Talk:Super Smash Bros. Brawl/Archive 16

message: Should the fact that they fit to match the stage be added anywhere in the article, or was it already done? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.133.192.156 (talk • contribs) 
(please sign your posts) i don't think it's a relevant fact. nice touch, but very trivial. FyreNWater 09:38, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crates and barrels 

message: Is Super Smash Bros. Brawl the first Wii game to use all four control styles? If it is, should that fact be mentioned somewhere in the article? --Kenny2k 01:36, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It being a first isn't very important, but mentioning the control scheme is, I think, notable.  Useight 22:23, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Brawl the first Wii game to use all four control styles? 

message: Since inclusions of all characters, stages, items are apparently no longer allowed, should we update the FAQ stating that it is not neccessary to include every info on the game? magiciandude (Talk) (review) 14:46, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: When was that decided, anyway?  I always thought that a Wiki article on a game should give the reader a good idea of what to expect if they were playing the game.  Not in the sense of an instruction manual, but in the sense that as a writer, I'm describing the features of the average play session to a reader who has never seen the game before, and got this article when clicking the random article link over there on the sidebar. I feel that if the reader were to later play the game, or watch it in action after reading the article, and they see something and think "Hey!  I didn't know that was in the game!", then the article is lacking.  These articles are here to inform people about their subjects, right?  SAMAS 16:47, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  No, because games are highly interactive. If everything in the game were talked about , it would be a game guide. This is an encyclopedia. We're attempting to write an article to give people a solid idea of what the game is, any interesting development history, and anything that makes it stand out from other games, maybe. But not everything. That's gamefaqs job, not ours.DurinsBane87 18:11, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't mean in the sense that we tell them about every detail, but I do believe that all unique features of a game, and the effect they have on the gameplay, should be mentioned.  
Take these articles (the Smash Bros. ones), for instance.  Particularly the part that's been causing so much dissent in this one:  The items.  Items happen to be a big part of the series' gameplay.  A character who is normally weak close in becomes a little more dangerous with a Beam Sword, and a thrown PokéBall can, one way or another, clear out half a stage if an Electrode comes out of it.  The right (or wrong!) item at the right time can sometimes turn the tide of a battle around.  Thusly, a couple of sentences in the middle of a paragraph that basically say: "Oh, and there are some items that appear sometimes, too" is, in my somewhat humble opinion, not indicative of the role they play in the game.  SAMAS 23:40, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

text: But there are a wide variety of items that are individualy not very special. The difference between the beam sword, home run bat, and fan isn't really all that big. and there are too many items. Any item you'd mention, someone would come along and say "oh, well, if they mention that item, lets put a blurb about MY favorite item." Then there's the fact that we don't know many of the items that will be available in the game. information about items, since their a huge function in game play, should be in the Super Smash Bros. SERIES article. it makes more sense there then to put the same blurb in every smash bros. article.  DurinsBane87 23:47, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Huh? I'm a little confused on what you said. magiciandude (Talk) (review) 16:52, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Time To Update FAQ? 

message: I've been watching the history of the Brawl page, and it seems to get vandelized every day. The page has been cleared, letters and words changed, and new characters coming out of nowhere (Although Johnny Appleseed WOULD be a good character). Could someone lock it how it was locked before? It seems like only people that dont have a Wikipedia Account are doing this, so that should stop most of the problem. --Kenny2k 22:44, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can ask for it, but I have to warn you guys in advance, this page doesn't experience anywhere near the vandalism some articles on Wikipedia do, so we're likely to get just a one or two week-long semi-protection at the most. Arrow 23:47, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lock the page? 

message: Please protect it with all your MIGHT! I jus got all that stuff off the official website. 0.0 Also can some one make it into a chart? best regards--Hitamaru 23:18, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Its supposed to be an encyclopedic article, not a list. Plus, if we did keep it in the article, people will vandlize it like crazy. --Kenny2k 23:56, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It does however sum up the ssbb confirmed stuff, why not just make it into the chart, if it does get vandalized then we just get the page locked, it needs locking anyways. What is the worst that can happen? Atleast give it a try, to lengthen the article.Sasst82 00:42, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Look at the other smash bros. articles. They don't have any of it. The characters are covered in the Super Smash Bros. Series page in a chart. And none of the items are really important enough to mention. DurinsBane87 00:46, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: though there aren't many the new items are atleast worth mentioning, because these are new to the smash bros. series.Sasst82 00:54, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The SSBM article doesnt mention new items, and the SSB article doesnt mention all the items. They don't change gameplay, not really, they just use the same gameplay in slightly different ways. The Final Smash is mentioned because it will change gameplay by giving every character a super move. That's why it was mentioned. Furthermore, any items that DO get mentioned should be integrated to the gameplay section, not given in a list. DurinsBane87 01:11, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright I guess that sounds ok,all I was thinking is a table would look nice,be easier to understand and lengthen this articleSasst82 05:37, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A table for day-by-day updates (if i understand right) is a BAD idea, It just fills the article with trivia. we need to mention only note worthy things, in the correct section, like characters and maybe stages, not EVERY item or attack.→041744 05:51, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Remember, its gotta match the other two Smash Bros. pages. --Kenny2k 06:06, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The character sections are different, in melee it is an unordered list whereas this article has the characters put in a paragraph(just pointing it outa)Sasst82 03:11, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Protect the Confirmed section

