Talk:Super Smash Bros. Brawl/Archive 17

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. 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 17


Contents

Bowser

Well, Bowser is in Brawl. Lets add it to the article. Unknownlight 14:05, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I added him HOURS before you posted this, if you haven't noticed >_> Dengarde 14:25, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

The only thing notable really, is that Sakurai stated in the Bowser page that there will be returning characters, including Bowser, that will be somewhat different in terms of moves/controls/abilities than how they were in Melee. I think. magiciandude (Talk) (review) 16:19, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

In the melee article they do not list all the characters or give any descriptions of them because of the link to the table of playable characters, this has all been discussed on a different page people, So that should apply to this page too.→041744 04:21, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Ok, adding him is fine the way it is. But let's not add anymore! We don't need to mention every last char on this aritcle. Say Luigi is the next one to be revealed and he comes a little redefined. Let's not add him to that list. We don't want it to get too long.
The only characters we should be adding to any list on this page is newcomer characters, such as Pit. --Son 21:14, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

List the characters?

Excuse me myselfalso, but what characters should be included in the article?
All confirmed characters. Duh. Quatreryukami 06:01, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Actually, not "Duh" because several editors, including myself, feel that it isn't necesary to list the characters because of the character table that we provide a link to. DurinsBane87 06:32, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
That is what was done in the melee article, no characters listed becuase of the link to the table.→041744 13:12, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

[Indent reset]No, not all confirmed characters. We don't need a list of every character in the game in this article. That's what the (series) article is for. My suggestion is to include a few of the recently confirmed characters and a list of newcomer characters. I suggest the newcomers because that's new information unique to this game in particular. So far, we've got Pit, Meta Knight, Wario, Zero-Suit Samus and Solid Snake. That should be listed. Then we add that not all of the characters from the prior games have been announced to return, and of those some such as Bowser and Zelda are returning. When a newcomer is announced we add it to the list; when a returning character is announced, we replace it Zelda with Bowser and Bowser with the returning character. --Son 13:36, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

He's right. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.172.92.171 (talk • contribs)
In other words, we should have only 2 returning chars mentioned and when a new one is announced we get rid of one and add the new one. 68.195.110.145 16:07, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Yes. --myselfalso 17:46, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

no i still agree with list every character i mean what if people think zelda got tossed if they replace him with bowser and they dont go to the series section!

Can I get a citation here?

I'm guessing there is a reference that is an interview with Masahiro Sakurai (he is mentioned a lot), but the first and last paragraphs of inclusion of characters are without any citations, which means they border on speculation. I'm hoping the reference is there, so it probably just needs to be included in those spots. Anyone know what I'm talking about?--Clyde (talk) 15:13, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Wii Guy (talk • contribs)

If you dont undertand how to sign your comments then you probably wouldnt undertand what he said. hell even i'm not to sure what he's talking about. --User:Atomic Religione

he says he wants citations for the first and last paragraphs of the "inclusion of characters" section. he says he's sure the information isn't speculation, but wants citations to prove it. Djchallis 16:46, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Giga Bowser

As reported on the SSBB site, Giga Bowser's Bowser's Final Smash 'move'. On this page ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Smash_Bros._%28series%29#Non-playable_characters ) It says that Giga Bowser's still up for question in Brawl. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.226.69.177 (talk • contribs) date

I'm not sure if this or the other page is the proper place to put this, I could just see this one having more experts and readers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.226.69.177 (talk • contribs) date

I'm also not sure if just because Giga Bowser's IN the game if he's really a 'playable character' due to the fact that Bowser just transforms into him. What do you think? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.226.69.177 (talk • contribs) date

Please sign your comments. WP:SIG Anyway, I see where you guys are going here. This is hard to say, I believe the section dicusses characters that would be non-playable in story-mode, like a moveable, non-changing Giga Bowser, you would have to fight. The fact is, Giga Bowser is "playable" since he's Bowser's transformation, and technically not a "Non-Playable Character". So the complication is, we don't know if Giga Bowser will appear in story mode as an NPC, but he will appear a PC as Bowser's Final Smash. ArchKnight47 18:47, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Sakurai even implies that Giga Bowser is playable in his introduction in his article about him: "What?! You can control Giga Bowser from Super Smash Bros. Melee?! It’s Bowser’s Final Smash!!"

