Talk:Super Smash Bros. Brawl/Archive 8

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 7 |
Archive 8
| Archive 9 →


Contents

Release Date for NA Confirmed!

It has been confirmed by Nintendo that SSBB will be released on March 15, 2007. The June 1st release date is invalid. It is available for Pre-Order on http://www.bestbuy.com (and possibly a few more sites.)

Edit: It is actually ONLY available for pre-order on www.bestbuy.com. order now! Available march 15!

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by SuperWiki5 (talk • contribs) 22:55, 30 January 2007 (UTC).

Best Buy is not a reliable source. They use those as fillers only, to "let" people know about the release date. No official release date has been made. Aramjm 00:15, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Nintendo has released all the Q1 titles and Brawl is not among them, so this is obviously not true. 199.126.137.209 00:17, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh really? check the website... it'll be there.24.128.186.205 21:54, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Best Buy sells the games. They don't make them. Besides, if it were true, then Sakurai would be releasing more info, as it says on the site. This question is on our FAQ. Read it. Aramjm 23:18, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I never said best buy makes the games u idiot!SuperWiki5 23:57, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

best buy is almost always wrong... they had aboout 5 release dates for Zelda tp! --TheGreenLink 23:19, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

He wasn't trying to say you were stupid or whatever. He was trying to clear this up. Anyway, GL is right, TP had constantly changing release dates, none of them right, except the last one. 68.74.7.123 01:17, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

This is ridiculous. It's a store listing. This is hardly "confirmed by Nintendo." 72.49.8.57 21:18, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

^what he said. They just tack a date and claim its the release date. Aramjm 21:21, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

The Canadian version of best buy says that Brawl will be released on Nov. 30, 07 and jigglypuff is a confirmed character?! Obviously they're not reliable at all!24.82.173.110 03:38, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

now BB says its due on 2/28/08 wait! now its 12/31/07~~union_K

...no. Leave the date to Nintendo, not to retailers, who are almost always wrong. 67.38.2.206 23:17, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't know, they released the Guitar Hero 2 songlist a week before it came out (in response to information). But then they did announce the release date months in advance. Sam 05:56, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

There was a time when Bestbuy said that Kingdom Hearts 2 was coming out some time in November 2005 or something like that. The people at Gamefaqs had a field day with joke topics. Mavrickindigo 02:55, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Dev. Studio

At this time the development studio is iffy. On the official SSBB page, Sakurai introduces himself from Sora (http://www.smashbros.com/en/main.html). However the splash page proceding that still reads copyright 2006 Nintendo/HAL Labs. (http://www.smashbros.com/en/index.html) I think there should be something in the article mentioning both studios. 72.49.8.57 18:55, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Ganondorf

The voice of Ganondorf, Takashi Nagasako has apparently joined the voices list of brawl, that's according to imdb. Should this be mentioned?

No, because IMDB is, like Wikipedia, is based upon user additions. they have no source. -Sukecchi 20:43, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Although it doesn't have a source, and I agree, should not be added to Wikipedia under those pretenses, I think that we can take it as a safe bet that this news ain't false. I'd also like to add that Luigi was also similarly added to IMDb. The voice actor for Luigi (in addition to Mario, Wario, Waluigi and crap loads of other characters), Charles Martinet's profile listing for Brawl was updated with Luigi in addition to already known roles such as Mario and Wario. AnujSuper9 03:15, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Controller

Shouldn't it be put that you CAN use the Wii Classic Controller? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.16.113.148 (talk)

The Classic controller is incompatible with games that use GC and/or Wii contollers, so its unusable. Please sign your posts with four ~ to sign your post. 67.38.17.46 20:00, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Wrong. They haven't stated if you can use EITHER. For right now, which controller to use is still up in the air. Don't assume. Spindash Shoryuken 22:18, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Read the article. It says that the Wiimote and the GC controller are usable. Seeing how the Classic is unusable on GC games, it's unlikely that it will be usable in the game. 68.74.9.113 01:25, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Unlikely isn't definite. Either way speculation doesn't belong in the article. --ArrEmmDee 22:51, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Brawl isn't a GCN game. --Comrade Kesha (talk) 05:24, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I never even suggested putting it on the article, and you guys keep pointing fingers at me. 68.74.0.82 20:44, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Sakurai said that the Wiimote might be used for minigames. I could get the link, but I'm not in the mood right nowFliptroopa 18:55, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Source now. Wait. *reads article* He won't use any motion for minigames. Nice try Aramjm

I think that this is quite possible. They could even have it write to the GC memory card, though they wouldn't. The Wii-mote is not usable, only GC and Classic.

He didn'y say anything for not using the wiimote. Then again, Tenkaichi 2 can use all three... but speculation doesn't belong here 68.73.7.71 16:01, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

You guys need to start reading more and stop acting like you know it all. The Wiimote has been CONFIRMED. This isn't a GCN game. Christ.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.49.8.57 (talk • contribs)

Where? AnujSuper9 02:43, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Number 1. Don't use "Christ" like that, you will offend some people. (so f'ing what?) Number 2. It has been hinted that the game will use the GCN controller, I would particuarly perfer that, I'm very much against using the remote thing to play a smash bros. game. BassxForte 02:45, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I have never heard that the GCN controller was hinted. they said you could use it the good ol' classic melee way.... but they didn't say it exactly like that...

How would you actually be able to play smash bros on the wii's controler? It's too fast paced.

Please Sign your posts. And the game speed is suggested to be slower. Tinkleheimer 06:00, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

if you read the article, there is a link to here: http://uk.wii.ign.com/articles/707/707504p1.html this mentions an interview with the designer where he said too much motion control would ruin the game and specifically hinted at using gamecube controllers. as far as i'm aware, this is what we're basing our information on (and there are many other websites that report the same information). please read the article and references before contesting them. however, if anybody knows something we don't and has an authoritative link to prove it, we'll be more than happy to include it. Djchallis 08:11, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Any and all of you can go to the Smash Bros. Dojo, the official site, and read Sakurai's interview with Famitsu (I believe, might have been a different publication though). He clearly sidesteps the topic about controlling it with the Wiimote making it, although not explicitly, clear that he himself was interested in developing the game to be controlled with the GCN controller also commenting about how the design of the GCN controller itself was designed with Smash Bros. in mind (in addition to several other games, of course). AnujSuper9 04:05, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Really?24.82.173.110 03:23, 5 February 2007 (UTC)0

That link is from an interview that is nearly a year old. Anything more recent? Trcrev 20:48, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

When I got the Wii, it came with a "classic controller" that was the traditional two-handed controller, maybe will use that for brawl, but that speculation shouldn't be added to the main article. BassxForte 18:10, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

The game is sais to be compatible to the GameCube controler, as when they experimented with the motion sensors they felt it just made it more complicated. However, this does not have to mean that the normal Wiimote+nunchuk won't be usable, only that the motion sensing and pointer fuktions will not be used. 213.67.208.199 20:00, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

The GC controler is not sold anymore over here in the uk (any shop i've been to anyway) so making brawl GC controler would really mess things up over here. Also, the game could easily use the Wii-mote for gameplay. C for jump-z for defend (combined with A for grab) control stick to move, a for standard b for special... you can get all the moves of SSBM in the wii controler. It really could go either way.--Brendoshi 20:59, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I see no reason at all why it could not be made to work for both/either with the individual players changing a setting for either, or the Wii itself figuring it out.--Viridis 21:09, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Dojo!??!?!!!

