warrant a section in the FAQ.Dengarde ► Complaints 17:47, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

It is still unknown if rayquaza is a boss or not we should wait for more updates on dojo before saying anything about it.--DarkFierceDeityLink 18:07, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

That is why I don't want people to jump to conclusions, we can't confirm or deny Rayquaza as a boss. I want to prevent speculation. Fangz the Wolf 12:40, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

If you go to Supersmashbros.com and go to movies, there is something called "fox's misfortion" and Rayquaza attacks diddy kong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.223.130.222 (talk) 22:30, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

We all have already see that, but we are not complete sure if he will be a npc boss or just some fancy element to make the video more "interesant" jo JOOO jo.--Fandangox (talk) 01:46, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

DOJO confirmation of release date.

I'm surprised no one added it. So I did. Telemachus Claudius Rhade 16:02, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

It's already mentioned in the info box. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sukecchi (talk • contribs)

And a second time in the article =\ Dengarde ► Complaints 16:07, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

you Missed something!!

didn't you guys see the ubdate on October 29 about the Stage Builder? Its important!! Ivyluv 02:08, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, we saw it, and it's in there. DurinsBane87 02:10, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Here's the quote "Brawl also allows players to create their own stages using a variety of options in a mode called Stage Builder. The editors can save their stages onto an SD card to overcome the limitations of the internal memory. Players can also send their stages to friends they have registered on their friends list. Through Nintendo Wi-Fi Connection, players will be able to submit their creations daily to Nintendo, and receive a daily stage from the service.[16]" DurinsBane87 02:11, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I can't believe I'm saying this...

but this article should be protected. There are so many vandals around this article, and there really is'nt much we need to add.Green Kirby 23:11, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I put in a request, it got accepted. Page is protected for 35 days. Dengarde ► Complaints 04:28, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

For future reference, one can request protection at requests for page protection, as Dengarde did. This page was semi-protected to deal with vandalism (preventing IPs and accounts less than four days old from editing). This allows regular contributors to continue to edit the article, an approximation of our "anyone can edit" motto. More is explained at the protection policy page. Cheers.--chaser - t 04:56, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Characters

Considering we have SO many arguements about examples and notable things in the section, I'm in favor of wipeing the whole section out intirely, and only leaving the link. Thoughts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Claycrow (talk • contribs) 12:59, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

It may be argued over alot, but the section gives information that the table does not. Such as the inclusion of 3rd party characters and more reprensintives of 1st and 2nd party games, along with the characters design being changed. The table just gives names, games and seires of origin.→041744 13:32, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I've changed it (and shortly thereafter reverted) to be like Super Smash Bros. Melee, which gives the number of characters in the game. I think if it should change, it should be something like that. --Son 13:48, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

The number of characters is something worth noting, once it is final. But now? I don't think so.--Henke37 10:50, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I wholeheartedly agree. -- Comandante42 (talk) 21:35, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Honestly, this whole page is going to be renovated when the game comes out, anyways. We'll have a whole new wave of editors with something to say about the final product. -- Coreycubed (talk) 22:29, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Remember though, www.smashbros.com is the OFFICIAL website of the upcoming ssb brawl game. The only stuff that is 100% confirmed and true about the game, such as new characters, levels and features, will be shown on this site. Therefore, you can look forward to anything updated on the site. If there are "updates" on other unofficial sites, it can only be considered plausible. Therefore, it is possible that the characters mentioned on other sites could be included in brawl, but it is not a 100% guarantee so don't get your hopes up too quickly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.237.193.235 (talk • contribs)

With all due respect, that has nothing to do with this current discussion. We weren't talking about legit source of character announcements; we were talking about the layout of the table in the article. Arrowned (talk) 19:32, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Spectator mode?

