Talk:Clone/Archive 6

From SmashWiki, the Super Smash Bros. wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
The icon for archives. This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Direct any additional comments to the current talk page.

The rewrite

I have re-written most of this page from scratch. The goal was to solve a few problems:

  1. The article didn't distinguish whether a difference mattered to whether a character is a clone, which left some confusion over the definition.
  2. The developer term "echo" doesn't match the fan term "clone", and the article didn't really lay that out right.
  3. Some characters (e.g. Wolf) needed a new category created for them.

I'm leaving the page fully-protected for now to give the new format time to sink in. After that, it'll be dropped to autoconfirmed so it can be more widely improved. Toomai Glittershine ??? The Frivolous 16:00, 2 February 2019 (EST)

I think the rewrite was a really good way to distinguish full clones, semi-clones, psuedo clones, etc. However, I’m curious as to why physical attributes were not considered as “distinguishing characteristics”. Considering how they affect how a character plays far more than individual moves, shouldin’t things like the Marth clones’ sweetspots, the Links being progressively faster but weaker, and Pichu hurting itself be considered distinguishing characteristics? Lou Cena (talk) 16:07, 2 February 2019 (EST)
Changing attributes is a lot less effort than inventing new attacks and creating their animations, and the idea of clones is to be less effort. Toomai Glittershine ??? The Inconceivable 17:20, 2 February 2019 (EST)
Regardless of how easy changing attributes are (and I do believe you that changing attributes is easy, mind you), I still think that they qualify as distinguishing differences. When I think of how Roy is different, I don’t think of his neutral attack. I think of his hilter sweetspots replacing Marth’s tipper sweetspots. When I think of how Pichu is different, the first thing that comes to mind is its masochaoism, not its up smash. The “other notes” thing should be for things such as Lucina’s up tilt having a timing-based sweetspot with more damage but less knockback that is completely absent on Marth, or Dark Samus’s Up smash catching smaller opponents that Samus normally can not. Lou Cena (talk) 19:34, 2 February 2019 (EST)
Then perhaps we need a better title than "distinguishing differences", because the point of the column is to list the ways in which the character is not a clone - and it's demonstrated by Melee that changing attributes, hitboxes, and other non-animation properties does not make a character less of a clone. Toomai Glittershine ??? The Undirigible 20:08, 2 February 2019 (EST)
Maybe change the “distinguishing differences” column to “different moves”, and then split the “other/notes” column into “attributes” and “other minor differences”? Lou Cena (talk) 20:14, 2 February 2019 (EST)
Not a bad idea. I'll call the first column "unique moves", but keep the second as "other notes", to keep the two as "differences that make them less of a clone" and "all other differences". (It'll probably look a bit messy if we try to have three columns of substantial text.) Toomai Glittershine ??? The Boss 20:22, 2 February 2019 (EST)
The last sentence in the echo fighter description may be a bit too "absolute", I would rather go with something like :
  • Whereas the spectrum of clone terms are used by the community to discuss the degree of similarity in the final result, the term echo fighter is used by the developers to denote a character as being low-budget. Echo fighters end up having a lot of similarities to their parents, but such similarities aren't as much as the reason they are classified as echo fighters as they are a natural consequence of being developped from another character to save on development costs.
I hope this won't lead to too much arguing as I feel responsible for that initiative, and as I feel that there will still be some people who won't trust me about it. YoshiRyu (talk) 16:26, 2 February 2019 (EST)
Yeah I had trouble with that sentence, trying to figure out how to say "the devs's opinion does not match the fans' opinion" in a factual way. I'll try another one. Toomai Glittershine ??? The Inconceivable 17:20, 2 February 2019 (EST)
A shorter version could be :
  • Whereas the spectrum of clone terms are used by the community to discuss the degree of similarity in the final result, the term echo fighter is used by the developers to denote a character as being low-budget. As a consequence of that initial intend, echo fighters naturally end up having a lot of similarities with their parents, for they share a significant amount of assets with them.
Or something like that. YoshiRyu (talk) 18:06, 2 February 2019 (EST)
I don't think the similarities should be denied. I just think it should be stated that they do have a lot of similarities (obviously), while being careful not to imply that those similarities define what an echo fighter is.
In the end, they are similar because they are echoes, not the other way around. YoshiRyu (talk) 18:09, 2 February 2019 (EST)

I feel like Ultimate Ganondorf is more of a psudeo-clone

According to Toomai’s cloneosity chart, Ganondorf only shares 50% of his moves. However, I noticed that the neutral aerial was labeled as a cloned move, despite Ganondorf doing a back kick then a front kick while Falcon does 2 front kicks. If hat’s a cloned move, then so is Roy’s Forward smash. Lou Cena (talk) 02:23, 9 February 2019 (EST)