message: Should the various levels seen in Nintendo's trailers for Brawl be mentioned somewhere? I'm not sure, as many could be just betas. Deoxys911 10:55, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Which is exatly why they won't be mentioned. Only confirmed stages like Battlefield and Delfino Plaza should be mentioned, if at all. Just a thought, dores anybody else think that it's kinda odd/lame that they're using MENU music for a stage? 195.195.15.250 12:39, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We will not be discussing that part about the menu music. This is a talk page, not a forum. -Sukecchi 13:17, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trailer Levels 

message: Yesterday, I e-mailed to Tips and Tricks, I asked them if it was true that in their issue, if they stated that Nintendo has contacted Sega, here's the response I got from someone: I don't think we stated in print that Nintendo had contacted Sega. However, he did stated that: that Nintendo was actively negotiating for the rights to include at least one other non-Nintendo character. I guess we can now remove the part about Nintendo contacting Sega and add in the fact that Nintendo is activtely seeking to have rights for non-Nintendo characters. Source: August 06 issue. magiciandude (Talk) (review) 17:43, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good work. I say we remove it. JMJ 18:23, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Correct me if I'm wrong but, aren't we are relying on one article to keep it?, which for all we could be written by 1 person; so why believe what we have.  I know this was a  while ago, when we had sonic in his own section why was it that it said the magazine's credibility has been question?  If the magazine's credibility is questioned that is like adding a release date to this article.  Before this goes any farther though it might be helpfull for someone to upload the article.Sasst82 03:04, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Is there a way to send a transcript to Wikipedia? magiciandude (Talk) (review) 18:27, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  E-mail to Tips and Tricks (regarding Sonic) 

message: Sakurai stated like a year ago that the game would be playable very soon, and that he wouldnt update it much because of the games production. Now, he updates the site nearly every day now, so if the game is finished, then it shall be released soon--Demonworks
That's original research, he could do all the updates for the week in a hour one day and put them on the site one at a time, he likely still working on it or else he would say something like "the game's almost ready". Don't infer get facts.→041744 16:07, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the game finished? 

message: Guys I know we all have good intentions here. We all want to provide the best information possible but I think for the most part things are getting a little too detailed. We are getting some pretty decent CONFIRMED updates now a days why not just stick with confirmed & offical updates and information until the game comes out. I think it would do everyone and the article good to just settle down a little with trying to include little details before the game is out. Just a thouhgt I think a lot of people share. (Poweroverwhelming 17:30, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, everything has been a little intense around here ever since the site has relaunched. magiciandude (Talk) (review) 18:33, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We all know to get updates from official sources but some ignorant people think a comment from a random blogger is as true as a comment from the game makers, I wish people had more common sense.→041744 18:50, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not so much that they believe it as they want to believe it.Sasst82 19:46, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

text: We need to make sure the page is protected during E3, or we might as well destroy the page now and save time. --Kenny2k 05:05, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stick with confirmed / official updates 

message: If you guys really want to get serious about this article, you can't be putting useless comments like "As of June 2007, it is still unkown if Sonic will be included."  (206.105.116.41 17:32, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ...was that behavior called for? Maybe you can tell us why that text is needed.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 18:00, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

text: then the entire portion of sonic would be speculation; no offense, but if you take that out the info on sonic should go to and we don't need peope getting into edit wars, not with E3 coming so soon, we need to concentrate on important stuff like locking the article. Sasst82 19:29, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, Sonic is worth mentioning because the character is the most requested third party character.  The info is fine as is.  There is no need to have the statement "As of ..." because a person already says that "That's not in the cards at the moment".  Obviously, if Sonic were to be announced, that would change.  --myselfalso 19:50, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Didn't see that.Sasst82 20:14, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't like wikipedia's rules and even I relize that the "As of..." sentance is needed.  And it is a redundant statement with "That's not on the cards at the moment"  and the fact that he's absent from the confirmed charater section.  All that is is a statement from a fan who's doing too much wishfull thinking.  You're basically saying "He's not confirmed yet...but he probably will be soon.  Just not now."  (Zojo 22:27, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you say "As of June 2007, Sonic is still not confirmed", you might as well say the same thing about Yoshi. Nintendo talked about Sonic in Brawl. Nintendo talked about Yoshi in Brawl. Unless you also put "As of June 2007, Yoshi is still not confirmed", take it off the article. --Kenny2k 23:33, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sonic 