Please sign your posts. No, he is saying that the reason you can control Giga Bowser is because he is Bowser's Final Smash. That does not say anything about him being a separate character. -Sukecchi 23:24, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Annoyingly, the argument about Giga Bowser in Story Mode probably will never get completely settled until Super Smash Bros BRAWL comes out for real. I'd suggest that someone write "Giga Bowser has been confirmed to be Bowser's Final Smash and is controllable for a brief period of time - however it is not clear if he will be the Single Player's Final Boss" - the reason I say single player is because Story Mode isn't confirmed for returning, is it? Classic Mode seems to be the most likely to return, and All Star is a bit 50/50. (Oh and just for what it's worh, I reckon Ridley will be the Story Mode's Final Boss - assuming he's a playable character) 84.13.124.136 20:34, 10 July 2007 (UTC) Mojanboss
So if that is the case why put anything in about Giga Bowser at all right now. Just because it was on the site does not mean it NEEDS to be on here. Lets just go with confirmed information.(Poweroverwhelming 20:38, 10 July 2007 (UTC))
Reggie Fils-Amie said at E3 that "Many of you are looking forward to playing Giga Bowser..." then folowing that he said that the game would be released on December 3rd. With that, Giga Bowser is a confirmed character.75.67.128.65 12:58, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Uh, he was a confirmed character since last week Dengarde 13:30, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
What I meant by that is that by all the official information I have seen he looks to be playable but not necessarily a playable character. From everything I have seen so far, Giga Bowser looks to be a powerup of some kind with a time limit. Kind of like the hammer from previous Smash games. So what I was saying is that I don't feel it necessary to add that to the "characters" section until its confirmed that he is indeed a character and not a power up specific to Bowser. (Poweroverwhelming 15:22, 13 July 2007 (UTC))

thats it i'm stopping this once and for all maybe giga bowser should be listed on the playable roster on the series but a note similar to sheik and zero suit samus'es about bowsers final smash for pete sake ever think of that then we know hes not confirmed unplayable

Actually I read that you can control Giga Bowser for a while but he will revert back to bowser after a certain time limit.

Sonic and Mario

I believe I have discovered information about Sonic in Brawl. The director of 'Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Games' Masanao Maeda stated that "This will be the first time ever that we see Sonic and Mario appear together in a game." This game is expected to be released in the US and Europe by the second week of November this year. This could mean one of two things. Super Smash Bros. Brawl won't be released until after mid-November, or that Sonic will not be in Brawl. I found this information at [1]. Please tell me if this belongs on this talk page, as I'm not sure. Deoxys911 04:21, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but this is old news. All statements that could go in this article would be original research. Joiz A. Shmo 04:55, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Well, this doesn't help that much. You can't say that Brawl will be released after mid-November because there's still the chance that he won't be in Brawl. Likewise, you can't say that Sonic won't be in Brawl because there's the chance that it'll be released after mid-November. See where I'm getting at? Unknownlight 05:01, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

OK. Thanks for clearing that up. Deoxys911 05:21, 5 July 2007 (UTC) Ok, The game is coming out after the Olympic one, so Sonic can not be made an impossibility, yet.--henke37 20:52, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

What is gameplay lacking?

It looks sort of decent at this point, but it really could stand to be rewritten or something. What should it detail more or less? Does the style of writing work? Anything like that'll work. TTN 19:22, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't think its really lacking any thing at all.The Wii Guy 20:21, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Not playable at E3

Ign says it won't be playableMarioman12 18:39, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

This doesn't affect the release date if that is what you are thinking(it says in the article it had nothing to do with the games progress.)Sasst82 18:44, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
Also, I don't think it not being playable is that significant in the article, except maybe a mention in the development section. But, as E3 hasn't happened yet, I think we should wait before adding anything to that effect. Joiz A. Shmo 21:23, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
Besides, that doesn't mean the game is not playable in terms of developement. Kojima got to play as Snake against Sakurai as Mario. The game is definetley playabe. (Zojo 22:06, 6 July 2007 (UTC))

It *might* be worth mentioning if the game would be playable at E3, but not being playable is definitely not noteworthy. Still, remember that we knew nothing at all about this game a week before last year's E3. There is definitely going to be something we can mention. 130.234.206.177 23:08, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Main image

I just checked the article this morning and someone replaced the main pic, the logo, with a bogus photoshopped complete and utter fraud of a cover. Please, can we get rid of this? 68.195.110.145 17:12, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

That image has already been discussed in past archives, and was beleived to be fake. --User:Atomic Religione

I removed it and replaced it with the real logo.→041744 19:38, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

It was created by a person named dragontear of vgboxart.com who has made several custom photoshopped covers for games. His homepage can be found here.