Uhhh I have no idea where you're getting that claim from. Ganondorf makes the exact same neutral aerial kicking motions as Falcon, with the only difference being speed and graphic effects. I suggest using training mode's frame-by-frame to see for yourself. Toomai Glittershine ??? The Sharp 09:35, 9 February 2019 (EST)
My bad. I was looking at the moveset table. I was wrong about his neutral aerial. Even then, while i was looking at your chart, I noticed that what you counted as a semi-clone stretched out to 35% while Pseudo-clones only stretched out to 15%. That’s a ridiculously small margin for what a psudeo-clone is. Was thee any source specifically stating that semi-clones have to share more than 45% of their moveset? Because Ganondorf is literally teetering on the edge of semi-clone. I’m not entirely sure if Ganondorf really can be called a semi-clone anymore if he shared only 50% of his moves and all of his shared moves have completely different functions. Lou Cena (talk) 11:12, 9 February 2019 (EST)
Ganondorf is indeed approaching pseudo-clone status, but I don't think he'll quite get there if he keeps 4/5 same aerials, 3/4 same throws, and 3/4 same specials (remember, function does not matter). All the other pseudo-clones have much more variation in two of those three areas. Toomai Glittershine ??? The Inconceivable 16:15, 9 February 2019 (EST)

Let’s leave this up to a consensus on whether Ganondorf is a semi-clone or a psudeo-clone

Psudeo-clone: Lou Cena: The margin of what a psudeo-clone is is oddly specific. Lou Cena (talk) 12:40, 10 February 2019 (EST)

Semi-clone: Toomai: Ganondorf shares many of his throws and aerial with Captain Falcon.

Function DOES matter. In fact, clones in Ultimate are nearly identical in function. Identical functionality saves up a lot of balance time. --86.163.147.208 16:11, 10 February 2019 (EST)

If you want to use my page as the basis for your argument, here's the explanation: Ganondorf is twice as close to the next semi-clone as he is the next pseudo-clone. But I don't think using only that page is a good idea for this talkpage so I speak in more general terms (for SSBU): Luigi has mostly his own throws and specials. Lucas has his own aerials and throws. Ganondorf still shares most of Falcon's aerials, throws, and specials. It's not the sharpest difference but it's fairly well-defined. Toomai Glittershine ??? The Breegull 16:54, 10 February 2019 (EST)

I admit defeat. You win. Ganondorf is a semi-clone. Lou Cena (talk) 16:56, 10 February 2019 (EST)
Technically, Ganondorf has two unique throws (that being his forward and up throw), but all but one of his aerials are close to identical to Falcon's. He should really receive a new up and neutral aerial at the very least. OldLink5 (talk) 23:36, 13 February 2019 (EST)

What the developers consider clones.

I think the developers actually have a definition on what makes a clone or not. And it differs per game.

Melee: Clones share largely all the basic attack motions with the original character - with large changes to character attributes and move properties. Some moves can even function completely differently like Ganondorf Up Tilt or Falco's lasers. Balanced as completely new characters against the rest of the cast. Future "declonings" are mainly just animation changes and tweaks to emphasise their Melee traits.

Brawl: Clones weren't really a thing in Brawl, but the concept of reusing skeletons and non attack animations were a thing with Lucas and Wolf. Falco and Ganondorf and Luigi got their differing traits fleshed out more since Brawl really wanted every roster thing to be unique.

Smash 4: Return of the Clones. The "semi-clones" weren't really developed as clones - notice how they didn't share custom moves? But Dr Mario returned, and Dark Pit and Lucina were added. The latter two basically had all the same move properties, sans a few flourishes. as they were created to be more like model swaps with bonus traits than fully fledged additions. Balanced ONLY against parent character and shared patch changes.

Ultimate: Clones Deluxe. They literally made the definition of a full clone super apparent. Like Melee clones, their motions are based on another character in the game. But unlike Melee clones, they were made to have minor changes but no big gameplay changes. Same attributes, same overall attack/mobility/weight/size etc. They even made Lucina and Dark Pit even more similar to make maintaining them easier. They are basically like glorified model swaps - notice how they emphasised Daisy's personality and flower effects and Dark Samus' different missile appearance? Echoes are mainly visual changes, and I feel like this page doesn't reflect this.

Just before anyone else comments here, the person above is a sockpuppet of a vandal. SugarCookie 420 15:08, 9 February 2019 (EST)

Excuse me? He's actually making a good point here. Clones: Pretty much the exact same gameplay and properties. Semi-clones: Based on another character, with differing properties and animations. Differences can wildly vary but they are different enough. Example of clone: Daisy, Lucina, Dark Pit, Ken. Example of semi-clone: Dr Mario, Pichu, Wolf, Young Link --86.163.147.208 16:08, 10 February 2019 (EST)

Once again, the above comment is made by the same vandal. SugarCookie 420 16:24, 10 February 2019 (EST)

Yeah, he has a bad rep and all (and I can't say it's undeserved), but this information is still completely valid, and dismissing it just because the person who added it has a bad rep is both petty and childish. --173.79.251.80 18:03, March 19, 2019 (EDT)

Unlike Echo figthers, Clones are a concept used exclusively by the players, the developers don't aknowledge them, so there is no point arguing over what developers consider to be a clone in each game, they don't even consider the concept itself to exist. YoshiRyu (talk) 05:34, March 20, 2019 (EDT)

