Talk:Super Smash Bros. Brawl/Archive 27

message: They said the same stuff with Ness. "Do you remember Ness?" and "Ness is the predecessor or Lucas" and crap like that. Now look. NESS IS IN! He has been officially leaked, and this just means that nothing is known about Marth or Roy. Famitsu is just speculating. GET OVER IT!
::That is true, I have also stated to forget what i have stated about them in a diiferent comment.--DarkFierceDeityLink 00:29, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: But, they only showed characters that had been confirmed by DOJO!! already. Remember that Lucario and Jigglypuff were revealed via an official slipup after the fact. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 23:42, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Ending the Marth and Roy are out thing

message: There's no doubt that Game Arts is A developer. But we don't yet know if it's THE developer of Brawl and/or "The Studio." We should not touch the info box until information becomes a little clearer.Satoryu (talk) 22:32, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow, ok "a particular team that had just completed a large-scale game" which was Grandia III. "Until the day comes when I can announce the team's name", Iwata pretty much gave the director permission to share the name. All in all using the above infobox, does not mean it can be wrong in the future since "The Studio" is part of a team hired "specifically for one game with no guarantee of employment once the project was finished". If there is anyone else like Game Arts worth mentioning simply place it under/above Game Arts, removing "The Studio" and using the above does not make it wrong. « ₣M₣ » 19:28, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Even if every reliable source out there says otherwise, if that is what everyone else can agree on, so be it. Although I would like to point out it was stated in the quote, "the team's name", not "the name of those team's". « ₣M₣ » 19:30, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Since there won't be a formal name (i.e., EAD Tokyo) for Sakurai's temporary team of Nintendo and GameArts employees, I think Nintendo and GameArts should be listed as the developers. 69.243.141.41 (talk) 20:12, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: But we don't know there won't be a formal name.  We won't know that until someone can read the developer credits off the Japanese release's box. Arrowned (talk) 20:17, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Game Arts is the developer of Brawl., cont. (arbitrary break)

message: Someone already has a leaked copy of the game and uploaded brief seconds of the character selection as well as choosing Link 
If do remember correctly when Halo 3 was leaked we were allowed to use the videos to write the plot details of the game. --HeaveTheClay (talk) 17:48, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There's nothing to say that that is the game, and not just something someones made!  Doktor  Wilhelm  17:51, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  So we can't use a video Nintendo released, but a YouTube video is considered authentic? Oh double standard, I knew you well. Anyways, it doesn't prove / show anything that's relevant to the article. Coreycubed (talk) 18:16, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: We can and have used nintendo videos, not in this article but the series article. When DK was glimpesed he was included, as are Jigglypuff, lucarto and ness now.→041744 23:09, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Agreed. We won't use the starting roster, and we most certainly won't use it from a crappy video like that.Satoryu (talk) 18:33, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry to pile on, but, just based in policy, we shouldn't be citing YouTube in the first place -it's too easy to doctor a video and YouTube does not verify the truth of its videos anyhow. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 19:16, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

text: That's right, YouTube is an unverifiable source and should not be used as a reference. QuasiAbstract (talk) 19:20, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I posted pictures of that and it was taken off anyway what does this have to do with the article?--DarkFierceDeityLink 20:36, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In a nutshell, its not, not in any wikipedia article do we mention which and what characters are starters/unlockables. We only host the starting # and the total #. Just by that this is disscussion is useless to improve the article.→041744 23:09, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Personally, I have no problem with the argument you restarted (if not its timing, since we were already relatively done); you were questioning consensus, which is allowed.  Such is life, and such is Wikipedia life.  My only real irk is why you consider Joystiq to be unreliable. Arrowned (talk) 23:39, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

text: If your still upset about the playable list get over it, its proof. The maker of super smash brothers made that video which counts as confirmation of Lucario, Ness and Jiggly. )If your not regard this.)--DarkFierceDeityLink 23:25, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: He believes dojo is the only source when i told him it wasn't he got mad and undid all the playable list please some one tell him that the Nintendo video is reliable.--DarkFierceDeityLink 23:41, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Since people started asking stuipid questions and bringing up rumors monthes ago (not you). THe offical nintendo video is true (Talk:Super Smash Bros. (series)#Character reveal) but it is not relevant to this article. Look at the characters section, we don't even mention every character! We have the table on the Super Smash Bros. (series) page for the sole porpose of ridding the game articles of listing every character. And there already the 3 characters are checked on the table becuase of the nintendo video. this disscussion is pointless to this article.→041744 13:36, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Understandable, the SSBB characters do have their own article (a privilege), no need to bombard the game article with charts if that's the case. Also, if the 3 characters are on the SSBB character page, no need to go into edit wars to place them on the main article, that's not what it's all about. Both Ness and Jigglypuff are vets to the series and that other one is not a huge announcement like Sonic or Snake, it's just a Pokemon, there was bound to have some new ones in that game. Duhman0009 (talk) 02:15, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Determining whether or not we should use YouTube 