If you click on the Super Smash Bros. Brawl Update link on the Wii main site (http://wii.nintendo.com), you'll see that they've removed Brawl from the logo, and put Dojo. In fact, it just says 'Smash Bros. Dojo!!' Is this some joke, or is it official by Nintendo? Either way, I'm bringing it up here for consideration in the article name change. Sorani172 13:27, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

...Dojo is the name of the site. The game is still Super Smash Brothers Brawl. -Sukecchi 13:32, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, then! I should've paid more attention to the site. Sorani172 13:39, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

You should have paid attention to the talk page, this has been brought up before. -Sukecchi 13:41, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Countless times... -SaturnYoshi THE VOICES 16:15, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Hey Sorani172, There is FAQ at the top of the page that answeres such common questions. You may want to take a look at it. Master Strike 18:08, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
I can't believe someone else asked this again. Comrade Pajitnov 21:42, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I can say, hand on heart, that I was never aware of that FAQs page. That should've been put there months ago... with an additional notice that it answers such questions as what goes on with the dojo picture on that site and why we have the developers listed as they are. Also, it's a good thing you guys aren't being too harsh with this latest guy's mistake, though I must say that if it were somewhat harsher, it definitely would break Don't Bite the Newbies. It's great the FAQ link was put there, overall. :) Erik Jensen (Appreciate|Donate) 03:08, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Agreed; the FAQ wasn't as noticeable as it should have been. I put it in an infobox at the top of the article; hopefully this will bring it to peoples' attention. Ourai т с 02:31, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Great job. If you guys find anything you want to add to this FAQ, please do so. Master Strike 17:58, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

As a sort of meaningless effort for posterity, I have researched all the archives for this talk page, and with the exception of archive 4, every one of the archives has a section asking this very question. Therefore, this discussion here marks the seventh time somebody has looked at the site's name and interpreted it as a name change for Brawl. Heh, most other internet discussions would adopt it as a running joke at that point. But this should clarify that it's not been discussed "countless" times, it's been discussed only enough times that it can be counted on two hands. I can link the other six archived discussions if you'd like. Hugs and kisses, Erik Jensen (Appreciate|Donate) 21:06, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Alright, I have arranged links to the other discussions for easy reference. They are: Discussion 1, Discussion 2, Discussion 3, Discussion 4, Discussion 5, Discussion 6, and this current Discussion 7. When the talk page goes through its next archive and the subject is brought up for the eighth time (and I think we can safely assume it will happen), I'll just post these links there. ^_^ Erik Jensen (Appreciate|Donate) 19:00, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Dense. Obviously the name of the official site. 72.49.8.57 18:58, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Pikachu inacuracy

The article says: "Though some of Pikachu's trademark attacks are shown in the E³ trailer, including Thunder, Thunderbolt, and Quick Attack, its Super Smash has yet to be seen." I believe the instruction manual for SSBM calls the move "Thunderjolt", not "ThunderBolt". Is there some other primary source suggesting otherwise?

If someone with editing power makes that change, they might also want to format that whole movelist (begginning with "including") as a parenthetical phrase instead. I belive it would make the sentance structure more apperent then those ambiguous commas. ~~William Morgan

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.139.132.187 (talk) 07:23, 18 December 2006 (UTC).

...Does it really matter? Comrade Pajitnov 12:32, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
if the article is mentioning differences between moves with names as similar as "thunder" and "thunderjolt/bolt", then i think it needs to get the names correct. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Djchallis (talk • contribs) 17:01, 18 December 2006 (UTC).

Stage Examples

here it is[1] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Marioman12 (talk • contribs) 21:51, 18 December 2006 (UTC).

Those are mainly assumptions and stuff the fandom wants. neither are encyclopedic. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sukecchi (talk • contribs) 22:08, 18 December 2006 (UTC).

Link

I think that we should change saying that Nintendo made Link look more realistic because thats only half of what they did. According to the game The Legend of Zelda: The Twilight Princess, he also matured, making him look differently. Colin Reding 00:07, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Does it really matter? The point is he's different that his previous incarnations in the series. -Sukecchi 00:15, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Archive 7

Shouldn't we archive this page? It's getting kinda long... --Linkmasta 01:52, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Definiely. Probably down to the "FAQ" section or around there. –The Great Llamasign here 02:44, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I moved all discussion before December 9 to Archive 7 since this talk page was getting to be about 44 kilobytes long. s d 3 1 4 1 5 final exams! 13:02, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Cool, but I prefer the move page method...which I did from Archives 4-6. Hbdragon88 07:10, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

walk or hop?

i was watching the trailer again (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62IfHDBCJOo0). and i noticed that between 00:41-00:43, that the way pikachu walks has been replaced with hops...like a kangaroo. Should we say something about that in the article? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.114.214.59 (talk) 18:01, 23 December 2006 (UTC).

I also noticed that Pikachu's walking animation seems a lot different, but it really isn't all that important. Comrade Pajitnov 21:34, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
Can someone please relink this video...the link no longer works and I'd like to see this hop like thing. AnujSuper9 06:41, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Techniques

So does anyone else think that the new crawling animation/ability added is going to either completely stop or interrupt Wavedashing?Sora3087 07:16, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

We will have to wait and see. I don't know if characters are able to jump at all in that mode, I don't even know how they will attack. It is just a matter of time. Tinkleheimer 07:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Another thing I was also thinking, I think it might be an optional walk style or something of the sort. You get a little different moveset in that stance. I dunno. Tinkleheimer 05:31, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Since the team behind SSB:Melee probably didn't intend for people to be able to use techniques such as wavedashing, and since Sakurai stated that "many people who have spent a lot of time playing Super Smash Bros. Melee are being brought in as the development team [of SSB:Brawl]" - assuming that the new development team members, including Sakurai, are now aware of those techniques - I don't believe wavedashing will be possible in Brawl. That is, unless Sakurai thinks it has proven to be an interesting part of the serie's gameplay. Bleako 23:24, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
I'd say it's very safe to assume that they are aware of Wavedashing and such techniques, but I don't think many (if any) members of the player-base has been brought in to help development. If they have, they are people that have spent a lot of time with the game, playing from a development standpoint, to help develop Brawl. These people are probably not people that used these high-level techniques themselves but people that were made aware of them. I say this because I'm fairly confident that no one from the player-base that made these moves famous has gone on to work for Nintendo. Though, of course, I don't know about Japan (but most of these moves originated in the US). AnujSuper9 05:16, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Engine?