This is incorrect; clones are indeed an official concept in earlier games. Melee marks them with recessed boxes on the selection screen, Brawl has no clones and Sakurai said so, and SSB4 places Doc/Lucina/DP outside other characters of their series. Toomai Glittershine ??? The Non-Toxic 06:52, March 20, 2019 (EDT)
This is an interpretation, a pinpointed one, however still an interpretation. Official mean explicit aknowledgement. Of course WE know the recessed boxes were clones, it's obvious, but the game didn't said so, and the dev never said so either. As Doc/Lucina/DP being at the end of the selection list, it's not an aknowledgement they are clone either, it was actually an aknowledgement that they are what would later be known as Echo fighters. I stand by my words : the devs never used once the word "clone", that's something the players came up with, so it's pointless to wonder what the developer consider clones are, they never told, and they never will. YoshiRyu (talk) 17:29, March 20, 2019 (EDT)
And I will even further my comment by explaining why it's pointless : while we, as players, feel the need to separate the characters in specific categories with boundaries, the devs don't actually have this kind of concern. Between a full fleshed brand new character and a perfect copy, they can put the amount of work they want to. There is no requirement for such a clear separation for them. If they want to make a very similar copy, they can do so, but they can also deviate as much as they want. They don't have the need to define "rules" over how unique each character will be, they can make a character 100% identical, 99%, 98%, 97%, etc. For us, it's about categories, for them it's more about a budget decided individually for each character. Ken got more budget than Daisy, Isabelle got less budget than Wolf, that's it. At no point they wondered if Ken was too different from Ryu, or if Isabelle was too similar to the Villager. They don't put the characters into little boxes taged "clones", "semi-clones", or "pseudo-clones" like we do. So it's pointless to wonder what a clone is from the devs perspective as they more about "how unique is it" than "is it a clone". If you want to emulate the devs point of view, you need to replace the categorisation players did by a "clonish rate" in percentage that will be specific to each character. YoshiRyu (talk) 17:29, March 20, 2019 (EDT)

Can we not reopen an old talk post, especially with the intentions behind this post? SugarCookie 420 18:02, March 20, 2019 (EDT)

I mean, there's no rule that says they can't do so, since someone could easily bring new information to the table. Alex the Jigglypuff trainer 18:04, March 20, 2019 (EDT)
Isn't there a policy or rule that doesn't allow reopening talk pages? Or is that for closed discussions? Also, there's a huge clone conversation below, so there isn't a point reopening this. SugarCookie 420 18:06, March 20, 2019 (EDT)
There is a rule against bringing up previously settled discussions, but not against continuing unsettled ones. Alex the Jigglypuff trainer 18:09, March 20, 2019 (EDT)
Not trying to be a pain here, but how are users like me supposed to know that a talk is closed ? YoshiRyu (talk) 21:07, March 21, 2019 (EDT)

Ness and Captain Falcon in SSB

Since the concept of pseudo-clones has been introduced, I was wondering if Captain Falcon and Ness in Smash 64 fit in this category. Based on the definition of a pseudo-clone on the page, it seems like they probably should be considered pseudo-clones of Samus and Mario, respectively. They're definitely unique enough to not be semi-clones, but since some of their moves are derived from Samus and Mario, should they go into this category? I could be wrong about this, but I think Captain Falcon in SSB shares more moves with Samus than Wolf in Ultimate shares with Fox. Captain Falcon and Ness are definitely unique characters in every game since Melee, but can they be considered Pseudo-clones of Samus and Mario respectively in Smash 64? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.41.244.226 (talk • contribs) 14:20, February 11, 2019

According to this list, Samus and Captain Falcon share about 22% of their moves, which is not enough for pseudo-clone, wihc is 30%. Ness and Mario most likely have a much less similarity percent. So no, both aren't pseudo clones. SugarCookie 420 13:21, 19 February 2019 (EST)

Really it’s likely that captain Falcon both are based on the demo fighters with some of Samus normals 

Thegameandwatch (talk) 16:09, 21 February 2019 (EST)

The rewrite isn't helpful.

1. It doesn't really explain what an echo is. Echoes I feel like are a special kind of clone, instead of having major gameplay differences, they have mainly cosmetic differences or differences that don't really affect the tier placement of a character or their gameplan.

2. It fails to properly explain the key differences between the Links, or Ness and Lucas, or Fox and Falco etc. It just focuses on which move animations are different. There's far more going on.

3. Some information is outright false on the character pages. Especially Lucina's. As a Lucina player and going by her data, she's definitely not an aggro character. She's basically the same as Marth.

