![]() | 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 15 | ← | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | Archive 23 | Archive 24 | Archive 25 |
When I checked the reference for the ESRB rating for Super Smash Bros Brawl it had absolutely no information about the rating. The official site Smash Bros Dojo has no info on it either. ESRB's official site did not have an entry for Super Smash Bros. Brawl, only for Melee. We should edit this to rating pending. Smashbrosboy 19:21, 14 October 2007 (UTC)Smashbrosboy
Just wondering, but... if a source requires a username/password to see it, can it still even be used as a source? -- POWERSLAVE 20:51, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
For those who might be wondering, it's rated T for Cartoon Violence and Crude Humor, according to the press info page. Erik 23:12, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Couldn't we lock this article again to new wikipedia editors? It bugged me to see the added speculation in the playable characters area. I know it's deleted but to avoid this, could we lock the article again so things like "rumor has it" would not be put again? deecee 14:10, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
I think we get enough vandalism for it to get locked. If anyone else agrees, I will put a request to the admins. Trevor "Tinkleheimer" Haworth 14:42, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Hasn't it been locked since October 5? That's the last time when some IP vandalism occurred. - Zomic13 15:27, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Shouldn't we mention the percent goes from 0% beyond 100% and even maybe that it stops at 999%, although we don't know FOR SURE that second part (999%).
Blind
man
shady
01:27, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
That box art has not been official confirm, and I am 99% positive it is a fake. I suggest we turn it back to the Super Smash Bros. Brawl lettering, with the white background. Seriously, no wi-fi sticker, we've seen all those animations, and no Sonic or Snake further proves this. It is a fake boxart, and should be removed. Johnknight1 6:37, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Just to point out, The melee boxart didn't show every playable character, and actually, neither did the first Smash Bros. Depressio 11:17, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Thats not true, just because some characters are missing doesn't mean they cant make a box art. The people who made the game have all the characters they are working with what they have.-- FrosticeBlade 21:45, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
I hope you do know that the creators just didn't create the characters in one day and show them on their site, they had them for a while and then showed us take snake for ex we show him on many many different videos and didn't get to see him on the site for who knows how long.-- FrosticeBlade 22:07, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
I don't think that box art is real, but if it is the creators could do what ever they want with the games box art if they want to add Lucas on it why not its their game. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FrosticeBlade ( talk • contribs) 22:20, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
right here http://www.vgboxart.com/browse/title/5435/-- FrosticeBlade 22:38, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Maybe it is real b/c that site is known for giving false box-art.-- FrosticeBlade 22:45, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Don't get me wrong its a nice box art but the last ones were more colorful if i'm not mistaken.-- FrosticeBlade 22:48, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm talking about the last box art for the old games SSB and SSBM.-- FrosticeBlade 22:51, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Thats is true maybe the SSBB site will give us this box art or maybe a final one?.-- FrosticeBlade 22:53, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
The FACT is Frostic, the cover we are using now if the one used by NINTENDO, its offical. Any other ones out there are FAKE. Now lets leave it at that. EDIT: We don't know, ans Wikipedia isnt a forum. Atomic Religione 22:54, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
And also the box art is more colorful its not all blue like shown.-- FrosticeBlade 00:42, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Will people please stop edit warring? Can't we just discuss this calmly here? — Malcolm ( talk) 20:06, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
The problem is the information about taunts falls under WiFi play in general. And the information therefore applies to Homerun contest. Which is false, as given the screenshots for Homerun contest nicknames do not apply. And before you say this was a random match, Sakurai says this mode can only be played with people under "With Friends".-- MrBubbles 20:08, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Yes, but it doesn't TRUE to the other game modes during WiFi, one of them is Homerun. Think of it as branches off each particular mode.