The article currently says the game's engine is a modified SSBM engine. Is there any proof of this? And shouldn't there be a citation? If someone can't come up with this then the "Engine" part should be removed. Personally, I was under the impression that they created the game from scratch for the Wii, but I have no evidence suggesting this besides the fact that they created an entire development studio just for this game. --IG-64 15:48, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

There is no way to check which engine is being used, or if they made a new one. Even if a new development studio is made, they can still use an old engine. However, I doubt they will be using a Gamecube engine for a Wii game, specially if they intend to add an online multiplayer support. --Japan became a first-world country after a bomb wiped out everyone. We Argentinians only managed to get two dictatorships and 10 million of poor people since WWII. 22:10, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Removed edit from User:Ibanez RYM. -FMF|contact 23:08, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

They said in the "How This Game Came to Be Made" article that they had received all of the source code and tools used in the development of Melee. Since they have all that, it would seem highly unlikely that they would write a whole new engine when they have a perfectly good one already. --Guess Who 03:47, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Its unlikely but that doesn't mean that they won't. FMF|contact 18:10, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

It doesn't mean they won't, but it is terribly doubtful, and frankly, they'd be retarded to do so. For instance, Twilight Princess used the Wind Waker engine, albeit modified. Also note that most character animations and movements have been carried over. It's most likely that they'd use the same engine. --Guess Who 10:22, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
I think the point here is that, at this point, you can't come to any conclusions like this because it's purely speculation. --IG-64 05:22, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

One thing's for sure, the game will look better. Shaders and bloom effects are now possible, thanks to the Wii's new graphic card. Other than that... there's no use to remake something that has already proven to be good. I think we might see some differences with the computer's AI, though. --Bleako 23:35, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

"Brawl" moves?

People have, multiple times, changed all instances of "Super Smash" moves to "Brawl" moves, stating it is the official name but not giving a cite. Any reasoning behind this? One edit even changed "Super Smash emblems" to "Brawl emblems", even though it's referring to an icon that was seen in the earlier Super Smash Bros. games. --HeroicJay 00:10, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm guessing it's a matter of subjectivity. Because the emblems (as tokens) and moves first appeared in Brawl, they naturally call them "Brawl moves" or "Brawl emblems", tying the names together, because "Super Smash" sounds like the first game of the series (or even the planned SNES debut). However, there are no "real" names for the emblems...at least that I've heard of. Jake52 My talk 06:57, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Just as long as the article doesn't keep alternating between the two, either one works. -Power Slave 10:48, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Since there's no other way to refer to them other than fan-given names, I think it's a good idea to either use the one used most commonly by people(which appears to be "Super Smash",) or use something more neutral, by simply saying it's an unnamed Special Attack, and referring to it as such. No fancy names and whatnot. - Zero1328 Talk? 12:15, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
This actually isn't exactly in relation to Smash Brawl specifically, but I was thinking for the entirety of the Smash Bros. series page, if we were to add a listing of moves and complexities in gameplay in the first game, and consequently added/improved from the first one to the second one. Such as the addition of Forward-B moves, full 4-directional Smashing, side-step, dodge, etc. And then I was also wondering if we should make a section within the moves area for a pseudo-moves section for things such as wave-dashing and DI. These moves are real and very legitimate moves used by most players of the game today, but never officially mentioned as part of technique listings for skill in the game, along with skills such as Teching and L-Cancelling. If you think that this would be a good idea, I would certainly not mind approaching it very professionally and contributing what I can, because I have an extremely deep knowledge of these things, including frames and such. Thank you. AnujSuper9 07:13, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I had previously changed the names to refer to them as unnamed special attacks quite a long time ago, but was reverted. The problem with fan names is there is no way to prove which name is more frequently used, and even so I think it's strongly discouraged to use fan made names. 199.126.137.209 00:39, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Swedish Nintendo Magazine and Sonic

It seems premature to change the regular page to include Sonic based off one article (http://gonintendo.com/?p=11432), but I thought at least I would list it here on the talk page in case other sources appear to confirm (or deny) this posting since no doubt it will become a major topic of discussion in the coming days. What do others think of the legitimacy of this statement from this magazine? Seth0708 20:03, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Eh...it's a cropped image...there's no way to tell if it's real or not....can they get a full scan...and a translation? -Sukecchi 20:50, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Even if it was true, we'd need to wait for an official confirmation from Nintendo anyway. Comrade Pajitnov 21:03, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Agreed, I just thought it best to post a link to this fragment of the article so that everyone is aware of it on the talk page before people start changing the main article. Seth0708 21:05, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, that scan is from the Swedish verson of the official nintendo magazine.

Are you sure? If so, what is it called? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Borincano75 (talk • contribs) 01:39, 10 January 2007 (UTC).
Yeah, I saw this on GameFaqs. I don't know anyone from Sweden so I don't know about it. I wonder if the magazine has a website.
I just went to SSBB board, did you by chance get it from this? [2] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Borincano75 (talk • contribs) 02:02, 10 January 2007 (UTC).

After looking at the comments posted on the site, they say N+ is a new magazine that just came out today, and it is from the makers of a few other credible magazines. And it is also The Official Magazine of Nintendo (I believe). If the article is real or not, I don't know. Tinkleheimer 01:43, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, I do believe this has lost all credibility now. -Sukecchi 15:10, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Should warnings be given to editors (like in the case to not add suggestive character) to not use this magazine as a source for Sonic until Nintendo confirms anything? magiciandude 02:23, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

How has this lost credibility? It simply means someone is investigating if Sonic the Hedgehog is in Super Smash Brothers. I have a furry wolf friend in Sweeden, and i can ask him to translate the article for me. (the article in question is also here) The Legendary Raccoon Fox: RingtailedFox • Talk • Stalk 21:54, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

My friend translated it as: "Wario, Link and Pikachu is what we'll see and play as Solid Snake, Sonic The Hedgehog, Samus without a suit, Fox McCloud, Pit from Kid Icarus and Meta Knight who we know from Kirby." The Legendary Raccoon Fox: RingtailedFox • Talk • Stalk 22:16, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, the whole "Just came out today" and the fact that there's only this small clip...it just seems so...fake. -Sukecchi 22:21, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

There's only one problem, we cannot constitute it as fact (1) from a new magazine that no one really knows about (2) Why hasn't Nintendo Power, the director, etc said anything yet? ok I lied, that's more than one problem. FMF|contact 22:24, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

The English aren't always going to be the first to get info. I am not saying this information is credible yet, but there is a possibility of it being credible in the future.