4. Why the heck is Ken a semi clone but Pichu a full clone? Literally all of Pichu's moves are different. --86.162.156.194 12:38, 24 February 2019 (EST)

There’s a good reason why I changed “none” to full sentences describing that while a character has unique functions on several moves (such as Falco), none of his moves are actually different. Lou Cena (talk) 13:20, 24 February 2019 (EST)

It's like, the defintion of what means to be a "clone" isn't really interchangable per game. Clones in Melee wouldn't be considered clones by the team's Ultimate standards, and we have to remember that full roster balancing was a factor that Melee clones got but 4 and Ultimate clones didn't. Sakurai back then developed clones to be different in gameplay, often drastically. But clones in Ultimate play it much more safe in terms of gameplay changes, instead opting for visual flair. --5.81.71.118 16:25, 28 February 2019 (EST)

Why is this page protect

Now only adminstratiors can editbit Thegameandwatch (talk) 10:47, 25 February 2019 (EST)

Memoryman3 is the main reason why. Using sockpuppets and anonymous IP addresses, he is trying to insert his own false and biased information that attempts to change the definition of clone characters. Ever since Daisy was revealed in Ultimate as a clone of Peach under the Echo Fighter label, Memoryman3, who as you should all know is obsessed with Daisy, has been going insane over Echo Fighters and other clones. He's been editing the Super Mario Wiki and SmashWiki, among other places, to support his biased perspectives. I have been the main force in reversing his changes to clone-related pages, and proving that Dr. Mario, Pichu and Young Link are still full clones in Ultimate and have not become semi-clones, and the administrators of this wiki have ultimately succeeded in blocking him and his sockpuppets/IP addresses. Zakawer2 (talk) 14:58, 27 February 2019 (EST)
It's not true that only admins can edit this article. It is protected up to established users, so users with accounts 90 days old and with 100 edits may edit it. Serpent SKSig.png King 15:38, 27 February 2019 (EST)

But that can take too much time Thegameandwatch (talk) 09:02, 28 February 2019 (EST)

I personally agree that 90 days is too much time and 100 edits is far too little, but until Memoryman goes away, we’ll have to keep this page protected for only established users and afmins for now. Lou Cena (talk) 09:48, 28 February 2019 (EST)

Also all of the echo fighters are protected So only admins can edit it them Thegameandwatch (talk) 13:44, 28 February 2019 (EST)

Well, until then, I can only hope MM3 gets the professional help he so desperately needs. 24.6.47.241 18:29, March 12, 2019 (EDT)
No personal attacks please. Alex the Jigglypuff trainer 18:33, March 12, 2019 (EDT)
I didn’t mean it as an attack. I'm just concerned this might be taking it a bit too far, that’s all. As much as I disagree with his opinions, I was genuinely worried about a fellow human being's mental health. I didn’t intend to ostracize anyone, and I should have explained myself better. Sorry if I came off as too harsh, it's just that I was legitimately worried that another obsession would spiral out of control and become potentially destructive (I can relate to this). Again, I'm terribly sorry if I sounded insensitive, and I fully accept the blame.

Have a wonderful day! 24.6.47.241 18:50, March 12, 2019 (EDT)

Dark Samus' Missiles

In the Ultimate section, it is stated that Dark Samus' Missiles are weaker than Samus'. Has this been confirmed?--190.166.139.215 00:46, 3 March 2019 (EST)

They’ve been weaker since Samus’s were buffed in 2.0 but not Dark Samus’s. Lou Cena (talk) 01:40, 3 March 2019 (EST)
This is incorrect. I have removed that part from the page. Alex the Jigglypuff trainer 03:50, 3 March 2019 (EST)

Echo category

Is it perhaps worth having a clone subtype of echo fighter, since they tend to be far more similar to their conjugate character than clones of the past, with Ken being the only exception. And the full clones from Smash 4 had some of their differences removed. 199.116.114.77 09:49, 3 March 2019 (EST)

Mii Fighters?

Each of the Mii Fighters borrow moves from different characters (such as Mii Gunner sharing moves with Fox and Samus, The Mii Sword Fighter sharing spacials and Arials with Link and Marth, or Mii Brawler sharing special moves with Little Mac) I was wondering if any of the Mii fighters share enough moves to be a Pseudo-Clone or to at least make not of on the page Skibot99 (talk) 14:30, 6 March 2019 (EST)

The Ganondorf, Young Link, Pichu, and SSB4 Luigi debate

These four have arguably been in two categories. While they share some of their moveset with another character, Ganondorf and SSB4 Luigi are on the brim, and Young Link is arguably moreso based on the older iteration of Link rather than the current one. Lou Cena (talk) 09:10, 7 March 2019 (EST)