Should something be added for the Spectator Mode in the Dojo update today? If not a whole paragraph/subsection, then at least a small description under the Wi-Fi Connection section?96.232.12.189 (talk) 23:57, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I have added a few sentences under Wi-Fi Connection. Please check again in the collectables section also. Someone else has added something about it there too. --Smashbrosboy (talk) 00:27, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

It was already mentioned. Next time, read a little more carefully.Satoryu (talk) 02:13, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes I know but it is a Wi-Fi connection feature and needs to be added there. Please check the update in question.--Smashbrosboy (talk) 04:06, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

FAQ

Well there's no FAQ talk page. Why don't we remove the Krystal section too, it was only talking about weather or not something that keeps on being disscussed over on the Brawl pages should be explained. Claycrow (talk) 15:35, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Really, the FAQ is not something to obsess over. Fox example, the "Kid Icarus" section was probably relevant at one point, but I don't really see it being an issue now. Try to focus on improving other articles instead of worrying about a non-article such as the FAQ. Coreycubed (talk) 15:41, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Training Mode

Should we add at least a small mention of this mode? I was thinking that one or two sentances would be enough, since it's not really that important...and I'd add it myself if I didn't suck when it comes to ecyclopedic-style writing.(Eternum123 (talk) 15:51, 20 November 2007 (UTC))

It's not important enough to mention. There's nothing new to it. It's the same as it's always been. We don't need to mention everything. -Sukecchi (talk) 18:00, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

It wasn't mentioned on the Melee page, so there's no reason to mention it here.Satoryu (talk) 19:19, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Still....it would help largen the article. - User:Mark Alvarez —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.65.112.15 (talk) 19:31, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

That's not a good reason. Adding info for the sake of making the article longer is not what we do at Wikipedia.Satoryu (talk) 19:49, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Good point, Satoryu. Then again, Training Mode may have some new features....but that's something we won't know until next year. Don't you just hate vandals? Some guy just decided to erase all the text from the article..and replace it with "I hate User:Dicklyon so much!"....I just love that little "undo" button.(Eternum123 (talk) 15:03, 21 November 2007 (UTC))

Saki Amamiya

On the Brawl Website, the second-newest update says that Saki Amamiya is featured in this game. Is he just some obscure assist trophy, or (God forbid) is he an actual playable character? 'Cause I don't think someone can get more obscure and unrecognizable than that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.180.85.70 (talk) 16:15, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Pay attention to the icons. He is an assist trophy. -Sukecchi (talk) 16:31, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

You know how you could find out? READ THE ACTUAL WORDS, don't just look at the pictures.→041744 17:36, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Calm down there. So he's an idiot, that doesn't mean you can yell at him. If you knew his other info, maybe, but not here. InsaneZeroG (talk) 17:43, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Dude, Sin & Punishment is one of the greatest games I've ever played, and it's definetaly the greatest shooter I own for the N64 (even if I did buy it on the VC). And it's ridiculous to say that an obscure character doesn't deserve to be in the game. I'd never heard of Lucas until he was announced for Brawl, and yet I've no problems with his inclusion. If you don't like a character, suck it up. Luigi "Kurai" III (talk) 15:15, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Y'know, Wikipedians are about as fun as cancer. I'm not being biased or anything. It's not like I'm saying Sin and Punishment is a bad game. I'm just saying, at least with Lucas and Ike they actually have a series, even if it's only in Japan. Sin and Punishment is a single game. That's it. But none of that matters, as long as Saki is not a playable character. 72.88.64.151 (talk) 18:29, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Uhh...you guys could calm down just a tad. OK, the easiest way to tell a character update and an assist trophy update apart is that the character updates' pictures have a blue background, while the assist trophies' pictures are plain white in the back. Simple as that. It COULD help to look at the icons and browse the words a little bit, but don't sweat it, we all make mistakes. 24.186.101.182 (talk) 18:40, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Playable characters have red backgrounds and items (Assist Trophies) have yellow backgrounds. Blue backgrounds are How To Play updates. Shyrangerr (talk) 01:28, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

He meant the background of the character image, not the actual post.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 01:37, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I see that now. Shyrangerr (talk) 23:03, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Possible Character Roster Reveal

Okay so this is of of a forum, but hear me out! It's linked from CoroCoro and they say that the entire of Brawl will be revealed on Dec. 15th OR just the starting line up. I link to the forum because of a rough translation. But if you want to confirm go ahead and fire that Babelfish up.