Nintendo of Europe is somewhat known for accidentally leaking information early. They revealed Paper Mario 2 and Warioware for the Gamecube quite a ways before Nintendo actually announced the games. I'm not saying it's confirmed, but, the "nobody else has said anything" reason for it being fake isn't really closing the book on it. I agree that until it's confirmed it should be treated as speculation, but dismissing it as a hoax with little to no reasoning behind it is just as silly as adding Sonic to the official roster at this point. If something comes of it, it would make an interesting note in the article that Sonic was announced on accident by a magazine in Europe, but I'm not sure it should even be included in the article at all until something's confirmed. Wikipedia's not a book of speculation. 68.202.33.218 09:00, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm Swedish, and can confirm that this is at least not fake. Whether or not it's credible is another issue.83.255.67.167 20:24, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Well despite saying it's not fake, we really have no proof this magazine really exists. -Sukecchi 20:55, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
i thought the person just before you confirmed the magazine existed, or were they confirming that it was written in swedish? i don't know. if the magazine is real, it might (just maybe) be worth putting in that the magazine said that. i agree with the person who mentioned NOE leaking info. NGC got hold of the info that twilight princess would be on wii early and were deemed uncreditable by almost every website, before nintendo finally announced it themselves. we don't have proof that sonic is in the game. we may have proof that an official nintendo magazine said he would be. if the magazine is real - do we mention it? Djchallis 22:04, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Saying is one thing, showing it exists is another. We have no images of it at all, just a clip of a supposed page that could easily be a hoax. -Sukecchi 14:39, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
True, and wasn't there that time one of Nintendo's official magazine stated that Fox's first game will be in Brawl? magiciandude 00:33, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me, but I've got the magazine as a whole. I live in a suburb of Stockholm (Huddinge) and my little brother brought the magazine for me. While I didn't find anything that was remiscent to the clip, the article mentioned Sonic the Hedgehog as a confirmed character. We'll just have to wait for Sakurai to annouce it, or e-mail him that. I could also speak with the guys in +N about the thing.83.183.203.58 20:38, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Could we get a scan of the page...if that's possible? -Sukecchi 20:38, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
I found that clip yesterday night, around 21:00 GMT, and I shall see if I can get a scan or something like that. The clip itself counts up the characters that will (or can, as in the case Sonic) show up in Brawl. But, the front page of the magazine says (Translated) "Super Smash Bros. Brawl: The most secret sneak peek". I'm thinking to myself, by the way, could this mean that Sakurai doesn't like to be disturbed? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 193.183.253.130 (talk) 07:54, 15 January 2007 (UTC).

If it were really a ground-breaking secret that only that magazine knew, I don't think they would surreptitiously put Sonic in the middle of that list. I think they casually placed him in there, purposely trying to start a riot (and it worked..). -Power Slave 04:14, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Um I don't think so since this is an official Nintendo magazine just Sweden. Wouldn't they get sued? magiciandude 19:44, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

eehhh... i read that magazine and there is no picture of sonic and the crew thought that the sonic rumor was a confirmed fact and wrote it down like a fact, thats it! it was just a silly misstake and nothing else! -Anton the Swede 16:00, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Anyone here thought of the simple solution of actually ASKING the writers of +N? I can try it, I know one of them is a member at a small message board I know, and I don't think emailing them would be too hard either. 213.67.208.199 20:00, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, how many of us are Swedish? By a coincidence, I am. But I never read +N, and much less know anyone who works on it (do they have a website?). I saw the issue you're on about at a local shop today, but I can't help you with the scanning though. Sorry. Gurko 11:46, 27 February 2007 (UTC) Guys just ask the editors of the magazine and post what they say.I am an avid video game freak and must know Dylan Uzumaki 23:34, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Diddy Kong?

Someone added Diddy Kong to the list of characters. Is this true or did someone just add him with no proof? Takuthehedgehog 02:57, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

  • I reverted both times this occurred. Unless there is a source, no one should put Diddy Kong on the article. Red Director 02:59, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm going to say it was pure, horribly written vandalism. -Sukecchi 03:07, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
I already removed it. I think the article should be in S. Protection due to vandalisms that has been occurring recently. magiciandude 03:14, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, it should be in S. Protection. Someone put in Ganondork and Kefka from FFVI awhile back. Vandals, stop being jerks! YEESH! ChromeWulf ZX 01:24, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, Diddy Kong is in this game and is initially available, but the game had officially excluded Princess Peach. --PJ Pete

what proof do you have? johnny's pizza 01:27, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Meta Knight's Fanfare

I cannot read Japanese, and Babelfish doesn't provide anything useful when translating the source given for Meta Knight's fanfare being a rock remix. I see one line that looks like they're considering it ("Whether this time, the meta just knight at lock pitch カービィダンス tune...... with Thinking, we were planned.") but the broken English is too broken for me. Is that really what it says? --HeroicJay 17:09, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I edited that section to make "confirm" less on whether it will be and more on what Sakurai said. He plans to make it different. Sakurai's response was to a post that asked that it wouldn't fit Meta Knight's somber demeanour to have the same upbeat Kirby song as his fanfare. "今回、メタナイトだけはロック調でカービィダンス曲かなぁ……と 思って計画しておりました。 I've been thinking about having Meta Knight have more of a rock version of Kirb'y dance tune. I've been planning on it too." Shao-Yoshi 19:24, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Game Informer Release Date

According to a member on Game Faqs, Game Informer stated that Brawl will be released on 6/1/2006. I don't have a copy of the magazine to tell if this is true, but I think of Game Informer to be pretty credible, although we might wait for an official release. Tinkleheimer 19:47, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I have a subscription to GI, but I haven't received a February issue yet (IIRC) and my January issue doesn't mention anything about SSBB's release date. Until I see the next issue, I'd take this with a grain of salt. A larger grain, because GI is more reliable of a source than what we've been seeing. Jake52 My talk 21:15, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, keep us updated when you get the Feburary Issue. Tinkleheimer 21:19, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

A couple of my friends say it does indeed say that. Tinkleheimer 01:51, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Gamestop (the company that carries and supports GI) ALSO gives 6/1/07 as a release date for the game (the last time I checked). This date should definently be considered, but we need an authentic picture of that part of the issue (or at least the text of the article) before we finally drop the gavel.
Jake52 My talk 02:06, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
If I can get some money, and if the stores near me have it. I will try and get it and get a scan. Tinkleheimer 03:21, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
I will upload a scan in a minute. Homeschool Winner 21:32, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Image:GammInformerFebuary2007SSBB.jpg
Click to enlarge.
I have found the page and took a picture of it. Homeschool Winner 21:40, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

It also says the developer is Sora, after all. Is this confirmation, or are they just guessing like everyone else? -Power Slave 21:58, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Guessing, most likely. Given several hints by Sakurai and Nintendo, it's really impossible that Sora is behind it (it's a team built from the ground-up by Nintendo composed of members of a studio that just completed work on a a major title - and I don't recall Sora ever making any major titles). --Guess Who 23:18, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

It doesn't seem like a popular news magazine to make up stuff and put it in like that. And it isn't April Fools. I don't know what to do on the status of this...Tinkleheimer 22:00, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Game magazines give placeholder dates and outdated information all the time. Besides, June 1st is a Friday, and it is highly abnormal for games to be released in the latter half of a week. --Guess Who 23:18, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Also Sakurai called the team the Studio. I don't see any reason that he would do that if Sora was making it because the company was already know at that time. He also stated that Nintendo built the team which would make no sense if it was Sakuri's new company making it. [3]. It sounds like plain guesswork here. --67.71.77.166 22:08, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

But it isn't like for national magazines to put in random dates as placeholders and companies also. They will normally do 2007 as a placeholder instead of an actual date. I don't know what to actually think, I am thinking of waiting until Nintendo says something, or GI says something in the March issue about the matter. Tinkleheimer 04:00, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Another source said June 1 a while back, but I don't remember what. It should be in one of the archives. I think "June 1" is the universal placeholder for any release date, since it's just about halfway through the year. -Power Slave 01:49, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

King Dedee

Ok now im seeing that King Dede is a playable character.Well I need proof that he is,like a photo of him in the game informer issue. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 151.200.179.213 (talk) 20:34, 17 January 2007 (UTC).