Single Player---Classic/Subspace
Multiplayer-Melee/Special Melee
WiFi Play---CopOp/Homerun
The statements should fall under all or should be specified like Satoryu did.-- MrBubbles 20:19, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
User:Satoryu saved the day. When you have stubborn editors such as myself things get heated for simple things, then again, there are more bigger silly edit wars than this.-- MrBubbles 20:42, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
To avoid another war: There is no confirmation of Online SE game play. The Dojo!! SE Co-op update says nothing about Wifi, and the Source at IGN only says "...it will have online cooperative play of some form". It could be referring to the Home-run Contest co-op game play. Dengarde ► Complaints 20:57, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Could we add some thing about assist trophy like talk about a few of them?-- FrosticeBlade 17:42, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
It's all good.-- FrosticeBlade 18:46, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
I agree, at least a list of known assist trophies. 24.59.31.58 21:11, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
We have to do something about all these images people! There can't be this many. Claycrow 17:56, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
From my own perspective the Subspace Emissary with Mario and Pit should be considered the least valuable and the first to delete should a picture downsizing is necessary. - Adv193 19:09, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
I think we should wait till we get a picture with all the players and use that one to replace Subspace Emissary with Mario and Pit.-- FrosticeBlade 19:13, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Mario and Pit are out, I suggest removing Snake's and the characters one doesn't need to be there. Claycrow 19:51, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
You should'nt be deleting pictures because certain people don't like them. Perhaps there's another way we can decide? A way that's fair. Green Kirby 20:42, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
We should take the best images and post them on the SSBB page-- FrosticeBlade 20:47, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
The only image I see that should be up for debate about changing is the one in the playable character section. I think it would be good to take a screen capture of the character section of the Dojo showing all the confirmed characters. That would show all the playable characters we know of. Chances are this is actually a horrible idea however, just suggesting something. Shyrangerr 22:10, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
These are not any more notable then every character, assist trohpey, or stage being listed, they should be removed. Claycrow 19:51, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
I think we could condense those sections a bit. Instead of having a seperate section for each, we should just touch upon the different modes in one section. If someone wants to know more they can go to the official website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.237.35.178 ( talk) 15:48, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
I brought this up before, but it was deleted due to the "not a forum rule", but this is for the sake of the FAQ.
In this video Pit is shown using his Final Smash twice in one match. This means that Zero Suit Samus has a final smash of her own. Many people on the Smash World Forums say that it's been confirmed her Final Smash returns her to normal Samus. Is there a source for this? Luigi "Kurai" III 21:57, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
At 1:28 he includes Luigi in the cast of characters. JesseMeza 20:12, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
I know you guys have been disscusing about whether or not there should be a trivia section in this article, so I made this so you can disscuss it. Use it or delete it. Green Kirby 21:25, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
How about this? No trivia sections as per WP:Trivia? Trevor "Tinkleheimer" Haworth 22:03, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Indeed, G.K I believe someone already said that, no trivia >
Trivia sections are discouraged under
Wikipedia guidelines. . |
Atomic Religione 22:04, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Trivia sections happen by chance on established articles when users add to articles that aren't closely being watched. This shouldn't be a concern on this article. Trivial things should be removed. Legitimate trivia should be moved to appropriate sections. As a page under development and with more than several eyes watching it, a section with a "trivia" title should never appear on this article. There should be no discussion about whether or not a trivia section is appropriate. -- Onorem♠ Dil 03:01, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
This section of discussion is about the creation of a section in the
SSBB article called "Playable Stages" and/or the creation of a new article called "Super Smash Brothers: playable stages"
To view the article currently being discussed please go to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Super_Smash_Brothers:_playable_stages&oldid=164165491
I belive that it would be a good idea if we were to add a section under the Playable Characters section. Or at least have a seperate article for the playable stages and link to it.
Here is my example:
The battlefield stage is considered a very basic stage and was in the original Super Smash Bros game. It has a main platform below 3 smaller floating platforms. Unlike previous smash games this one now has a changing enviroment as the stage goes through the different times of the day. ( daytime, evening, night, and morning)
Afterwards it should be applicable to post edits thereafter due to a likely range of
secondary sources to emerge after the game is realeased. Agreed?