E3 or E³?

In the article, the text uses E3, but the references use E³. Although a minor issue, do we want to use E3 or E³ throughout the article? The article about the Electronic Entertainment Expo uses E3. Cheers, [sd] 23:36, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

WP:MOSTM and Talk:E3 might help. FMF|contact 02:04, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Also there was a requested move when the article was moved to E³ and the consensus was to move it back to E3. We should use that. --69.156.205.225 05:17, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Listing the Assist Trophies

It might be a good idea to at least list the assist trophy characters. That way people won't get confused when they see Dr. Wright and Samurai Goro on the official site and then decide to put those guys as playable characters. (Zojo 17:01, 10 July 2007 (UTC))

that would be like listing all the pokmon in the game. Besides there will likely be about 20 to 40 assit trophy characters, listing them all would be pointless. Besides the page is currently protected agaist IPs.→041744 17:14, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

your right. but should we have something in there just to let them know?--Demonworks

i have to agree with you--Sir de wario 18:16, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps you should add info about assist trophies to the FAQ --Kenny2k 19:12, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Done, but feel free to change it. I may have made it a bit vague. Dengarde 19:26, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

If it;s of any interest, we should keep this page as is for now. If we want a list of Assist Trophies, I think that, assuming there's less then 20 of them, we could just add them to the NPC page. Either that, or make a seperate article for them. IDK. 84.13.124.136 20:39, 10 July 2007 (UTC) Mojanboss

There too trivial get a whole page, all the NPCs of the series weren't notable enough to get a page. Besides we don't have to list every assit trophy character, or every playable character for that matter, in this page.→041744 20:42, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

sorry, it's too trivial. not every little new detail needs to be added, anyway. this is an encyclopedia article, not a word-for-word transcription of what the site releases. we just need to add that to the FAQ and clean up the false/unneeded info that newbies add. FyreNWater 07:54, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Gameplay

Since the other sections had so much fat trimmed from them, I think Gameplay deserves similar treatment. It seems way to long and dragged out. There is much to be removed/shortened in it. Does anyone agree? 75.153.231.20 08:13, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

American Date announced at E3

December 3, 2007. Thanks everyone 68.223.235.69 17:26, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Are...you sure? A source might help... (Zojo 17:53, 11 July 2007 (UTC))

Reggie mentioned it in the Nintendo conference just a short while ago at E3. I wouldn't doubt his words. Disaster Kirby 17:54, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
OH SNAP! I saw it. It's the real deal. Dec 3 is now the happiest day of our lives. (Zojo 17:58, 11 July 2007 (UTC))

Here is video proof. --Kenny2k 19:07, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Also regarding the release date, it is December 3rd on the OFFICIAL WEBSITE. Go look for yourself and add it to the article. --ZacLOL 05:50, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Donkey Kong was seen in the teaser too.The Wii Guy 19:28, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I guess that makes Donkey Kong another confirmed character. magiciandude (Talk) (review) 20:30, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Ooh im all tingly inside, hopefully something even bigger will come up in the next two days. 68.195.110.145 21:46, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

We all see DK in the trailer, right? I'd say it's enough evidence to put DK as a confirmed character now. Also, who's the 4th fighter in the scene where the Bridge of Elden is being blown up. The character got blown to the left. (Zojo 22:16, 11 July 2007 (UTC))

It's a small Moblin. -Sukecchi 22:46, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

No I don't think so, it's too blurred. It MIGHT be, as an assist trophy maybe, but it doesn't look distinguishable to me. I see Zelda, Samus, Kirby, and then, a blur... Lemha 00:02, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