Don't worry, it was nothing more than someone vandalizing. magiciandude 20:57, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Online and Wii Remote Have BEEN Confirmed For Brawl

Here we've been waiting for an answer from Nintendo to confirm online and Wii remote functionality and it's been confirmed since MAY OF LAST YEAR. And it's not just fans--major video game medias, including Gamespot, IGN and GameInformer, have also been waiting for an answer. It must've slipped under the radar. Click on this link to see for yourself:

http://wii.gamespy.com/wii/super-smash-bros-wii/707716p1.html Tj terrorible1

Hey, guess what, we knew that already. --Guess Who 01:39, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Very important information stated on the Japanese website is nowhere to be found in the article

Such as: --the speed of the game will be “moderated” --every character’s ability is being refined from the ground up to allow more freedom in aerial combat --not all characters will return --if they add online functionality to the game, they do not plan to add a ranking system --Sakurai (translated from Japanese to English): "This time, we'd like to stress easiness over the small details of combat, so overall it might become somewhat easier." / "We will create this game with balance in mind."

Also, I looked at the ssbb articles in other languages and the stages are listed like our character section is. Why isn't our stage section like that?

Please sign your posts :D...and can you post a link to this, or is it on the Japanese Dojo Site?Tinkleheimer 23:23, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I've read most of what Sakurai said already (the bullets you forementioned) on the Toukouken. So it's not really 'new' news. Also, the Japanese article posts the stages that have been shown in a list, but that is unofficial speculation people have made based on the videos, similar to how they are mentioned in the english wiki section. Shao-Yoshi 08:09, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Of course this information isn't new. But it's important. And you want to know the source? The Japanese official SSBB website--the same source for the following: -there will be 1-2 more third party characters, -all third party characters must have appeared on a Nintendo system. The above are important details about SSBB's gameplay and they need to be added to the articel somewhere. Not adding these details is like leaving out a confirmed character. So add them...NOW!!!

Possibility

Maybe there should be a list of characters wanted for brawl on the page. Its a good idea because it gives people a good idea of who they might be seeing in the game. Its a bad idea because people would argue about whether soo and so should be on the list. If it were to happed any character that is wanted could be added as long as it fits within the standards(must have been in a nintendo game..ect).Widkid85 21:46, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

No, this is not a forum or discussion about SSBB. This is an encyclopedia. Tinkleheimer 21:50, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Exclusive Meeting where Brawl was revealed

Should we also mention that Bill Trinen, the Localization Manager, seen at almost all Nintendo Press Events and a head representative speaker along with Miyamoto and Iwata, was also at the exclusive meeting where Brawl was revealed? AnujSuper9 07:37, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

No, that's not really important information. -Sukecchi 12:48, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Additional pictures

I was new to Wikipedia when I added those pictures to the Smash Brawl characters section, but why was it considered vandalism or un-necessary. I only added pictures of the new characters. I should have asked permission here first, yes, but what was wrong with it? I'm not trying to confront anyone or anything, I just want to know so that I know not to make the same mistake in the future. Thankyou. AnujSuper9 00:33, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Right now, I'm laughing at the new picture caption at the top of the confirmed characters section. "Hank, the angry drunken midget, Paris Hilton..." DarthJango42 00:39, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

That wasn't me. Haha. AnujSuper9 00:45, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
We talked about this before, having images for every character is really not necessary. -Sukecchi 00:51, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Ok fine, I agree, every character isn't necessary, but then where is the boundary drawn? Well, I guess it doesn't really matter, but ok, thank you. AnujSuper9 00:56, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

--- it may not be necessary but it is helpful. Why have a free online encyclopedia and not use the freedom of images? A picture is worth a thousand words. Plus it's really cool.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.252.188.143 (talk • contribs)

"Really cool" is poor logic, since articles have a limit to the amount of images it can have, lest it just become a large image gallery. --ArrEmmDee 22:24, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Super Smash Bros.

Since Brawl is not out yet and Nintendo is mostly keeping its mouth shut, would it be possible if you guys also took a look at Super Smash Bros.?. It's looking a lot like a game guide right now. bibliomaniac15 03:35, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Is this usual?

  • Is it normal for Nintendo to keep things a secret for this long? If they want to build up hype they should at least tell us a general release date. I know Wikipedia is not a forum, but as Wikipedians are generally much more knowledgeable than your average f0rumgo3r, I was wondering if anyone knew anything about Nintendo's habit of keeping a big game such a secret? Do they not want to fall prey to the Twilight Princess problem of telling us wrong or delayed dates? Just wondering.

By the way, this is ShadowUltra speaking, but I can't log in using this computer. 69.244.235.160 03:16, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I am not totally sure. It has been a long time since an update for being such a popular game. Tinkleheimer 04:10, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Usually Nintendo doesn't release the much news until the game is available in a playable form, like a demo or something. Once that happens, there'll be almost daily news on the game -Power Slave 05:04, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't be to sure. I think updates (IIRC) came on Twilight Princess quickly before the demo was released. I might be wrong, as it was a while...Aramjm 01:37, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I am sure I read somewhere that Nintendo did not post the final character list for mele untill some time after it was released.--213.66.131.204 22:46, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Likewise, it is 2007, and Nintendo still hasn't published the final list of unlockable NES games for ACPG. --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 04:52, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Yoshi

I've noticed in the Japanese trailer, there is a yoshi stage. I'm pretty shure yoshi will be in ssbb.

Speculation. Utter speculation. Learn to spell too. -Sukecchi 14:32, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
More detail: I don't think anyone actually believes Yoshi won't be in the game, but since his existence in the game hasn't been officially revealed yet, we're keeping him off to avoid the slippery slope. (If we include Yoshi, what other characters do we include that haven't been revealed yet?) --HeroicJay 16:52, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Every character in Melee had their own stage, (well... except for the pokemon characters) so it is highly likly that Yoshi will appear in the game, but since he hasn't been officaly confirmed, he should not be put in the article. BassxForte 00:56, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

that's not true though - bowser, dr.mario, ganondorf, marth and roy all failed to have their own arenas.Djchallis 11:51, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

This is speculation, but I am 100% sure Yoshi will be in. First, they have had multiple charicters without their own stage, but they have never had a stage without the character from it. There would be no reason to make a stage if the character wasn't in the game. Second, Yoshi is a very iconic character. Yoshi is huge for Nintendo, and the chances of taking out such a huge character is extremely low. It is equaly unlikely that they will take out a character that has represented their series/subseries in a previous Smash. Despite all this though, it is a trailer, which means it does not necessarily represent actual gameplay. I can guarentee, though, that Yoshi is in. Also, I just want to add, in response to the above, that stages have generally represented a series instead of individual characters, so Marth and Roy are really the only two who didn't have their own stage. Unoriginal Username 04:13, 28 January 2007 (UTC) (AAAAHHHH, I keep forgeting to sign my posts...)

i agree, yoshi's inclusion is 100% likely, but unfortunetly we can't put it in until we have confirmation. on the stages thing tho - i'd consider bowser to have a stage when we get a bowser's castle stage. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Djchallis (talk • contribs) 08:54, 28 January 2007 (UTC).