message: See Wikipedia:Requests for page protection#Current requests for protection.  I've requested to protect the page.  --myselfalso 20:01, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was declined.Sasst82 21:28, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Request again. This page is getting vandelized with the stupidest stuff, and has been completly cleared several times. --Kenny2k 23:33, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I did, but my timing was terrible, when I got it out there were already ones in front of it (I think they missed it).  Sadly when the article is submitted for lockdown people spam it more, I hope I haven't lost anything, but I have reverted this article twice in the same day!!!  It is getting very frustrating.  I have requested a full lock during E3, no editing by anyone, but the admins.Sasst82 00:59, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: E3 protection is mandatory. I would perfer that it stayed protected until its released, though... --Kenny2k 02:30, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:   myselfalso has commented on having the article locked until the game comes out.I personally would settle for through E3 over not having it locked at all.  Also we don't know when it comes out (probably just have to get locked repeatedly)Sasst82 02:41, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've semi-protected the page for a month. It's not preemptive (we don't protect pages preemptively, see WP:PROT), but it's because of the ridiculous amounts of vandalism for the past few weeks. Full protection during E3 is unlikely, as that should only be done when there are extreme levels of vandalism (though that could happen). — MalcolmUse the schwartz! 21:10, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page Protection 

message: We've all been over this before. There isn't a Stages section on the other pages, and I think we all agreed at one point that it dosn't belong in the article. Should I remove it? --Kenny2k 22:10, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Somebody already removed it, I feel sorry for the guy who typed all that just to have it deleted. magiciandude (Talk) (review) 22:15, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Are they at least mentioned in the article somewhere. Even "a few new stages will be added such as [stage here]" somewhere would be good right?Blindman shady 18:15, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Right. magiciandude (Talk) (review) 21:31, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wrong. --Kenny2k 00:28, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

text: What are you talking about? There IS a stages section on the other pages.--Claude 02:50, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So I can't state an opinion now? If you payed attention, I said "wrong" to having a stage section. On ANY SSB article. Its too trivial.--Kenny2k 09:07, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: no, you said "there isn't a stages section on the other pages", which was what they were complaining about.  you're allowed to have opinions all you like, and we'll happily listen to them. :) Djchallis 11:04, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Personally I think anything about the stages should be, at most, a subsection under the Gameplay section, or even just a paragraph within the Gameplay section. The fact that nearly all of the stages have something going on in them during battle is probably the most notable thing about the stages so far, as the said 'going ons' are fairly more significant and noticeable than those of the previous two games in the series. Disaster Kirby 11:29, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm fine with the stages subsection, but we can't speculate as much as the section that was removed(It speculated on stages that were in the trailers).  It would be a subsection because there is very little info on stages.The other two games do have stage sections, but one of them is just an overview of how many stages there are and the other mentions examples, so we don't need to name all the stages (from the game) in the article.Sasst82 15:32, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Because there's hardly any information about stages available.  For the other games, there is information on all the levels...for this game there's so far...5?  Maybe 6?  When characters and stages were merged into game play, it was the consensus at the time to have a characters subsection but not a stages subsection because of the lack of info.  It was suggested to wait until release to have a stages section.  --Son 17:06, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no way to have an actual section for them. The current set up is as in depth as we are going to go. At most, there may be a couple of decent details to add, but there won't be more than a paragraph on them at any time. TTN 17:09, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly. --Kenny2k 03:14, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WHY is there a section about Stages?? 

message: Hey there, Zelda was revealed on the website today, she's been revamped to have her Twilight Princess look, the same as Link, can we add this to the character section?
You can, but it isn't neccessary. Deoxys911 07:42, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Um, I pretty much did when I put her name between Link and Fox in the 'new design' sentence of the Characters section. Disaster Kirby 07:46, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I was thinking the same thing, actually.  It's definitely darker than in Melee.  In any event, it's not really encyclopedic and probably doesn't need to be mention unless a big deal is made of it in the coming days. Jeff Silvers 12:56, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.. Zelda's color tones are more vivid than in Twilight Princess (even on her dress).. but that's probably because TP's artistic style consisted mostly of washed up colors... maybe they decided to make her hair more contrasted in the transition from TP to Brawl so she would fit better with the abundance of shiny colors that are present in this game. Bleako 09:49, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zelda 

message: Should this be added to the article.... but where?
 
DivineShadow218 07:05, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It has already been added, just worded differently.Sasst82 15:45, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: no it hasn't DivineShadow218 19:50, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

text: However, the names are now part of the gameplay. Unlike the last game, you can customize the controls to your name. It seems fairly important. --Kenny2k 21:02, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I'd say no to that. We don't even know of thats the real screen. Remember the caption "The character-selection screen is still a secret!"? That could mean anything, including that it's a fake image. Dengarde 23:55, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd like to point out that there is something like the above quote in the article"The game can be played using four different control schemes: the Wii Remote on its side, the Wii Remote/Nunchuk combo, the Classic controller, or the standard GameCube controller.[7] Players will be able to create profiles with personalised button configurations for each control method.[10".Sasst82 00:07, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would like to further point out that what you quoted, it dosn't state anything about the names. I think there should be mention of the names.DivineShadow218 00:58, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  It calls them profiles instead of names. Which is what they are. the name is the name of a profile. DurinsBane87 01:01, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Names