You can clearly see DK jump down from the sky. He may be a little hard see but thats him. The Wii Guy 01:02, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I was referring to the 4th character in the Bridge of Eldin that Zojo was talking about. Lemha 01:18, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/21594.html Higher quality trailer. It's a Moblin. -Sukecchi 01:22, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh sorry about that. The Wii Guy 01:34, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

yes it really hard to see but its him most defintely,now i wonder if the site will add him to the veteran roster tomm?.Dennj

who knows. they probably will, they have been adding new characters weekly (Zelda, Bowser). Reggie also said there's a lot more to see in the next few days. I hope so. Lemha 01:32, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to be so rude, but that is no Moblin. I took a screenshot and it is clearly Donkey Kong.OBEY STARMAN 03:53, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
People are getting confused. There was another part to the E3 trailer that showed a Bulbin on Eldin Bridge, and the section of trailer that showed Donkey Kong is not the same portion. They both appear at different times. Arrowned 03:59, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
May I add Donkey Kong to confirmed Characters section on the FAQ? It is pretty clear that he is not an assist trophy do to the fact that Pikachu attacks him. OBEY STARMAN 04:03, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Donkey Kong and the video shown during the conference are on the official website now. (Early update today, for some reason.) Disaster Kirby 04:19, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Donkey Kong is confirmed, and that is a Moblin on the bridge. No more speculation, please. 'K, thanks. --Kenny2k 05:19, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

The Moblin must be a assist trophy becouse all it was doing was walking forward. He didn't run he didn't jump he must be a assist trophy. The Wii Guy 14:50, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

If King Bulblin appears as part of the stage's routine, I don't see why regular Bulblins can't be hanging out on the ramparts (and maybe shooting fire arrows) just like they did in Twilight Princess. That's more likely to be the case, as I can think of a lot better options for Zelda-based Assist Trophies. Arrowned 15:17, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh yea I forgot that he was part of the stage he must have droped a bomb. Witch blew up the part of the bridge. The Wii Guy 15:31, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

This goes to show that if u assume something then it is usually wrong. No one should suggest a change to this article unless it is announced on the Dojo. This will lead to minimal changes and correct info.75.132.30.105 16:01, 14 July 2007 (UTC)Confucious

Dairantou Smash Brothers X

The translation of "Dairantou" to "Great Fray" is bogus. "Dairantou" can mean Brawl and even Melee. A "great fray" IS a Brawl. Why do people always translate Japanese text as wooden as possible? Could it be either left in Japanese completely or translated appropriately, please? WeeklyJumpman

It was once "Great Battle" (more simple, and worked fine) but someone was bent on trusting machine translation instead of human translation. "Fray" is pointless I agree, but we should probably leave it, or it'll start a fight. JMJ 00:58, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually I changed it to "Great Fight" and added a source(which is still there) sometime ago. What do you mean by "appropriately"? Its either Fray or Fight. FMF|contact 23:36, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Europe Release Date?

2008? Where did you hear that? --Pluvia 00:18, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Please look at the source next to the release date: http://ms.nintendo-europe.com/e32007/enGB/pr_releaselist.html — Malcolm talk 00:19, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Oh yes, so it is. I'm guessing it'll be around about January, that's kinda rubbish compared to America, but atleast i'll know how to get all the characters by the time it comes out over here. Pluvia 00:24, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure about this picture...

I'm not so sure we should include Image:Basic01_070522a-l.jpg in the article. For some reason I think it's photoshoped. Aside from this one, no image on the site has shown damage meters, and placing the characters name, image, and symbol seems way too extreme. A few photos on the site are photoshoped, so this may be one of them. Dengarde 00:57, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

http://www.smashbros.com/en_us/howto/basic/basic01.html This is where that particular image is from. -Sukecchi 00:59, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Aye, it's an official image as Sukecchi pointed out. We 'preciate the concern, though. JMJ 01:01, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
No, I know it's an official image. It's just that it seems fake. I mean we don't really know WHAT the damage meters look like. It could be like the situation with the Menu pic in the Names update. Fake, or edited.Dengarde 01:01, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Wait...wait, it looks exactly the same as it does on Dojo, but yet you think it's fake? It's the same thing as the DK fiasco on the Smash Brothers talk page. It's an official source. It's fine. -Sukecchi 01:07, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

resetting the indents. I think what Dengarde is saying is that the pic was doctored, or "mocked up", which is probably true. I'm sure Sakurai just slapped a fake HUD onto a screenshot for presentation purposes, I doubt it'll look like that in the end result. But, the picture is still official and demonstrates gameplay, we should keep it. JMJ 01:09, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