Virtually everyone believes characters like Yoshi, Captain Falcon, Jigglypuff, etc. are going to be in the game, however I (along with many users) will not tolerate characters that are currently only speculated on being put in the article. BassxForte 01:27, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

No rudeness intended but Sukkechi you need to stop insulting people you pompous big-headed idiot.

I'm not phased with your comment by the way just to let you know. I think you're just kind of upset that your demand for a speculation section has been shot down. You said you're new, and that's fin, you should just read up a bit more on the FAQ we have at the top of the talk page. -Sukecchi 23:54, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
It's true that on Wikipedia, no matter how obvious something may seem in the future, stuff posted into articles is still treated as false information unless there're reliable second and third party sources to prove it correct, and for Yoshi good sourcable sentences would happen once the game is released. As for Sukecchi, the way he tells the other guy to "Learn to spell" implies that the other guy is either unintelligent enough or lazy enough not to spell perfectly at all times, which by my book borders on a personal attack (but not exactly anything bad enough to warrant the "pompous big-headed idiot" line above, I must admit :D). In other words, it'd probably be in Sukecchi's best interest if he was just a little less blunt in his comments in general. Just my advice. Erik Jensen (Appreciate|Laugh At) 01:07, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Krystal

After seeing a number of people trying to add Krystal into the character list as speculative information I feel it must be said, the inclusion of Krystal is currently a speculative piece of information and does not belong on this page, Wikipedia is not a place for speculation, it is a place for facts and rarly is original research or speculation allowed, thank you. BassxForte 22:38, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm not too sure... Just because in Melee, Mario and Link got Peach and Zelda in it, it may dosen't mean in Brawl that Fox gets Krystal as well. SuperSaiyan Crash 20:07, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
It was mostly just one IP user over and over again. And I doubt that user checked the Talk page. --HeroicJay 00:03, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm just getting sick of how people are treating this page, it seems like we can't go a whole day without it getting vandilized, *sigh*. BassxForte 02:33, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

It's going to happen less now for at least a little while: the page has been semi-protected until the 9th (oddly enough, at the request of an IP vandal who was only asking to protect because he apparently believed it would cause users to stop removing his vandalism. Backfired, huh?) --HeroicJay 17:01, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Why not have the page semi-protected, like Wii has been? - NP Chilla 17:11, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
It is semi-protected. In fact, I just said it was. It wasn't when the "Krystal" thing kept getting added, though. --HeroicJay 20:07, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

You don't even use that name without giving it proper respect! There is no SSBB without IT!

...No....just no. I guess this is some sort of fanboy who can't take no for answer. I'm pretty sure there is infact, a Super Smash Brothers Brawl with out her. -Sukecchi 15:47, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I'm the one who has been posting this several times, and no, I'm not a fan boy of her, I just thought I was telling the truth about her having a good chance to get in the game. Sorry for any inconvenious, I wont post it anymore, I promise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.177.45.75 (talk • contribs)

Hmph. I tried to revive her article, but nooooooo... --Luigifan 12:00, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Jigglypuff

I don't know who added the section on Jigglypuff or why it's not accessible, but it needs to be edited pretty badly. It makes the page look pretty unprofessional. --Cabez 02:06, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

It was already deleted because it was added by a vandal, and Jigglypuff has not been confirmed yet. --HeroicJay 02:29, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree it should be taken off but maybe there could be a possible characters list because characters like sonic and donkey kong are quite likely--80.43.127.41 13:31, 27 January 2007 (UTC)conserned user

I'll let someone else answer that one -_- 71.62.160.2 16:04, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
We've already said that there will NOT have a Possible Characters list. That's final, end of story. -Sukecchi 16:27, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
That's come up several times, so I added that to the FAQ. --Guess Who 02:33, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure anyone who will look at this before it comes out will already know which characters may be in the game, so even if it was worth considering, it would be pointless. I think we should try to get this protected, because people seem intent to add characters they want or think will be in the next game. I can only forsee vandalism getting worse as the release gets closer, and as people make more rumors about new characters. Ths is just my opinion, but I don't want to see an unannounced character in this article every day. Unoriginal Username 04:25, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree with protecting the page, I'm getting tired of reverting incorrect info, although it seems more of people purposly trying to vandalize the page and less people adding characters they want. BassxForte 04:46, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

i don't see the need for a likely character list because the piece on the article that says some of the characters from melee may not return implies that most of them will. hence for a list of likely characters people should just look back at the melee article. Djchallis 08:57, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Melee trailer stages

"It should be noted that in the first trailers for Super Smash Bros. Melee (originally shown at E³ 2001), a number of stages that turned out either to be heavily modified in the final game, or to not be in the final game at all, could be seen.[14]"

Looking over the trailers, this doesn't appear to be very true. The only notable changes I observed are that the background in the Mushroom Kingdom adventure stage is different, the classic Mushroom Kingdom stage has it's pipes removed, the Yoshi's Story stage has a slightly different shaped platform, and the lab building in Great Bay was enterable. None of this is could really be considered "heavily modified" and there were certainly no stages shown that didn't turn up in the final game. Drexx 03:20, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Pikachu?

Does anyone know what Pikachu "Smash" move is?

Source:http://www.smashbros.com/en/movie/index.html 21:09, 1 February 2007 (UTC)Irockyo1

Nope, and we won't for a while. Comrade Pajitnov 21:27, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Too right. Anyway, it'll probably just be a big lightning bolt or something. - NP Chilla 19:36, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Anglicization for Wario and Mario

I noticed that there was no romanization of the Japanese Wario and Mario. Can someone add it, or is it identical to the English version? bibliomaniac15 05:10, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Generally, if the Hepburn and English are exactly the same we don't bother.—ウルタプ 05:16, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Release Date (Not Confirmed)

People should just shut up about the release date! Talking frequently about it won't make it come out any sooner! Can can people just not talk about it until it is actually confirmed!!! --TheGreenLink 23:19, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

You need to come down. Everyone makes mistakes sometimes. You need to remember to not "to Bite the Newcomers". Also, you may want to refrain from "flaming", it gives you a bad image. While it does bother me when people put unconfirmed, I just remain calm. Remember, anyone who contributes in Wikipedia are doing what they feel is right (vandalizing is, of course, another story). So take a chill pill and just revert the date. I hope that helps. magiciandude 04:16, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Everyone knows that SSBB will be released sometime in 2007 but this article confirms it will be released AFTER June 25 2007 because Pokemon Battle Revolution is the FIRST online game for the Nintendo Wii.

http://wiinintendo.net/category/first-look/ Go down the the GDC 2007: Online Date Set

"Super Smash" attacks

I removed references from the article to "Super Smash" attacks, as the article itself said that this was a speculative term that was not confirmed by Nintendo. I have replaced this term with "special attacks," which is more descriptive and less prognosticative. Unless we have a reliable source stating that these moves are in fact called "Super Smash" attacks, the term should not be included in the article. - Chardish 06:02, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Archive 8

We need to archive this page. It's too long. -Linkmasta 01:43, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I second that -- Powerslave (talk - contribs) 04:37, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Strongly agree --Viridis 04:41, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Stage Query

Hey, you guys remember from the new trailer that they show that stage with the Atlus-esque guy holding up the platform, and other platforms being around with torches and stuff all over the place?