Spitfire
01:26, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
Besides the obvious fancruft, having lists of characters/stages/assist-trophies is bad because... well, Brawl is going to be huge. And even devoting just one paragraph to each of these things will stretch the article to unwieldy lengths. We need to consider article length, and in my opinion, it is at a perfect length right now. -- POWERSLAVE 02:06, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
How is a list of playable stages encyclopedic? Wikipedia is not a game guide. Listing playable characters is a stretch, but it's still useful. - Zero1328 Talk? 02:11, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
On a related note, look at the article you made: There are three paragraphs coupled with six frivolous nonfree images. That's an absurdity! Please read through WP:NONFREE for a tutorial on the use of nonfree images. There is absolutely no reason that any of those even needed to be there. You Can ' t See Me! 02:23, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
Alright, I give up. It's obviously 5 vs. 1 and I have no way to win this argument. :( —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spitfire19 ( talk • contribs) 12:59, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
I noticed in the gameplay video, that they reintroduced fighter introductions. Should we mention this? Fangz the Wolf 22:20, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Triva section, I don't think so, but the info is worth saying. We ALL know no trivia because everyone (including me) has said no. But that doesn't mean the info should be left out. Hear me out:
Stadium is listed under the single player section in the article, but perhaps it should be moved into multiplayer? After all, it's like the normal matches in melee: they could be played with just one person, but were classified as multiplayer. Luigi "Kurai" III 14:27, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Why not. You have permittion to move whatever you want to move, aslong as you keep on giving good reasons for it as you have just given us now. -The Bold Guy- 14:29, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
No, it stays under Single Player.
Single Player---Classic/Subspace/Stadium
Multiplayer-Melee/Special Melee
WiFi Play---CopOp/Home-run
It's only played through single player. That's its primary mode since Melee.-- MrBubbles 16:22, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Given that all the stuff announced so far can be potentially played by at least 2 people, would it be simpler to just remove the "single player" and "multiplayer" headings, since the distinction doesn't really seem to apply. Could divide it up as "Adventure Mode" "Stadium" and probably stuff like Tourney and Special Brawl could be lumped together under a heading like "Vs. Mode" MarkSutton 16:25, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Personally I don't have a problem with that, but I don't know who put Single Player back. It was originally Adventure and Multiplayer.-- MrBubbles 16:28, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Stadium should stay under single player. It can be played with more than one person, but it's still primarily single player. Shyrangerr 20:03, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
I will have to go with MarkSutton on this one. Dojo only lists everything under "Game Modes", "Adventure", etc. The site does not specify if it is still classified as just Single Player anymore. « FMF » 21:31, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Isn't Sora Ltd. working on SSBB? If he says it in his name, most likely it is the company that is developing it.-- Water111 01:07, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Wow this got lots of discussion fast. I just thought I'd bring this up because I just noticed on DOJO!! it says:
"This is the official site for the Wii game Super Smash Bros. Brawl — a place where I offer personal, straight-from-the-creator reports on the project. -Masahiro Sakurai (Sora Ltd.)"
Sakurai puts Sora Ltd. at the end of his name; usually people to do that to show you know who they're working for/their corporation. Seeing this at the end of his name seems to me like Sora Ltd. is the developer. But yeah I guess an alternate source that explicitly says this is recommended... But it really sounds like Sora Ltd. is the developer.
Oh and looking at the ref for "The Studio", if you click on "Index" at the top, it says:
"I'm Masahiro Sakurai of Sora, director of the "Super Smash Bros." series of fighting games featuring Nintendo's most popular characters. Hello. (Note: Sora is the name of my company.)"