Ganondorf is a Semi-Clone

  1. Ganondorf is close, but he is still quite solidly a semi-clone. He still has cloned moves for 4/5 aerials, 3/4 throws, and 3/5 specials; Luigi has 1/4 throws and 3/5 specials, Wolf has 2/5 aerials and 0/4 throws, and Lucas has 0/5 aerials and 0/4 throws. Sure Ganondorf's ground attacks are fairly unique now, but he still has a lot of Falcon baggage that the other pseudo-clones don't. Toomai Glittershine ??? The Brazen 16:32, 9 March 2019 (EST)
    Again I think a major problem with your argument is you're conflating superficial similarities in animations with the moves themselves being similar, and also only looking at it as a Ganondorf copies Falcon scenario when in fact that's not really the case. For instance let's consider up air, sure they are superficially similar, they're both flip kicks, but this falls apart for 2 reasons: 1 is that A LOT of characters have this type of up air; it's not really a case of Ganondorf copying Falcon so much as it is Ganondorf, Falcon and many other characters copying Mario. 2 is that beyond the superficial similarities, the moves are very different. For a start the animations actually differ quite a bit from each other, and the function of the moves is also completely different. There will always be move archetypes that are similar between multiple characters, because particularly for human or humanoid characters, there are only so many reasonable ways in which they can attack in certain directions, but beyond a very superficial level, Ganondorf and Falcon are very different indeed. Alex the Jigglypuff trainer 16:56, 9 March 2019 (EST)
    Well, to be completely fair, a cloned move having the same animation as an attack but having a difference in what specifically it does is not uncommon amongst clones. Aidan, the Irish Rurouni 17:16, 9 March 2019 (EST)
    True, but there comes a point where the move is so different in function that it may as well not even be the same move anymore (such as Ganondorf’s up tilt). At that point, it likely took almost as much work to change its frame data, change its knockback, change its damage, its particle effects, and most of all, the intent of balancing a character. Forgive me for sounding a bit like Memoryman here, but the function of the move is meaningful in some ways. They just can’t be minor like Dr. Mario’s or Lucina’s. Ganondorf’s are completely different. Lou Cena (talk) 18:40, 9 March 2019 (EST)
    From where are you getting this assertion that function can be meaningful if it's different past "a point"? And how does one measure this point?
    You also seem unaware of the vast difference in effort between animation work and fighter script work. Frame data, knockback, damage, and so on take effectively no effort at all. Graphic effects may or may not take extra effort depending on whether the desired effect already exists. But animation can easily take an order of magnitude longer simply because it's much more complex a task. (I'm ignoring the "balance" comment because it's not relevant for this specific case; Ganondorf isn't an echo and thus was always going to have as much balance effort as any other character.) Toomai Glittershine ??? The Sphere 19:46, 9 March 2019 (EST)
    The animation similarities between Ganondorf's and Falcon's up aerials are more than "superficial". Look at this (ugly) gif I made - the positions of the non-kick leg, the arms, the post-attack lag pose, they're not identical but they're a lot more similar than coincidental. It seems reasonably clear that while they might not be "copy-paste-alter" like a full clone or a less-distinct semi-clone, many of Ganondorf's moves are still strongly derived from Falcon's, and that's the whole thing of being a clone. Toomai Glittershine ??? The Golden 18:02, 9 March 2019 (EST)

Ganondorf is a Pseudo-Clone

  1. Ganondorf is exactly at 50% on the Cloneosity list. However, there isn’t a single semi-clone who has such polarizing differences on moves with the exact same animation. For example, despite Ganondorf’s up tilt having the exact same animation, it’s drastically different from Falcon’s in every other way. There comes a point where changing the move’s properties takes up more time than changing its animations. Ganondorf is much more unique than the other listed semi-clones as well (Ken, Isabelle, Falco, Roy, and Toon Link). Lou Cena (talk) 09:10, 7 March 2019 (EST)
  2. I was never really fond of how cloneosity rates characters, and Ganondorf has a significant number of moves which are different from Falcon's, and most of those that aren't vary so drastically in function that comparing them would be laughable. Alex the Jigglypuff trainer 09:17, 7 March 2019 (EST)
  3. He rates them based on their animation rather than physics. It's debatable if this is the best method but I figured I would clear this confusion up. Skibot99 (talk) 09:47, 7 March 2019 (EST)
  4. Following the cloneosity chart to a T is not exactly the best idea, because it's mostly done as a side thing and not to be taken hardcore. With that said, Ganondorf has been Luigified over the years, and I think that there's enough differences in Ultimate to make this claim. Aidan, the Irish Rurouni 11:05, 7 March 2019 (EST)
  5. Ganondorf arguably (or maybe not) had the most changes done to him than any other clone in Ultimate. He still retains Captain Falcon's specials in terms of appearance (mechanics are a bit different), but everything else is completely different. Alex95 (talk) 16:22, 9 March 2019 (EST)
  6. There's no reason not to classify Ganon as a pseudo-clone; he's very comparable to Luigi and Wolf. Many of his animations and attacks are completely different, and even the similar moves have entirely different functions. DryKirby64 (talk) 19:38, 9 March 2019 (EST)