Well, any word on where that stage is from or anything? Any ideas/rumors circulating about that stage? I anxiously await any info. Thanks! AnujSuper9 20:48, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Some people assume it's the inside of that Fire Emblem castle that was also shown in the trailers. No confirmation on that, though.. -- Powerslave (talk - contribs) 23:33, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

One thing I noticed is that under Stages on the Wiki page, it says: A stage based off Metal Gear Solid, and the stage is Shadow moses island.- Undertakerz0, Nintendo nSider Forums

That's not the stage I'm talking about. AnujSuper9 06:39, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Nintendogs

I was reading Gamepro the other day and saw that you can play as a Nintendog. Should somebody add this to the fighter list? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.168.68.91 (talk) 01:52, 8 February 2007 (UTC).

...No, you can't. There's the possibility of a Nintendog ITEM. -Sukecchi 02:04, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Should this be made as an item on the FAQ? Erik Jensen (Appreciate|Donate) 02:27, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Ermmmm not real sure. Unlike the FAQs already in there, this question has been asked a dirth of times (if not any), so I doubt it'd be much of a bothersome question. Jake52 My talk 05:23, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
No, it specifically said you can play as a Nintendog. It said you can "gnaw the face off of Pikachu as a Nintendog". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 164.116.80.116 (talk) 19:12, 8 February 2007 (UTC).
Could you perhaps give a little more to evaluate, such as reference information (a web link, or an issue & page number)? A bigger excerpt with which to establish context? So far, nothing has been shown that clearly verifies that a Nintendog is a playable fighter. The quotation you provided, by itself could easily mean other things. Dancter 19:44, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

yeah, the Nintendog is an ITEM, though the item itself that activates it hasn't been seen. it's thought that the Nintendog is used to block the screen. johnny's pizza 23:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I am going to treat any information provided by the media as any information here on Wikipedia; not valid until there are valid resources stating it as true (as in, you won't find info on Wikipedia that doesn't meet this standard). And in this case, the only valid source will be Nintendo themselves. The media cannot be trusted with this matter. Why, I read in Game Informer that this game will be out in June!? Oh wow, why haven't I heard this news everywhere?! Why? Cause it's a load of BS to sell more magazines. AnujSuper9 04:12, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Not grabbing an orb

In the second paragraph under "Items and Abilities," it is mentioned that while performing their special attacks, it should be noted that only Mario is seen grabbing an orb. But shouldn't it also be noted that Link and Kirby are seen with the same fiery aura as Mario when he obtained the orb?--<;b>the ninth bright shiner talk 00:44, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

You could add that if you want, but it's not crutial  Powerslave   Talk  01:17, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Maybe we should just take that bit about grabbing an orb out?--the ninth bright shiner talk 03:02, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
I think it's fine the way it is. Even though everyone ASSUMES the orb is what triggers the special attack, Mario is the only one who actually grabbed one in order to pull off the attack. That's noteworthy  Powerslave   Talk  22:32, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

7 archives

7 archives already, and the game hasn't even come out yet. I'm predicting a flow of edits when it comes out. bibliomaniac15 00:49, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Yep, and this page is probably big enough for an archive as well. I think, however, that we should only bother archiving when it seems like a big reveal about the game is coming. On an unrelated note, spy the last 500 edits to this page and you'll see that, aside from some additional Sonic info at the bottom, nothing about the page is really different or expanded. (500 edits ago turns out to be one month ago exactly.) Erik Jensen (Appreciate|Donate) 02:32, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

For the speculators

If you really want to speculate about characters go to the super mario wiki, they have a list on their brawl page about who has a good chance to return and who doesn't, also, i beg of you, DON'T add your speculation to this page! BassxForte 18:15, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I would suggest the Smash Bros. Wiki as the perfect place to fill up on that. It's linked to the Smashboards, which is the forum where all the speculation would and should take place, and the wiki itself would be much more appropriate for Smash half-info than the Mario Wiki, or the Zelda Wiki, or the Metroid Wiki, and so on. (I, of course, love to speculate that the subject matter of the Golden Sun wiki will be featured in Brawl, but I digress...) It's like BassxForte says, though: Wikipedia as a general encyclopedia that should appeal to casual readers is not the place to speculate! Erik Jensen (Appreciate|Donate) 02:45, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Let me assure you, I like speculating about the subject of characters, and their are a few specific characters I want in the game, but that information doesn't belong on wikipedia, I have already sent a letter to Nintendo asking for my desired characters to appear, now all I can do is wait... and hope... BassxForte 07:21, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Female Character

Can anyone identify the female character snake is fighting in this screenshot and more importantly should she be added to the confirmed characters list? http://www.smashbros.com/en/pics/img/pic12.jpg 69.115.231.177 13:40, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

See Super Smash Bros. Brawl#Samus Aran. -- Steel 13:42, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, that's just Samus in her Zero Suit. Joiz A. Shmo 19:21, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

News from Sakurai

Super Smash Brothers Brawl game director Masahiro Sakurai spoke to a Tokyo radio show, "The Gaming Show," and revealed this information[4]

  • Sakurai stated he wants a roster 40 deep, with 1-2 more non-Nintendo characters.

Cut:

Added:

  • I added this before because it is actually from the mouth of Sakurai. I think it's at least worth adding it somewhere if not in the confirmed characters section. 1up.com is a reliable source Genome4824 00:26, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Super_Smash_Bros._Brawl/Archive_3#New_Characters_and_Removals_confirmed

AHEM >_> -Sukecchi 01:42, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, this isn't exactly "news" as it has been around a while. Joiz A. Shmo 01:46, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
So it was disproven, then?--Viridis 01:53, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
No, but it hasn't been confirmed. Joiz A. Shmo 04:45, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Actually, it has, by someone on the Nintendo Forums, if I could fish up a link, I would do so. --68.7.16.99 11:29, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
Well it's not "news" but it's not in the article page —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Genome4824 (talk • contribs) 04:52, 18 February 2007 (UTC).
How many times are people going to parrot this goddamn rumor? How many months old is it now?--Claude 08:21, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
[5], the first and still only primary source for this "news", was posted on June 6, 2006. It's been plaguing us ever since. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 08:27, 18 February 2007 (UTC)


Sora?