<conflict>What he said, but if we DO keep it, I think the caption of the picture should be changed, at least.</conflict> You're misunderstanding me. Remember the picture in the Menu update? How it was edited so that the character selection screen was blurred out? I'm talking about something like that. We've never seen the actual meters in action, same with the trailers. Nintendo cold have just photoshoped it for this update. Also, note in the second picture, how Links is there but Mario's isn't? The image with both show that they're close enough for Marios meter to at least be partly visible if it was a legit screen on the third. Like I have shown in This photo Dengarde 01:25, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Okay. Maybe you're right that Nintendo photoshoped an image from their own game. But until this information is released then this is an OFFICIAL IMAGE! How else can I explain it? Unknownlight 01:38, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
I can knock this entire thing down with two words: original research. The pic stays. --Guess Who 03:04, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Unless you can find a source that states that the picture is photoshop, altering the text to say that it is would be speculation. After all, what's to say that the image where Mario's damage meter is missing isn't the edited one? Futhuremore, if past games are any indication, the location of the meters would be related to the player number the player is. Using that logic, where they're close together the players are #2 and #3, whereas in the one where it is missing could be player #1 and #4.

But of course, everything I just said is pure speculation, just like your points about the image in question appearing photoshopped by Nintendo. The best thing would be to leave it as is for now. TwilightPhoenix 03:07, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I have reason to believe the Brawl is near completion. I believe that they are currently working out bugs and beginning to manufacture The title. So, there for, why would nintendo go through the trouble to photoshop any image for a game if it is almost completed? 75.132.30.105 15:57, 14 July 2007 (UTC)Dave.

North American Release Date and Snake

It says that theres a release date for North America, but I've been looking at daily updates on the smash bros site and on nintendo.com and nothing states ANY release date, so I want to see a citation for that. and Snake is NOT a 3rd party character, Metal Gear (the first game with snake and the beginning of the series) was on the NES (Nintendo Entertainment System), so Snake is a Nintendo native, NOT a third party, I wanted to see if everyone agrees with me changing it so it doesn't mention this horrible mistake. C. Pineda 02:48, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

1 - The infobox in the article that gives the release date cites it, with a link included. It was in Nintendo's conference this morning at E3. 2 - What system a game comes out on isn't what makes a company a different party. First-party developers are internal sub-groups; second-party developers are standalone companies owned by the system's publisher; and third-party developers are standalone companies not owned by anyone. Konami the company is not, and never has been, owned by Nintendo. They're third party, and so is the Metal Gear series and all its characters. Arrowned 02:53, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Also, Metal Gear actually started on MSX, then it was ported to the NES in North America. Just wanted to point that out. magiciandude (Talk) (review) 03:43, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
The release date was announced at Nintendo's press conference at E3. Just because it wasn't on nintendo.com and Smash Dojo doesn't mean it wasn't announced.

The date was annoucned on the dojo, its on the frontpage now.--220.238.78.181 06:56, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Snake is most definitely a 3rd party character. just because he debuted on a Nintendo console doesn't mean Nintendo owns him. same goes with Final Fantasy characters. FyreNWater 07:48, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Geno was in Super Mario RPG on the SNES but he would still be considered a 3rd party character since Square Enix holds the rights to him. (Of course, I'm not implying that Geno's a new character in Brawl) (Zojo 17:20, 12 July 2007 (UTC))

First of all, Snake belongs to Konami. Second of all, as of today, the North American release date is Dec. 3rd, 2007. It said so in the Smash DOJO. Jeremy Plaza 19:39, 12 July 2007

New Characters Added

Start this so we can add the new characters to the list when they're announced on the website. Donkey Kong was announced today so someone can add it in —Preceding unsigned comment added by HOTTSH0T11 (talk • contribs)

We've already discussed this before. The SSB and Melee articles both link to a separate playable character article specifically so that we don't have to clutter up the games' pages with massive lists and constant updates. Brawl's will do the same. Arrowned 17:09, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

List? What list? Last time I checked, this was an encyclopedic article. Encyclopedic article. Encyclopedic article. Keep saying it until you and everyone else finally understands. --Kenny2k 20:08, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Why is Captain Falcon on the very bottom box under list of playable characters in SSBB? Was he in a screenshot somewhere? 72.200.67.163 21:18, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