Link! http://smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=127033 66.133.193.216 (talk) 23:42, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't trust anything on a fourm, blog or other user submited community (including wikipedia) without a credeible primary or secondary source.→041744 01:55, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, it is originally from CoroCoro. Our IP friend linked to Smashboards because it has a translation. Keep this in mind, but there's no reason to mention any of this on the article until the issue is released, if this proves to be true.Satoryu (talk) 02:28, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

I was afraid this would get to Wikipedia. I visited CoroCoro's website and found their preview for next month's magazine stating that "all characters" will be discussed. Nothing further; anything else is speculation. Here's what it says:

http://corocoro.tv/image/next/200801/pickup03text.jpg King Dedede was finally revealed! We'll have a definitive issue commenting on all the characters from the soon to be released "Smash Bros. Brawl"!! If we talk about any of the details now, we'd run out of things talk about on our website next month. So, for those of you without time machines, stay excited and wait until next month!!*kaburicho (talk) 17:39, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Cover of Nintendo of Europe official magazine [for FAQ]

The cover of the new issue to the NOE official magazine could easily be mistaken for a new boxart, but if you actually examine it, you can see that someone just took the boxart and the images from the DOJO!! and had fun with Photoshop. Should something be added to the FAQ? Luigi "Kurai" III (talk) 15:19, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

No, because the real box art already exists. --Son (talk) 20:13, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

That's not what I meant. People WILL mistake this for the boxart. We should state in the FAQ that it isn't. Luigi "Kurai" III (talk) 22:34, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I thought the same, it should be added to the FAQ.--R-RockMan.EXE (talk) 22:56, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

I propose that instead of people saying "people will ask this so lets put it int the FAQ." lets actually wait for people to ask it, everyone might have more common sense than we give them credit for.→041744 14:38, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Hope for common sense and you'll just be disappointed :P Though that said, FAQs are Frequently Asked Questions, not Speculatively Asked Questions. -masa ♫ 21:05, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Even though no one has asked it yet, I think it should be covered in the FAQ anyway, as sort of a pre-emptive move. -- POWERSLAVE 21:46, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

As said before "Frequently Asked Questions". No one has asked about it so far so there isn't any reason to add it to the FAQ. Shyrangerr (talk) 01:24, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

If you use logic, yes no-one has asked it yet, hence making it a unfrequent question. But preparing in advance may avoid a lot of headache for users in the future. **BM** 09:31, 26 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by BM-1988 (talk • contribs)

Agreed -- POWERSLAVE 12:06, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree too.--R-RockMan.EXE (talk) 22:55, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

People have asked it. Being a member of Smashboards, you see a lot of idiots. Luigi "Kurai" III (talk) 00:11, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Musicians

should the statement in the opening blurb be updated from 36 to 37 due to the knowledge presented in today's "Donky Kong" music update? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.195.11.81 (talk) 19:35, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes it should. I'll get right to that.Satoryu (talk) 20:37, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

But the site's musician list still says there are 36 musicians, so we should either reference the Donkey Kong post, or change it back to 36. --(trogga) 23:18, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

The Dojo list has now been updated with Tanaka. LordRM (talk) 05:51, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Wario's "New" Final Smash

Well if you go to dojo there is an update on Warios Final Smash. He becomes wario man... wasn't his original smash a "Nukclear" Fart bomb shown in the original video? Should we keep note of that in the FAQ?"Thats Mama Luigi to you" (talk) 12:46, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Nope, that "fart nuke" was afaik just a chargable special move. ~ Felcis (talk) 13:10, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

It was speculated that Wario's FS was the Atomic Fart, but that was never confirmed anywhere.Satoryu (talk) 14:32, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually didnt the guy whos making ssbb (cant remember name) said that it was a final smash way before when the video was released?
Oh i just say. yes it is a chargable attack. But i did remember the guy saying it was a final smash way before..."Thats Mama Luigi to you" (talk) 21:26, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Nope. Speculated.Satoryu (talk) 21:28, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

The old website said the nuclear fart move was tentatively being called the "Wario Waft", which ended up being the name and function of his Down B attack. Most people just assumed the Wario Waft would have been a final smash because it was so huge in the trailer. - Joshua368 (talk) 22:47, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Event Mode

Should we talk a little more than that one sentence provided from today's update? Blood dripping on the ground 18:31, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Since when did we become a Dojo mirror? I wish people wouldn't start having seizures if we don't include a full write-up of every update. There are other sites for that. For what I hope is the last time, if it's not notable, it doesn't belong on the page. Why is the return of Event mode so notable? Coreycubed (talk) 18:41, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