Seems like pretty convincing evidence to me.-- Water111 02:26, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Where does he say he can't reveal the name of the developer? Sora Ltd. is his company; why would he let another company make his game? Why would he have his company beside his name, but let another company develop the game? I don't mean to be rude or anything, just in case it seems like I am.-- Water111 03:12, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
I know this may have been discussed before, but Ganondorf's voice actor is listed on the IMDB. I know people are going to say, well thats not a reliable source, but so far they managed to get right all the other voice actors (e.g. David Hayter's voice for English Snake before it was confirmed). This brings me to my next point, should the article have a list of the voice actors for the Japanese and English versions? **BM** 11:47, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
The only mention of Ganondorf is from Eiji Aonuma when he answered a question from Game Informer. Here is the interview. In it Aonuma says Sheik and Ganondorf's models were submitted then tweaked to fit in the Brawl eviornment. So Sheik and Ganondorf are going to appear in some form. It's very likely to be in playable forms, but nothing can be said because anything further than saying they're in Brawl in some form is Original Research. Shyrangerr 02:30, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
![]() | This page 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. |
![]() | 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 15 | ← | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | Archive 23 | Archive 24 | Archive 25 |
When I checked the reference for the ESRB rating for Super Smash Bros Brawl it had absolutely no information about the rating. The official site Smash Bros Dojo has no info on it either. ESRB's official site did not have an entry for Super Smash Bros. Brawl, only for Melee. We should edit this to rating pending. Smashbrosboy 19:21, 14 October 2007 (UTC)Smashbrosboy
Just wondering, but... if a source requires a username/password to see it, can it still even be used as a source? -- POWERSLAVE 20:51, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
For those who might be wondering, it's rated T for Cartoon Violence and Crude Humor, according to the press info page. Erik 23:12, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Couldn't we lock this article again to new wikipedia editors? It bugged me to see the added speculation in the playable characters area. I know it's deleted but to avoid this, could we lock the article again so things like "rumor has it" would not be put again? deecee 14:10, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
I think we get enough vandalism for it to get locked. If anyone else agrees, I will put a request to the admins. Trevor "Tinkleheimer" Haworth 14:42, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Hasn't it been locked since October 5? That's the last time when some IP vandalism occurred. - Zomic13 15:27, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Shouldn't we mention the percent goes from 0% beyond 100% and even maybe that it stops at 999%, although we don't know FOR SURE that second part (999%).
Blind
man
shady
01:27, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
That box art has not been official confirm, and I am 99% positive it is a fake. I suggest we turn it back to the Super Smash Bros. Brawl lettering, with the white background. Seriously, no wi-fi sticker, we've seen all those animations, and no Sonic or Snake further proves this. It is a fake boxart, and should be removed. Johnknight1 6:37, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Just to point out, The melee boxart didn't show every playable character, and actually, neither did the first Smash Bros. Depressio 11:17, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Thats not true, just because some characters are missing doesn't mean they cant make a box art. The people who made the game have all the characters they are working with what they have.-- FrosticeBlade 21:45, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
I hope you do know that the creators just didn't create the characters in one day and show them on their site, they had them for a while and then showed us take snake for ex we show him on many many different videos and didn't get to see him on the site for who knows how long.-- FrosticeBlade 22:07, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
I don't think that box art is real, but if it is the creators could do what ever they want with the games box art if they want to add Lucas on it why not its their game. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FrosticeBlade ( talk • contribs) 22:20, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
right here http://www.vgboxart.com/browse/title/5435/-- FrosticeBlade 22:38, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Maybe it is real b/c that site is known for giving false box-art.-- FrosticeBlade 22:45, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Don't get me wrong its a nice box art but the last ones were more colorful if i'm not mistaken.-- FrosticeBlade 22:48, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm talking about the last box art for the old games SSB and SSBM.-- FrosticeBlade 22:51, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Thats is true maybe the SSBB site will give us this box art or maybe a final one?.-- FrosticeBlade 22:53, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
The FACT is Frostic, the cover we are using now if the one used by NINTENDO, its offical. Any other ones out there are FAKE. Now lets leave it at that. EDIT: We don't know, ans Wikipedia isnt a forum. Atomic Religione 22:54, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
And also the box art is more colorful its not all blue like shown.-- FrosticeBlade 00:42, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Will people please stop edit warring? Can't we just discuss this calmly here? — Malcolm ( talk) 20:06, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
The problem is the information about taunts falls under WiFi play in general. And the information therefore applies to Homerun contest. Which is false, as given the screenshots for Homerun contest nicknames do not apply. And before you say this was a random match, Sakurai says this mode can only be played with people under "With Friends".-- MrBubbles 20:08, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Yes, but it doesn't TRUE to the other game modes during WiFi, one of them is Homerun. Think of it as branches off each particular mode.