He's in the Smash Bros. section because he's in Smash Bros. Nothing about Brawl there.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 21:22, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Do you not see the confusion? It's not going to hurt to put a list on the Brawl page. I would agree that no list would have to be in the Brawl article if all characters were returning to Brawl. But they're not. It's more convient and does not make this less of an encyclopedia article to add the list. (Zojo 22:34, 12 July 2007 (UTC))
If we add one list for characters, we're going to be asked by random users to add lists for everything, including items, music, and other updates on Smash Dojo. This will hurt the article in the long run, considering the anti-listcruft rules Wikipedia gives out. If some of you really want to argue in favor of this though, I suggest you read these four guideline articles and then start listing reasons in this talk page why we should add lists that clearly explain why it's worth the inevitable difficulty. The rest of us are supposed to be open-minded about change, so at least we can promise we'll listen. Arrowned 22:46, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

It would be useless to do this, it's a worthless take up of space, and, as this is encyclopedic, people do have complete freedom to click the playable characters list, browse to the character they want to see playability of, scroll their eyes over to the brawl column and see if their in or not. Maybe when the game is release we could have a list of former characters that did NOT appear in brawl, but having a list of characters that DID appear in brawl is completely and utterly USELESS. Thank You. 68.195.110.145 00:54, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Then why do you talk about the gameplay of it so much in the article? Doesn't that belong in Super Smash Bros series? If you have that article, it seems like this article about Brawl is supposed to show what's specific to this game that's not in the rest. (Zojo 16:00, 13 July 2007 (UTC))

No, it doesn't belong in the (series) article. Gameplay is very specific to this game. Characters are very specific to the entire series. --Son 16:10, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

The gameplay of a game is far more important then the specific characters in it. The article HAS to talk about the gameplay of the game, but lists of characters are unessecary. The gameplay far outweighs the characters in it. DurinsBane87 16:09, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

But the gameplay has basically remained the same through the series. There's only been few additions and improvements to each new game. And, if you think about it, don't most people seem to identify or judge the game by the fighters it has? (Zojo 16:17, 13 July 2007 (UTC))

We're following precedent. I'm sure character lists were argued for melee and SSB articles, and obviously they lost. In order to keep consistency and an encyclopedic tone, we're going to follow their precedent. With the exception of the occasional one or two edit users and IPs, You're the only person fighting to include lists. This is a waste of talk page space. DurinsBane87 16:23, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Why isn't there a character list? CR-4791 05:32, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

We've already discussed this before(in this very section!!!). The SSB and Melee articles both link to a separate playable character article specifically so that we don't have to clutter up the games' pages with massive lists and constant updates. Brawl's will do the same. (sorry to say the same thing as Arrowned)→041744 14:17, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Error on first paragraph

It says "Brawl is the first Super Smash Bros. game that features at least one character from a franchise not owned by Nintendo" when it should be "Brawl is the first Super Smash Bros. game that features at least one character from a major franchise owned by Nintendo" Can somebody fix it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Storm39 (talk • contribs)

That depends, can you name a Melee character that Nintendo didn't own? I can't. JMJ 23:23, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Not to be rude, I don't know if you made a typo or not, but that made no sense. Smash Bros is meant to be a fighting game in which characters owned by nintendo and their second parties fight. with the exception of Snake, who is the at least one character not owned by Nintendo. This would make your statement completely invalid because Brawl isn't the first game to feature a character owned by nintendo, since all of the characters(other than snake) are owned by nintendo. 68.195.110.145 00:13, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm confused at what you're saying. It currently says "Brawl is the first Super Smash Bros. game that features at least one character from a franchise not owned by Nintendo", and you think it should say "Brawl is the first Super Smash Bros. game that features at least one character from a major franchise owned by Nintendo". It's definitely not. — Malcolm talk 00:45, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
That makes no sense, every character in all the games were owned by Nintendo. Except Snake. So that means we don't need to change it. Pluvia 02:43, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

it's right, you're wrong. try harder next time. FyreNWater 05:34, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey, easy on the personal attacks. Useight 16:31, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
that's not an attack. it was a suggestion to fully read something before making a new section. we have enough of them already. i don't like dealing with not-very-contributive edits. FyreNWater 09:47, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

you want us to change one word? fat chance...--Demonworks

jeez luize okay snake was supposed to be in melee sonic was supposed to be in melee pokemon characters are in melee that dosent mean that SNAKE ISENT THE FIRST THIRD PARTY!!!!!—Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.54.155.36 (talk • contribs)