For one thing, it was one of the biggest single player modes in Melee, and half of the unlockables were obtained through it. Blood dripping on the ground 19:08, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I think it is an important mode, and now events have difficulties.--R-RockMan.EXE (talk) 22:07, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Being important in Melee dosn't nessicarly mean it will be important in this game.→041744 22:35, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

"I think it is an important mode" does not make it important. The article on Melee mentions the mode only once in passing. Again, I ask you to assert its notability before trying to justify adding any more info regarding the mode to the article. Coreycubed (talk) 23:15, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. If it wasn't mentioned on the Melee page in detail, there's no real reason to mention it here either. It's not particularly notable anyway. And as it stands, the blurb does kind of stick out, and it doesn't fit well with the other paragraphs. I'm alright with deleting it.Satoryu (talk) 00:00, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I wish we wouldn't all use the Melee article as a role model for the Brawl article. The Melee article is less than perfect... ♣ Powerslave 01:50, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

The fact that the Melee article doesn't mention the Events mode suggests to me that the Melee article is flawed. Oh by the way, is the Melee article a GA or FA? Last I checked, it's still a B-class. So lets not be saying, if it's not in the Melee article, then it shouldn't be in the Brawl article... (see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS on that one.) That aside, the Event Mode should be mentioned in this article (and Melee, for that matter) and explained what it is. That would make the article more complete. Dojo explains what it is, so we can simplify that here in this article and provide links to the Dojo blog on the Event mode. Once the game is released, we can give a more detailed description of the mode, and whether or not characters can be unlocked. (And, by the way, this same thing should be in the Melee article, since the game's been out for years now.)

And one other thing. Instead of spending all day focusing on Brawl, how about getting Smash and Melee to a GA, A, or FA class article? --Son 04:38, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Was all that directed at me? Because if so, I said the Melee article is not perfect and shouldn't be used as a template for this article. If not, sorry. ♣ Powerslave 20:05, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

No. It's directed at other people. --Son 23:12, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

The only noteable difference that can be put it in this article is to state is that the Event mode has been updated to feature a new difficulty setting. Although the picture from DOJO does have supporting evidence and we can use a sourced link [1], the key issue is the full mechanics on any further upgrades to the Events mode or any further details on how the diffculty system works which is something to support on not putting up event mode yet, until those details have been found. But one thing is clear any upgrade to Event mode that would make it different form Melee is Noteable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.59.237.110 (talk • contribs)

No, not ANY difference. That would be like "And differences Brawl has from Melee is notable", and that would just mean spamming the page when ANY update comes up on the Dojo. We're not gonna do thatDengarde ► Complaints 18:15, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Did you also ignore my comment of wait until further details are found before adding to the page if necessary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.59.237.110 (talk) 02:42, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Add

Why can't we just add the new stuff that is happing to brawl and not the old for ex the friend list etc?--DarkFierceDeityLink 21:30, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

WP:N. Not everything that shows up on Dojo, regardless of when it appeared, is notable/important enough to be mentioned in the article. That said, the friend list/non-Wii-code thing probably is noteworthy enough to get a mention. Arrowned 21:34, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure about that. Brawl requiring its own codes seems pretty trivial to me.Satoryu 22:41, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Besides it would be better to wait until the game is released then that would be the right time to carefully add the details that are deemed necessary. -71.59.237.110 16:09, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Apparently, the game has a different Wii Friends List —Preceding unsigned comment added by Krnassassin190 (talk • contribs) 23:27, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

It uses both the Wii System Friend Code and the game's own friend code. --HeaveTheClay (talk) 23:30, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

This is true. However, is this noteworthy enough to be included in the article? I believe not; it seems rather trivial.Satoryu (talk) 00:07, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Released?