Apparently, Nintendo got permission from SE to use Sora in Brawl. Add? Toajaller3146 03:52, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I think this may be just another rumor. Source? Joiz A. Shmo 03:58, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Highly unlikely as well. Kingdom Hearts is mainly a PlayStation serie, as is the FF Sora is from. You really need a good and reliable source for that. JackSparrow Ninja 04:01, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

KH had a great selling GBA game, and apparently Nintendo wanted permission from SE. Sora is not in ANY ZFinal Fantasy game. he's an KH exclusive. Read rumors on MANY sites. I'll contact Nintendo and ask. Toajaller3146 04:14, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, if you're willing to contact Nintendo about it, I don't suppose we should stop you. But we really shouldn't be using rumors to base content in the article on. And if it were true, there'd probably have been many people who contacted Nintendo by now already, and if they said it's true, it'd show up on many semi-official sites as a big news item, which it hasn't yet. (I'm wondering if Sukecchi is going to delete this section with either "rm fan discussion" or "This is not a forum." in the edit summary...) Erik Jensen (Appreciate|Donate)

Aye, the Sora thing was just a rumor that's still spreading through message boards. It's not totally impossible, but there's nothing to suggest it's true Powerslave (talk-contribs) 01:53, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Emailed nintendo about it, awaiting response- if i hear good news, ill add it in. Toajaller3146 03:11, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Well that's good. Don't get your hopes up for a response, though. 90% of their emails are machine-automated Powerslave (talk-contribs) 04:05, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Funny thing is, one time I sent a letter (through mail, not email) to Nintendo about Mario Party 6 I think and I actually got a response back that wasn't computer automated. Anyway, even if you do get a response back, nobody would believe you because you could easily make it up... DarthJango42 04:47, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

If anything, the reason they got square licenses(based on there's usually some truth in a rumor) was to ass some SMRPG characters to which square owns everything except the original Nintendo characters. Sora3087 19:13, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Idots Editing The Page

STOP BEING IDOITS!That INCLUDES 4channers!STOP F******* UP THE PAGE!IF IT'S true AND has a CLAIM to back it up (a REAL Claim then you can add it.If Not then GTFO! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JunjiHiroma (talk • contribs) 03:09, 21 February 2007 (UTC).

Please do not act nasty in your edits, please be civil, if your tired of vandilism and/or well meaning but unneeded information just request the page to be protected. BassxForte 03:21, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

take a chill pill. Your friendly neighborhood Spider-Man 01:46, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Wiki edits

Please, people, stop modifying Brawl's page for no reason. I also can't wait for the game to come out, but why do you keep adding useless stuff? We've all seen the pictures, there's like 20 in all, we'll have better pictures later on this year, so you should wait before putting pictures on this page. Also, someone apparently erased a few things from the ending part of the page for no reason (Spaz_Attack3000: That was me. I go to the NSider Super Smash Bros board almost every day, since before that E3, and continuing after it. I deleted that last chunk of text because it has all been proven to be no more than a collaboration of rumors. There is no eveidence that Sonic is going to be in Brawl. If you don't mind, I ask that you, or anyone who can, edit at the top of the paragraph that information on Sonic in Brawl is completely rumor, nothing more.), and someone else tried to put it back but it's full of mistakes! Seriously, the page should be locked until someone gets new, official informations about the game. If wikipedia was about making speculations about things, Brawl's page would be three times bigger than how it is now... Bleako 16:05, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

You certainly ain't the first one to make this demand... The previous discussion of that nature was five months ago here. Anyway, like I had posted here at around the same time, it's probably better to encourage editors to give editing love to the other Smash-related topics on Wikipedia then to tell people outright not to edit this page, as it'll just encourage them to be defiant. I tried proposing page locking myself for this page long ago, but it turned out Protection is not to be used as a pre-emptive measure against vandals. I'll encourage any Smash-fan editor editing this page and reading this discussion to consider joining the effort to develop the Smash Wiki, which is where I'm doing a lot of editing stuff right now to pass the time until B-Day, because that could always use the extra effort. Erik Jensen (Appreciate|Donate) 21:20, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
You're right... asking for that would contradict wikipedia's nature, which is to be an online encyclopedia where anyone with the slightest bit of information can pass it on to other people.. Anyway, I wouldn't be able to stop vandalism by complaining here if I wanted to, it'll always happen. That's just annoying though, forums are made for speculations and encyclopedias should only include proven facts and at least decently written in english (I often hesitate to write things because of the many mistakes I make).. anyways. Sakurai, damnit, GIVE US SOME INFOS PLEASE WE ARE DYING OF IMPATIENCE HERE! lol. Bleako 23:11, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Template for users adding incorrect information / releasedates

Though the problem will probably be reduced now that the page is semi-protected, I have made two templates in case someone adds incorrect, unverified information. It is like a warning template, explaining people why their edits have been reverted, which you can leave on their talk page.

{{Unreferenced msg}} - for incorrect, unverified information
{{Unreferenced vgdate msg}} - for incorrect, unverified releasedates

JackSparrow Ninja 21:40, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. However, adding content without citing a reliable source is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are certain this information is correct, please add a reliable reference to verify the information. Thank you.

I am just testing it out. Looks good :D Tinkleheimer 22:23, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Megaman is worth mentioning

I Read from somewhere that Megaman was the creators number 1 sugjested character. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 204.49.209.110 (talk • contribs) 15:30, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't know about that, I've always read they're more interested in Sonic as a 3rd party character. Either way, I don't think it's worth mentioning. Maybe if someone found a way the info could fit (and source it), it would be alright. Anyone else's thoughts? Powerslave (talk-contribs) 21:47, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

only put it there if its been confirmed by Nintendo johnny's pizza 22:06, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Exactly, unless you can prove this with a RELIABLE source then there is no need to mention it. Furthermore, it is NOT the most requested third party character, that honor goes to Sonic. For proof check out this site, http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/08/20/0531202&from=rss (Personally though, I hope they both show up!) Master Strike 22:16, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Yes, Sonic was the most requested character to appear. Megaman was mentioned once as a character Sakurai would like to see in the game, though. Regardless, it shouldn't be added, anyway. I do agree that they both should appear, though, as they are both likely candidates and have high popularity. --Ultima 19:15, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Question

In the edit box, I saw the following comment: The Sky stage has been proven to be a Kid Icarus stage, the statue in the back is a giant statue of Palutena from the games. Check the discussion for a picture comparison. So,why put it in the comments where you can only see it if you look at the edit box, and not the main article? Wikiman232 07:39, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I would assume that it is not in the main article because it is not necessary information to people who want to learn about the game, it is more of a citation to stop people who are editing from deleting it unnecessarily. Minirogue 18:10, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Archive This Page!

Someone seriously needs to archive this page. It's way too big. --AgreeneyedFox 05:33, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. I suggested that earlier but somebody said that the page will be archived when new info comes out. --Linkmasta 03:43, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Are you referring to me, perhaps? :D If so, it was just a passing thought of mine that an archive should be made and this talk page should get cleared when the next big reveal comes because otherwise archiving it now may cause the pointless reposting of a lot of discussions that were already talked about in the archives. Part of the reason why we have a FAQs page in the first place is because there's a tendency among users to bring up the same subjects over and over again on talk pages because the already concluded discussions has been archived away out of the reach of people who do not bother looking through archives before posting their questions (see my Dojo investigation above for a prime example). I think we should wait a little longer before archiving because to me it's very possible that in a month from now there will be a lot of new information to deal with, and a new archive will work wonders by then. Anyone can archive this talk page whenever they'd like, of course. Erik Jensen (Appreciate|Laugh At) 21:25, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
But waitaminute: I've heard some believe it won't be coming out until November of 2007, while others talk about that June 20 date; if the latter is so, it might STILL be a couple more months before there's info... so perhaps someone better archive this now. Erik Jensen (Appreciate|Laugh At) 19:28, 16 March 2007 (UTC)