Actually, he is the first "third party character" to appear. Storm39 was simply confused over the definition of third party. And please sign your posts by adding four tildes at the end of your comments. Thank you. Arrowned 01:01, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
The characters in Smash are (except for Snake) first-party characters. Ironically, now IIRC, the studio handling Smash is a Second-party developer. Konami, the owner of the MGS franchise is a Third-party developer. Get your facts straight. InsaneZeroG 01:56, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
Actually, there are a few 2nd-party characters in Melee: All of the Pokemon and Kirby are 2nd-party characters. But that's beside the point. Point being, as you and many others have stated sickeningly numerous times, Snake is the first and currently the only third-porty character. You Can't See Me! 19:52, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Release Dates

Have the Japanese and European release dates been announced or is IGN still making them up? Deoxys911 22:43, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm sure they're lying. Sakurai went and announced the US date himself, while Japan continues to have nothing but "2007" and Europe has nothing.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 22:53, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

oviusly the jappanesse traslates should tell us what the realease is in jappan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.54.155.36 (talk • contribs)

...like I said...it only says 2007 on the Japanese site....—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 00:09, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
Are you kidding me? The release date for this game is pretty much old news... Well it would have been to you had you gone to the official site, the Smash DOJO!!. There, it clearly states that the release date is Dec. 3rd, 2007. The release dates for Europe is in early 2008 and the Japanese date is before Dec. 3rd. Jeremy Plaza 20:08, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, since you know...you can know that for sure. >> Twilight Princess came out in the US before Japan. Absolutely nothing is guaranteed.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 00:26, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
That's a good point Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？, and also the actual system (Wii) came out here before Japan, so I wouldn't be surprised if Brawl came out in Japan closer to Christmas. C. Pineda 07:15, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Stages

I think that it would be very helpful if were added a listing of stages; and note what their purpose was in the game. The Super Smash Bros. DOJO[[([2])]] would be perfect for the citations needed. Right now, there is practically no information what so ever, and it is a big part of the game. CR-4791 02:45, 16 July 2007 (UTC), CR-4791

Having a list of stages in the article is rather unnecessary, especially when people can just go look at the official website if they want to find out info on the stages. Plus, I'm fairly sure that discussion on inclusion of a Stages section has been done previously. Disaster Kirby 02:58, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

And although the SSB and SSBM pages have a stages section, there isn't enough stages confirmed for this page to have one. magiciandude (Talk) (review) 03:07, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

i don't think it's needed. if people really wanted a list, they could check out a game site's profile for the game or the Smash Bros Wiki [3]. as for Classic Wikipedia, it's not very contributive to the article. FyreNWater 04:18, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Then what would be the point of having any of this information if everyone could check the official website? There is hardly any information on the page, and stages are nearly half the game. CR-4791 05:30, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Because Wikipedia is not a game guide, nor is it a PR site for Brawl. This is an encyclopedia. And on a side note, stages aren't nearly half the game. You have the characters which is the most important, followed by the set moves, followed by items, followed by the goals of each game (like the All-Star mode from SSBM), and then the stages the games are played on. --Son 14:40, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
the article should not print every piece of information about the game. the article will be read by those who've never heard of smash bros before, and so its job is to tell them the information they'd need to do, such as who made the game, what it's like, what reception it had (when it comes out) etc. generally information that allows them to understand its place in the gaming world. specific information about the details of the game are not necessary, and can be researched on a number of other websites. Djchallis 10:27, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Are fake photos allowed?