Has the game been released? Some guy took a picture of his copy; it looks pretty real.

http://img155.imageshack.us/img155/1346/1196721236257aa55a6et7.jpg --Monthlyside1 18:09, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Dis looks shooped. I can tell by the lazor, and from shoopin a few whoops in my time. Coreycubed 18:18, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

That's not real. All the person did was print out a picture of the box art put in the Wii case and proabaly got one of his friends who works at EB games to get him a fake recite. I used to do it all the time to my sister when she wanted a game i also wanted for a prank.--DarkFierceDeityLink 18:19, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Also he/she has a pen right near him/her he/she could of checked it him/her self and half and im pretty sure Dojo would of told us that the game was released.--DarkFierceDeityLink 18:24, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Look at the angle of the box. It was taken so that you can't see the side title on the binding. Definately not real. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.201.63.107 (talk) 21:35, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Fake. The guy who took this picture even told us how he did it. He printed out the Brawl cover and put it in the box. As for the recite, It's actually for Rayman Raving Rabbids (Rayman R/R), Photoshoped to Super S/B. Pure fake. Dengarde ► Complaints 23:23, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Look at it

Look at the picture carefully didn't Masahiru Sakurai say that the game was rated E for All? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.233.71.119 (talk) 00:08, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

E for All is an entertainment expo from October 18-21 that a demo of Brawl was playable at; he wasn't talking about the ESRB rating (which is "E", standing for "Everyone"). The game is rated T, as noted on Nintendo.com. Arrowned (talk) 00:16, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Further, Japan does not have the same letter ratings as the ESRB does (There is no "T" rating in CERO; it would instead be "B" or (more likely, given the cultural disparity) "A"). Remember that Sakurai is Japanese. -Jéské ^{(Blah v^_^v)} 00:44, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but he does have a translator, but point taken. --(trogga) 19:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm surprised we never mentioned this confusion in the FAQ.Satoryu (talk) 02:38, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I'll add it. -Jéské ^{(Blah v^_^v)} 02:41, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

And done! -Jéské ^{(Blah v^_^v)} 02:49, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Stevo1000's edits under development

If you look at the history he's been inserting nothing but his personal vendetta against Nintendo, with words like 'contempt' being used. Not to mention he yet again mentioned delay in his recent edit.

He was rash and removed mine and another editor's edits without merit. Without. Any. Merit.

He hasn't backed up his reasoning for his edits and I would like a few of you to discuss which version should stay, as for now, I strongly disagree with the mention of delay. The game had an unknown release date from the start. Early 2008 could be interpreted in different ways, so lay off that please. --HeaveTheClay (talk) 22:55, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Nothing more than a cursory mention of the game's release date in Europe is necessary; unlike the Americas and Japan, they had not issued a concrete release date prior to today's announcement. Coreycubed (talk) 22:59, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

He's at it again. One would think this type of behavior is disruptive. --HeaveTheClay (talk) 23:01, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Europe Release Date Delayed?

http://www.videogamer.com/news/06-12-2007-7051.html

http://gonintendo.com/?p=30984

Not sure though on it's validity, but it seems like we've already added a source and changed the release date of Europe on the article. What to do?

Zanibas (talk) 01:36, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Replace "We" with "Stevo" - all the edits in regards to the European release date, save for an OR revert by me and some tidying by another editor, fall squarely on him. -Jéské ^{(Blah v^_^v)} 01:43, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't aware that a European date was announced. I thought it was Japan and North America that was announced. --Son (talk) 02:02, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Nor was I. -Jéské ^{(Blah v^_^v)} 02:26, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Hang on. Are we sure that this is official?69.131.152.173 (talk) 02:39, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I just brought it up to avoid people editing it so hastily! As of now, we should take it with a grain of salt, just like when multiple sources said "Geno Announced!". Zanibas (talk) 04:17, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Sources actually said Geno was announced? Last I heard, Square Enix had the rights to him and Mallow. -Jéské ^{(Blah v^_^v)} 05:05, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

He's referring to this, which is announced rumor, sure. Arrowned (talk) 05:09, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I was in no way implying it was official. I was just pointing out Geno and Mallow, despite being in SMRPG:LotSS, are third-party. -Jéské ^{(Blah v^_^v)} 05:19, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I was referring to certain sources (I forgot them already =/) that stated "Geno will be announced toninght on the DOJO!". All I'm implying is that we should take everything that comes from a "general source" with caution. Zanibas (talk) 06:32, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Seems reliable enough. Note that Melee wasn't released in Europe until a half a year after its Japan launch as well.--SeizureDog (talk) 10:34, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't think Nintendo Europe is that mad. But gamespot did ask a representative and they received word that TBD is the best info for EU.--62.20.210.130 (talk) 13:35, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