Young Link is a Full Clone

  1. Young Link is still a full clone. A mirrored sword hand is actually a lot less effort than you might think; after all, SSBU mirrors animations in real-time for some characters. With that removed from the equation, he only has a unique neutral attack, dash attack, and Final Smash - everything else is still identical, and all other semi-clones have at least five unique moves. Toomai Glittershine ??? The Brazen 16:32, 9 March 2019 (EST)
    If that’s the case, why is Roy’s forward smash a “different” move if all that’s different animation-wise is that he holds his sword with two hands instead of one? Lou Cena (talk) 18:36, 9 March 2019 (EST)
    Roy's f-smash is not just different from Marth's by number of arms on sword (which, depending on how exactly it's done, could arguably a significant enough difference by itself to mean "not a clone animation"). Roy also takes a step forward during the swing and makes a follow-through around his body instead of whacking his sword on the ground. It's not comparable to mirroring animations. Toomai Glittershine ??? The Sphere 19:46, 9 March 2019 (EST)
    If Roy twisting his body factored into his forward smash being a different move, then Young Link is the same case. Despite holding thwir swords in opposite hands, they face the same direction. Thus, Link twists his body forwards in order for him to even strike an opponent. Your definiton of what exactly qualities as a different animation is a bit wonky to be honest. Lou Cena (talk) 20:18, 9 March 2019 (EST)
    Please read my comments more carefully. I never said anything about Roy "twisting". And the way you talk about Link and Young Link tells me you don't understand how "mirroring" works. You may need to do some research in training mode. Toomai Glittershine ??? El Pollo 20:57, 9 March 2019 (EST)

Young Link is a Semi-Clone

  1. Young Link’s bow and bombs act differently than Link’s. Additionally, while the Echo Fighter label is incredibly inconsistent, Young Link is definitely not in the same vein of a clone as Pichu or Dr. Mario. He has a different dash attack, and all of his animations are altered because they hold their swords in opposite hands. Roy’s Forward Smash is counted as a different move just because he holds it with two hands. Why would most of Young Link’s moves not? Also, like I said with Ganondorf, there comes a point where changing the physics of a character is more work han changing their animations. Lou Cena (talk) 09:10, 7 March 2019 (EST)
  2. Young Link is clearly still based on Melee Link, which has differences from both Brawl Link (which Toon Link is based on) and Ultimate Link. Aidan, the Irish Rurouni 11:05, 7 March 2019 (EST)
  3. While Young Link can be regarded as a clone in Melee, he's definitely more of a semi-clone now in Ultimate due to Link's changes. Same with Toon Link. They're both semi-clones of Link, but aren't clones of each other, if that makes sense. Alex95 (talk) 16:22, 9 March 2019 (EST)
  4. The gameplay differences are very numerous, especially with the changes Link received in Ultimate. Alex the Jigglypuff trainer 18:49, 9 March 2019 (EST)
  5. As said before, Young Link is now more a semi-clone than a full clone because he hasn't changed much from Melee, whereas Link has been distinguished further and further. Even aside from being mirrored, Link's Breath of the Wild incarnation has more unique properties (the Remote Bombs, sword beams from the forward smash, and altered animations for attacks like the up tilt) that make him very distinct from Young Link. DryKirby64 (talk) 19:38, 9 March 2019 (EST)

Pichu is a Full Clone

  1. I’ve seen people argue that Pichu is a semi-clone, but I personally think he shares enough moves to be a full clone. Not to the extent of Dr. Mario, but still enough. Lou Cena (talk) 09:10, 7 March 2019 (EST)
  2. Dr. Mario and Pichu are on the same level, if you ask me. The only thing that really sets Pichu apart from Pikachu is the self-damaging thing and smaller size. Other than that, there's some minor move differences that, while not being the same between the two of them, are about the same in number between both Dr. Mario and Pichu. Aidan, the Irish Rurouni 11:05, 7 March 2019 (EST)
  3. Pichu is no less a clone than he was in Melee. The one thing that changed was not gaining Pikachu's new neutral aerial, and that single difference isn't enough to matter. Toomai Glittershine ??? The Brazen 16:32, 9 March 2019 (EST)

Pichu is a Semi-Clone

  1. Pichu is probably a semi clone because how it uses the move is different to Pikachu it has the mostly the same moves but different animation Thegameandwatch (talk) 14:46, 9 March 2019 (EST)
  2. Short answer: Pichu isn't a clone because the game doesn't regard him as such. Also, Pichu's recoil. Alex95 (talk) 16:22, 9 March 2019 (EST)
  3. I have to agree that Pichu is a semi-clone, for the same reasons Toon Link is a semi-clone of Link. While it has many shared moves, it also has a completely different skeleton that require different animations in many cases. Its attributes are also different even besides the recoil, such as altered knockback and damage, giving it a lot of general differences that further distinguish it from Pikachu. DryKirby64 (talk) 19:38, 9 March 2019 (EST)

Luigi was a Psudeo-clone in SSB4

  1. With half of his specials, half of his tilts, half of his aerials, his dash and neutral attacks, and a majority of his smash attacks being completely unique, as well as him often being considered on Wolf or Lucas’s level even before Ultimate, i’d say Luigi is justified to be listed as a psudeo-clone in SSB4, despite bieng at 52% on the cloneosity list. However, the list does not include physical attributes, which if they were included, would drop Luigi (and SSBU ‘Dorf) below 50%, which would qualify them as psudeo-clones Lou Cena (talk) 21:33, March 20, 2019 (EDT)

Luigi was a Semi-Clone in SSB4

1.