I saw a "screenshot" of Luigi performing his final smash, which had Green Fireballs instaed of Mario's red. Are fake or photoshopped photos allowed? --Pezzar 04:34, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

...Of course not. Why should a fake photo ever be used, especially for a game like this where there's nothing but fanboying and speculation all over?—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 04:36, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
This is an online encyclopedia, not a gallery of fake screenshots... Jordan

I agree.... Mikey —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.92.45.33 (talk • contribs)

this is an encyclopedia, encyclopedias are only for facts, so basicly, no. Sir de wario 20:11, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Why would you ever think that. I'm not trying to be rude, but, Luigi hasn't even been confirmed yet??! Putting that screenshot here would be the farthest thing from encyclopedic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.195.110.145 (talk)

hmm, let's think. this is an encyclopedia that lists relevant facts on different subjects. you asked about a fake picture. hmmm... that's a tough one. [/sarcasm] mock-ups belong on art sites, journals, blogs... basically anything besides Wikipedia. FyreNWater 03:34, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Guys, I think he got the point. Let's not overdo it now. You Can't See Me! 04:31, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

THANK YOU, people here get WAY to out of hand and keep adding and adding and adding, why do you think we have a bizillion archives?! --User:Atomic Religione

That IS a very foolish question though, you have to admit, and as a foolish question, it requires ridicule. I can understand an unofficial picture maybe (such as one taken from E3 but not released on the website), but a fake one, that's just ridiculous. C. Pineda 07:12, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Items section?

Shouldn't there be an items section to give a sample of the new items available as well as some old?C. Pineda 18:33, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Items are mentioned. A list isn't necessary. -Sukecchi 18:34, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
There could be a section added "additions to the series" or something of the sort, in which new items, characters, and stages are highlighted. Miles Blues 18:53, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
We don't need to list everything. What we have now is fine. -Sukecchi 19:07, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

That would be detrimental to the article, and has been discussed so many time it's sickening. Check some of the archives for the arguments against. DurinsBane87 19:28, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Apparantly this subject has a 50/50 of opinions. Unless you decide to do a vote to see what the majority thinks, lists or no lists, at least put a big box at the top of the page saying NO LISTS otherwise, this will REALLY get sickening. (Zojo 22:20, 16 July 2007 (UTC))

if by 50/50 you mean that there ae two opinions, you're correct. If you mean that editors are split between those choices 50/50, then you're sorely mistaken, as the overwhelming majority has voiced not to put lists in the article. Even if we did put a box up top, people would still bring it up, because the majority of editors, especially IP's, don't read them. DurinsBane87 23:56, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
Maybe not 50/50 but we keep getting requests for list quite often. (Zojo 17:00, 17 July 2007 (UTC))
Usually from IP's and new users. There's already a list. There's no reason to have two. DurinsBane87 17:04, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Zero Suit Samus

You turn into her once you use Samus's final smash attack. Should this be added?DivineShadow218 07:02, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I think it is fine how it is now. Tinkleheimer 07:06, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

it's already in the Zero Suit Samus article. it's not really that important to the Brawl article. FyreNWater 10:01, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

It's not worth another section on this talk page. Whenever new info is posted on the official site, someone puts it in the article almost immediately. -- PowerslaveTC 10:45, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

updated the FAQ about this. not that the people it's directed at read it, as it's shown by the edits newcomers tend to make.FyreNWater 11:23, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

It definetely needs to be in the Brawl article. One of the biggest questions is how Samus sheds her suit. And since Zero-suit Samus is a special case character and not your average run-of-the-mill character, it probably should be mentioned (Zojo 17:48, 18 July 2007 (UTC))

I know that this is a forum-y question, but did anyone else notice that, in the E3 06 trailer, when Samus used her Final Smash on Pit and Meta Knight she did transform into Zero-Suit Samus? I just noticed that myself. Unknownlight 18:48, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I noticed it, dont really see how you couldnt have. I suppose the answer to her transformation was right in front of our faces and we didnt even know it. --User:Atomic Religione

We couldn't be sure. It could have been just for effect. Who would of guessed from the trailer that Wario could ride his chopper? I guess now those things aren't banned as speculation now. (Zojo 22:06, 18 July 2007 (UTC))

leave them off the main article, put them on the character's article. now stop adding to the length of this talk page. FyreNWater 03:01, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Does anyone know who this is?

From this Friday's update. Anyone know who this is? Is it a totally new character? Should we put this into the article at all? --Kenny2k 07:33, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

It is a new character, and I believe the article not only needs a mention of him, but the story issue as a whole. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.225.211.5 (talk • contribs)

While this new character isn't notable yet (we know nothing about it nor its purpose yet), I'm personally more interested in the update as a whole. It seems like they're giving the game... *gasp* a plot! Disaster Kirby 07:53, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Lets leave this topic alone for now. We'll probably get more information next week (hopefully) --Kenny2k 22:26, 20 July 2007 (UTC)