New Page

Should there be a new page, with a link to it on the brawl page, about the pokeball pokemon and assist trophies. It could provide information about who the characters are, what they do in brawl, and other information. I myself came to wikipedia several times to look up the assist trophy characters, because I did not know who devil, little mac, or saki amamiya were. A page that links to these characters' profiles or games would be very useful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.15.40.2 (talk • contribs)

The Super Smash Bros. Brawl article does not need to have a link to those pages. If you had done a search on Wikipedia for "little mac", for example, you would have found out who he is. Additionally, many of the characters features in Assist Trophies are a bit esoteric; not all of them are going to be notable enough to have their own Wikipedia page or section. As for their function in Brawl, a collection of information would amount to little more than a game guide, which is not appropriate for Wikipedia. A small section on the character's page would be enough (such as with Little Mac's page). Coreycubed (talk) 20:34, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn't made to go that in depth. Use The Smash Wiki for that kind of stuff, you'll see they generally have very short articles for each.
Blind man shady 15:29, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

T Rated

Where was it announed that the game was rated T for Teen. It was not on a Dojo update, and as it was stated numerous times by numerous people, only dojo updates provide canon information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.15.40.2 (talk) 21:55, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[2] Dojo is not the only place that provides trustworthy, canon information. Arrowned (talk) 21:59, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Rotation

Is this mode really worth mentioning? It doesn't seem too notable to me. Satoryu (talk) 19:10, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you theres nothing really good about it.--DarkFierceDeityLink 19

17, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Three's company. Shall I get out my Gray Mauler friend to rip it off the page? -Jéské ^{(Blah v^_^v)} 19:17, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, let's do that.Satoryu (talk) 20:21, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

[Indent reset] If the article is ever going to achieve GA or FA status, there should be some mention of it in the article. --Son (talk) 20:32, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

For what reason? InsaneZeroG (talk) 20:43, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I disagree, Son. Remember that we don't have to include everything we know. What's really stopping us from getting GA status is that the game isn't out yet so all the information is kind of volatile. Powerslave 21:32, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I am aware that not everything from the dojo needs adding to the article, but this is a mode that was not available on melee, so is it not worth adding at least a sentence? **BM** 00:17, 12 December 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by BM-1988 (talk • contribs)

Wrong; Melee's tournament mode had an option for a "Winners/Losers Out" match, where the winner or loser of a contest dropped out and handed it over to the next person. -Jéské ^{(Blah v^_^v)} 00:21, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

[Indent reset] There is no way this article would make GA if the game was released right now. (Side note: In the attempts at writing this article, we've been trying to parallel Super Smash Bros. and Super Smash Bros. Melee and both of those articles are B-class, not GA, A, or FA class. Those games have been out for years.) By excluding the fact that up to 16 people can rotate in play is leaving out a basic fact of the game. We don't have to put everything, but that means stuff like every character in the game, the credits of the developers, the list of composers of music. --Son (talk) 01:30, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Good point. I'll add it back in.Satoryu (talk) 03:16, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Credits can we add

sources --DarkFierceDeityLink 20:56, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I removed that gigantic list...not necessary...and Gamefaqs is also made up of user submitted data, we can't use anything like that...nor would we want to...we don't have a list like that anyway...nor do we need one. -Sukecchi (talk) 21:09, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Not to mention we've already had multiple discussions on not adding the barrage of composers to the article in any form. Plus, short of games from the 80's that only had a working staff of five people anyways, video game articles on Wikipedia don't list the full staff from the credits. Arrowned (talk) 21:20, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Replacing Image

Is is okay if I replace the screenshot from the E3 06 trailer with the current character screen shot from Dojo!! ? Magiciandude (talk) 04:16, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Which one? --(trogga) 04:21, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Replace http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ssbbrawl3.jpg with http://www.smashbros.com/en_us/gamemode/wi-fi/images/wi-fi04/wi-fi04_071207d.jpg. I feel that it should be replaced because:

It is updated
It is an actual screenshot
It shows more of a roster
It gives a general idea what the character select screen looks like

Magiciandude (talk) 04:27, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

I say wait till the full character select screen is revealed. Then we'll use that.Satoryu (talk) 06:11, 12 December 2007 (UTC)