Comments

Skipping straight to a vote count for this matter is a very poor idea because it makes it difficult for early posters to discuss a difference of opinion with later posters. I would not put a lot of stock in this. Toomai Glittershine ??? The Brazen 16:32, 9 March 2019 (EST)

Part of this is based on how convincing the users’ arguements are as well. For example, despite there being as muh people who think Pichu is a full clone as he is a semi-clone, none of the users have either defined what a full clone is in the first place, or have just said that he isn’t an echo fighter. Lou Cena (talk) 18:34, 9 March 2019 (EST)
We do not need to "define" what a full clone is because the page already does. Toomai Glittershine ??? The Sphere 19:46, 9 March 2019 (EST)
Copied directly from the page:
Young Link fits into the mold of a semi-clone now; a majority of his animations are different. It doesn’t matter that it’s mostly just holding the sword in his other hand. The fact of the matter is that almost all of his attack animations are different. We’d either have to specify what wualifies as what specifically is “different” (because clearly minor alterations don’t count for you), or we’ll have to define Young Link as a semi-clone. As for Ganondorf, while you do make a fair point on his aerials being exactly the same animation-wise, saying that he only has “several” unique attacks and animations is laughable and retaining a significant amount from [his] parent” is laughable. Comparing him to Isabelle, or Ken, or Falco, or Roy, or Took Link is laughable. These six have a clear amount taken from their base fighter. Ganondorf’s shared moves much less numerous than any of these six. Lou Cena (talk) 01:59, 10 March 2019 (EST)
You are speaking mostly/entirely in generalities, with phrasing such as "majority", "clear amount", "less numerous", etc. I have made a concerted attempt to compare characters in specific terms, such as spelling out how Ganondorf's number of different aerials/other attack groups compares with that of pseudo-clones, or that Young Link does not reach the "five unique moves" mark that other semi-clones do because if his mirroring was enough to count as unique animations then Mario would become a different character every time he turns around and faces the other way. I don't think you have a case to ignore my position as "laughable". Toomai Glittershine ??? The Quintonic 06:52, 11 March 2019 (EDT)
I apologize if I sounded rude when I said your postion was “laughable”. However, it would be much less convoluted to just say “)Ganondorf is now a pseudo-clone” instead of listing him as a semi-clone and then saying that he compares to pseudo-clones anyways. Simply calling him a pseudo-clone would fix this confusion by giving a simpler explanation than “His shared moves, while sharing similar animations, have significantly different frame data, damage, and knockback that alters their functions.” Preferably, it should read something like this: “Ganondorf’s only shared moves are X, Y, Z... and even those moves differ significantly in function.” He’s not comparable enough to the other listed semi-clones. The moment it has to be explained is the moment that listing their status differently would be the better thing to do. That’s the basis of my arguement for both him and Young Link.
As for Young Link, while you do make a fair point on him not having enough truly different moves, he does not compare to the likes of Dr. Mario and most of the echo fighters at all. Calling him a full clone in that regard would be wrong. I’m not saying that his moves are entirely different; he still has the same general sword swipes. But if you’re grading them based on animation, Young Link would end up as a semi-clone. It doesn’t matter that the general concept is the same; all of his animations were changed, and that’s what you said defines a clone status. Your point about Mario’s mirrored animations is also an entirely different beast. Mario’s moves are literally mirrored when he turns around. Young Link’s idke stance has his sword positioned differently, and thus his animations have to be completely redone. There was a manual on Brawl’s development that said that the idle stance is what every character’s animations were built off of (I currently can’t find the article, so it may have been deleted by source gaming, but I trust that you know which article I’m talking about. The one where it showed manequins replicating the attacks of characters such as Snake, Olimar, and ZSS) I’m not currently arguing this for Pichu because while his idle animation is more bouncy, it’s the same general stance, and could be easily replicated. With Young Link, not so much. Lou Cena (talk) 03:29, March 12, 2019 (EDT)
You've lost sight of the article itself. I am only comparing Ganondorf/YL to the pseudo-clones/semi-clones on this talk page in order to show he is not one; the article text correctly treats him equally to all others in his category, rather than comparing him with another category.
It is true that many animations have to start and end with the idle pose. However, this doesn't actually mean you have to redo the animations themselves if you change the idle pose: you only have to change the idle pose at the start and end. In fact, there's a good argument that they might have copied Link SSB4 to create Young Link SSBU and only then started changing Link SSBU, which would have reduced work considerably. (We have no proof either way of course, at least not yet.) I also know the Brawl article you speak of, and it's mostly about creating new characters' animations, not touching up old ones'. In addition, there are other characters with different idle poses that everyone agrees are clones (e.g. Dark Samus). Toomai Glittershine ??? The Dispenser 07:30, March 12, 2019 (EDT)
Just a technical input : actually, you don't necessarily have to change animations start and end frames to chain them, you can use a blending algorithm to do so. YoshiRyu (talk) 08:09, March 12, 2019 (EDT)