message: I have fully protected this article against editing.  In less than 24 hours, three posts to WP:ANI have appeared demanding that one editor or another associated with this article be blocked for actions on either the article or the talk page.  This is going to stop one way or another.  The protection will remain in place until dispute resolution is complete.  I am filing a report at Requests for Comment seeking additional third party uninvolved comments on the situation.  If that does not work, Mediation will be attempted.  This nonsense will stop.  This action is not an endorsement of one side in the conflict or another, nor is it a finding of fault with either side, but it is an attempt to encourage the sides of the conflict to cease the unproductive bickering that is going on.  --Jayron32.talk.contribs 23:56, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Please do something with this user HeaveTheClay he's up to no good i'm undoing off topic thing and he restores them please do something.--DarkFierceDeityLink 00:12, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No. There will be no more demands to block this user or stop that user. Such demands are disruptive. I recommend that all edits to this article and this talk page be stopped until uninvolved editors from WP:RFC come to comment from an outside perspective. If this talk page degenerates into further personal attacks, or comments continue to be removed, expect further action to stop those disruptions. This is to all people involved in the dispute; do not make demands that admins block one user or another for anything at this point. Let dispute resolution work its course, and let this lie for a while. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 00:16, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Apparently, the dispute is between two users who decided to constantly revert each other's edits. Since this is an unreleased video game, there is a lot of speculation and debate circulating around. A mediator would probably want to begin by calming them down, then provide ideas in which both users could contribute to the article peacefully. I’m no mediator, so I can’t come up with good ideas. I hope this helped. --haha169 (talk) 05:20, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article protected, dispute resolution needed before protection is to be lifted. 

message: Three ANI reports have been filed by both sides of this dispute, and this situation needs to be mediated by outside, uninvolved editors.  As an administrator, I am filing this as a neutral, uninvolved party, and only wish to see all editors involved return to productive editing. The article will remain protected until the dispute is resolved.  Please carefully consider the article history and the article talk history before making comments.--Jayron32.talk.contribs 00:02, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Please do something with this user HeaveTheClay he's up to no good i'm undoing off topic thing and he restores them please do something.--DarkFierceDeityLink 00:12, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No. There will be no more demands to block this user or stop that user. Such demands are disruptive. I recommend that all edits to this article and this talk page be stopped until uninvolved editors from WP:RFC come to comment from an outside perspective. If this talk page degenerates into further personal attacks, or comments continue to be removed, expect further action to stop those disruptions. This is to all people involved in the dispute; do not make demands that admins block one user or another for anything at this point. Let dispute resolution work its course, and let this lie for a while. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 00:16, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Apparently, the dispute is between two users who decided to constantly revert each other's edits. Since this is an unreleased video game, there is a lot of speculation and debate circulating around. A mediator would probably want to begin by calming them down, then provide ideas in which both users could contribute to the article peacefully. I’m no mediator, so I can’t come up with good ideas. I hope this helped. --haha169 (talk) 05:20, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Request for comment initiated

message: When not loged in the release date reads Febuary 10 still. When logged in it then changes to the correct release date. Cansomeone fix or explain?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.206.69.44 (talk) 14:42, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Doesn't happen to me. Try refreshing your cache (Ctrl+F5).—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 15:01, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Or you could just clear it, but that's harder to do.Blindman shady 15:36, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Release Date

message: The Sakurai interview at  reveals that Kazushige Nojima, writer for several Final Fantasy titles, was called in to help with the Subspace Emissary scenario. Can someone incorporate this into the article? 216.80.38.172 (talk) 07:00, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: We can't add it to article just yet, do to the fact that it's protected.----Lbrun12415 07:13, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Brawl development detail 

message: Given that it appears that all parties to the former conflict are stepping up to the table, and appear to be willing to now work out their differences here on the talk page, I am presently unprotecting the article.  This is not a liscence to return to the former bad behavior, but rather an act of good faith that said behavior has stopped forever, and the formerly embattled parties are now willing to work together constructively.  Please continue to work under the guidance of Edit Centric, and please continue to behave civilly.  Good luck and happy editing. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 07:53, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Unprotecting article

message: We gotta add something about that  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.84.9.105 (talk) 11:17, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. It's the subject of today's DOJO!! entry. NF24(radio me!) 12:42, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Shouldn't it's connection with the Virtual console be noted, as it's a sampler for games available on there?  Doktor  Wilhelm  13:13, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, especially since DOJO!! mentions that if you run out of time, you have to buy the full version in the Wii Shop. NF24(radio me!) 13:48, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

text: The end of game screen shown  states that the player will be returned to Brawl, so it's got nothing to do with updates (as if it was uploaded to the Wii console the Brawl disc would have to be in o play them), it seem it will just be a collection of demos on the game disc its self (which is a shame), there may even be games that arn't available on the VC. Though the statement of "for the first time ever, you can play trial versions of these games by the miracle of Virtual Console!" seems a bit cofusing, specially with: "You won’t need to be connected with Nintendo WFC to play these games." stated later. I'm confused now!?  Doktor  Wilhelm  16:10, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

text: And don't forget.  The Japanese Dojo showed MOTHER 2/SNES EarthBound and Fire Emblem: Monshō no Nazo, which could mean that the demo versions of them are only in the Japanese version.  However, it is unknown whether or not that Nintendo divisions outside of Japan will let gamers try those two games out. Parrothead1983 (talk) 12:12, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

text: S'why I just nuked it <3 Coreycubed (talk) 18:27, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: looks better like that, well done!  Doktor  Wilhelm  18:35, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Masterpieces