Single Player---Classic/Subspace
Multiplayer-Melee/Special Melee
WiFi Play---CopOp/Homerun
The statements should fall under all or should be specified like Satoryu did.-- MrBubbles 20:19, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
User:Satoryu saved the day. When you have stubborn editors such as myself things get heated for simple things, then again, there are more bigger silly edit wars than this.-- MrBubbles 20:42, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
To avoid another war: There is no confirmation of Online SE game play. The Dojo!! SE Co-op update says nothing about Wifi, and the Source at IGN only says "...it will have online cooperative play of some form". It could be referring to the Home-run Contest co-op game play. Dengarde ► Complaints 20:57, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Could we add some thing about assist trophy like talk about a few of them?-- FrosticeBlade 17:42, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
It's all good.-- FrosticeBlade 18:46, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
I agree, at least a list of known assist trophies. 24.59.31.58 21:11, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
We have to do something about all these images people! There can't be this many. Claycrow 17:56, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
From my own perspective the Subspace Emissary with Mario and Pit should be considered the least valuable and the first to delete should a picture downsizing is necessary. - Adv193 19:09, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
I think we should wait till we get a picture with all the players and use that one to replace Subspace Emissary with Mario and Pit.-- FrosticeBlade 19:13, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Mario and Pit are out, I suggest removing Snake's and the characters one doesn't need to be there. Claycrow 19:51, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
You should'nt be deleting pictures because certain people don't like them. Perhaps there's another way we can decide? A way that's fair. Green Kirby 20:42, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
We should take the best images and post them on the SSBB page-- FrosticeBlade 20:47, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
The only image I see that should be up for debate about changing is the one in the playable character section. I think it would be good to take a screen capture of the character section of the Dojo showing all the confirmed characters. That would show all the playable characters we know of. Chances are this is actually a horrible idea however, just suggesting something. Shyrangerr 22:10, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
These are not any more notable then every character, assist trohpey, or stage being listed, they should be removed. Claycrow 19:51, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
I think we could condense those sections a bit. Instead of having a seperate section for each, we should just touch upon the different modes in one section. If someone wants to know more they can go to the official website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.237.35.178 ( talk) 15:48, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
I brought this up before, but it was deleted due to the "not a forum rule", but this is for the sake of the FAQ.
In this video Pit is shown using his Final Smash twice in one match. This means that Zero Suit Samus has a final smash of her own. Many people on the Smash World Forums say that it's been confirmed her Final Smash returns her to normal Samus. Is there a source for this? Luigi "Kurai" III 21:57, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
At 1:28 he includes Luigi in the cast of characters. JesseMeza 20:12, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
I know you guys have been disscusing about whether or not there should be a trivia section in this article, so I made this so you can disscuss it. Use it or delete it. Green Kirby 21:25, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
How about this? No trivia sections as per WP:Trivia? Trevor "Tinkleheimer" Haworth 22:03, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Indeed, G.K I believe someone already said that, no trivia >
Trivia sections are discouraged under
Wikipedia guidelines. . |
Atomic Religione 22:04, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Trivia sections happen by chance on established articles when users add to articles that aren't closely being watched. This shouldn't be a concern on this article. Trivial things should be removed. Legitimate trivia should be moved to appropriate sections. As a page under development and with more than several eyes watching it, a section with a "trivia" title should never appear on this article. There should be no discussion about whether or not a trivia section is appropriate. -- Onorem♠ Dil 03:01, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
This section of discussion is about the creation of a section in the
SSBB article called "Playable Stages" and/or the creation of a new article called "Super Smash Brothers: playable stages"
To view the article currently being discussed please go to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Super_Smash_Brothers:_playable_stages&oldid=164165491
I belive that it would be a good idea if we were to add a section under the Playable Characters section. Or at least have a seperate article for the playable stages and link to it.
Here is my example:
The battlefield stage is considered a very basic stage and was in the original Super Smash Bros game. It has a main platform below 3 smaller floating platforms. Unlike previous smash games this one now has a changing enviroment as the stage goes through the different times of the day. ( daytime, evening, night, and morning)
Afterwards it should be applicable to post edits thereafter due to a likely range of
secondary sources to emerge after the game is realeased. Agreed?
Spitfire
01:26, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
Besides the obvious fancruft, having lists of characters/stages/assist-trophies is bad because... well, Brawl is going to be huge. And even devoting just one paragraph to each of these things will stretch the article to unwieldy lengths. We need to consider article length, and in my opinion, it is at a perfect length right now. -- POWERSLAVE 02:06, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
How is a list of playable stages encyclopedic? Wikipedia is not a game guide. Listing playable characters is a stretch, but it's still useful. - Zero1328 Talk? 02:11, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
On a related note, look at the article you made: There are three paragraphs coupled with six frivolous nonfree images. That's an absurdity! Please read through WP:NONFREE for a tutorial on the use of nonfree images. There is absolutely no reason that any of those even needed to be there. You Can ' t See Me! 02:23, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
Alright, I give up. It's obviously 5 vs. 1 and I have no way to win this argument. :( —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spitfire19 ( talk • contribs) 12:59, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
I noticed in the gameplay video, that they reintroduced fighter introductions. Should we mention this? Fangz the Wolf 22:20, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
Triva section, I don't think so, but the info is worth saying. We ALL know no trivia because everyone (including me) has said no. But that doesn't mean the info should be left out. Hear me out:
Stadium is listed under the single player section in the article, but perhaps it should be moved into multiplayer? After all, it's like the normal matches in melee: they could be played with just one person, but were classified as multiplayer. Luigi "Kurai" III 14:27, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Why not. You have permittion to move whatever you want to move, aslong as you keep on giving good reasons for it as you have just given us now. -The Bold Guy- 14:29, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
No, it stays under Single Player.
Single Player---Classic/Subspace/Stadium
Multiplayer-Melee/Special Melee
WiFi Play---CopOp/Home-run
It's only played through single player. That's its primary mode since Melee.-- MrBubbles 16:22, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Given that all the stuff announced so far can be potentially played by at least 2 people, would it be simpler to just remove the "single player" and "multiplayer" headings, since the distinction doesn't really seem to apply. Could divide it up as "Adventure Mode" "Stadium" and probably stuff like Tourney and Special Brawl could be lumped together under a heading like "Vs. Mode" MarkSutton 16:25, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Personally I don't have a problem with that, but I don't know who put Single Player back. It was originally Adventure and Multiplayer.-- MrBubbles 16:28, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Stadium should stay under single player. It can be played with more than one person, but it's still primarily single player. Shyrangerr 20:03, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
I will have to go with MarkSutton on this one. Dojo only lists everything under "Game Modes", "Adventure", etc. The site does not specify if it is still classified as just Single Player anymore. « FMF » 21:31, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Isn't Sora Ltd. working on SSBB? If he says it in his name, most likely it is the company that is developing it.-- Water111 01:07, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Wow this got lots of discussion fast. I just thought I'd bring this up because I just noticed on DOJO!! it says:
"This is the official site for the Wii game Super Smash Bros. Brawl — a place where I offer personal, straight-from-the-creator reports on the project. -Masahiro Sakurai (Sora Ltd.)"
Sakurai puts Sora Ltd. at the end of his name; usually people to do that to show you know who they're working for/their corporation. Seeing this at the end of his name seems to me like Sora Ltd. is the developer. But yeah I guess an alternate source that explicitly says this is recommended... But it really sounds like Sora Ltd. is the developer.
Oh and looking at the ref for "The Studio", if you click on "Index" at the top, it says:
"I'm Masahiro Sakurai of Sora, director of the "Super Smash Bros." series of fighting games featuring Nintendo's most popular characters. Hello. (Note: Sora is the name of my company.)"
Seems like pretty convincing evidence to me.-- Water111 02:26, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Where does he say he can't reveal the name of the developer? Sora Ltd. is his company; why would he let another company make his game? Why would he have his company beside his name, but let another company develop the game? I don't mean to be rude or anything, just in case it seems like I am.-- Water111 03:12, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
I know this may have been discussed before, but Ganondorf's voice actor is listed on the IMDB. I know people are going to say, well thats not a reliable source, but so far they managed to get right all the other voice actors (e.g. David Hayter's voice for English Snake before it was confirmed). This brings me to my next point, should the article have a list of the voice actors for the Japanese and English versions? **BM** 11:47, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
The only mention of Ganondorf is from Eiji Aonuma when he answered a question from Game Informer. Here is the interview. In it Aonuma says Sheik and Ganondorf's models were submitted then tweaked to fit in the Brawl eviornment. So Sheik and Ganondorf are going to appear in some form. It's very likely to be in playable forms, but nothing can be said because anything further than saying they're in Brawl in some form is Original Research. Shyrangerr 02:30, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
![]() | This page 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. |