My two cents about the matter (I'm following this page, since the rewrite was the result of my input) : Maybe you should properly redefine what a clone is, because you obviously don't all put the same weight on the same criterias. If I may, I would say that now we've got the echo concept that focuses heavily on reusing animations, maybe we should consider the clone concept from a gameplay perspective exclusively. With such a clear separation between gameplay and animation, you could then say without a doubt that Dr Mario, while not being an echo, is still a full clone, and that Ken, while being an echo fighter, is however only a semi-clone. You could even start talking about characters like Roy being semi-echo or characters like Pichu being pseudo-echo if you wanted to. YoshiRyu (talk) 05:41, March 12, 2019 (EDT)

Just a precision : when I say that we should redefine what a clone is, we could do it without retconing SSB, SSBM, SSBB, and SSB4. We may simply keep the current definition of clones as the "pre-ultimate" definition, and have in a second part a "post-ultimate" definition of clones, something like :
  • A full clone (often shortened to just "clone") may have unique attributes (such as being heavier or faster), and perhaps a unique attack or two. Otherwise, they share effectively all moves and most properties with their parent. Dr. Mario, Young Link, and Lucina are examples of full clones in Ultimate.
  • A semi-clone has several unique attacks of their own and may have unique attributes too, while retaining a significant amount of elements from their parent. Ganondorf, Isabelle, and Ken are examples of semi-clones in Ultimate.
  • A pseudo-clone is mostly a unique character, but with enough moves copied from their parent that it would be inaccurate to say they are not cloned to some degree. Luigi, Wolf, and Lucas are pseudo-clones in Ultimate.
YoshiRyu (talk) 06:02, March 12, 2019 (EDT)
Can you show that the community at large (i.e. not just this wiki) uses the term "clone" differently like this in SSBU compared to the other games? Because I really don't want to complicate things further by having the same term mean two different things on one page. Toomai Glittershine ??? The Dispenser 07:30, March 12, 2019 (EDT)
Nope, I can't. The introduction of the echo concept will surely make people rethink their definition of what a clone is. But we probably need time to see where it will go, however this evolution can also start here. The pre/post ultimate separation was more of a broad idea, but the main point of my comment was that some of you seem to focus mostly on gameplay similarities while ignoring animations entirely when they talk about clones, while others put a bigger weight on having similars animation even if the move properties are vastly changed from the parent one. You don't seem to all have the same definition of what is a similar move... So, what is a cloned move ? A move with the exact same properties (frames, hitboxes, effects, ...) ? A move with the same animation, even without common properties ? Or both ? YoshiRyu (talk) 08:09, March 12, 2019 (EDT)
Personally, I think the move can only be considered truly unique if the function is vastly different. For example, despite Electroshock Arm having a different move, all it does differently is launh at a lower angle. Roy’s Double edge dance is the same as Marth’s, despite having a different last hit. Meanwhile, Ganondorf’s entire moveset is completely different from Falcon’s in every way possible (frame data, damage, knockback, particle effects, etc.), with the exceptipn of his aerials,grabs, and two of his specials being the same in animation. Lou Cena (talk) 11:39, March 13, 2019 (EDT)
Well, it's not so obvious to me, because different launch angles also means different combos, and that's an important difference for some players. Meanwhile, you could say that having different damages is just a parameter and doesn't have that much impact on the short term gameplay. It's actually hard to give a strong definition to the notion of "similarity" because it's a very subjective word. But yet again, my initial comment was about how it may be time to remove the animation of the equation. I strongly feel that when people started to use the word "clone", they were initially mostly complaining about characters that were similar gameplaywise. But I have no evidence, it's just how it felt to me back then. YoshiRyu (talk) 16:14, March 13, 2019 (EDT)
Our main objective is to capture what the playerbase at large thinks, and I would say it's fairly clear that many people "over-rate" characters as being clones using animations and special move mechanics only; a huge population called Wolf a clone in Brawl just because of his special moves, and Lucina was accepted as a clone quickly after her SSB4 trailer having no gameplay knowledge other than her animations being Marth's. In fact, I would wager (but cannot prove) that the vast majority of players do not care what function is when deciding for themselves whether a move/character is a clone. (It cannot be debated that function does not matter for at least the Melee clones, such as Falco, so this view is not without factual basis.) But we need to balance that with the need to be accurate, and I'd say it's fairly evident that things such a "Wolf is a clone" are not accurate, which is why the additional categories were created: to try and capture the nuances between "character is cloned pretty much entirely", "character is cloned but also has their own things", and "character isn't really a clone (only in some ways) but a lot of people will tell you they are". Toomai Glittershine ??? The Loony 06:51, March 14, 2019 (EDT)
I main Wolf, so I know well how short sighted it is to consider him to be a clone of Fox (I main Wolf, yet I can't do shit with Fox). But the thing is still : as long as some people consider two characters to be clones based on a similar gameplays and other consider two characters to be clones based on similar animations, an agreement on which characters are clones can't really happen. Personnally, I wouldn't consider Young Link and Pichu as full clones, the difference in body type and therefore hitboxes is quite important. So again, what are the priorities ? You need to sort out that before arguing, cause if people don't use the same criteria, a concensus is impossible. Maybe we should put two column : gameplay and animation, and then we may all agree that Young Link is a semi-clone gameplay wise and a full clone animationwise. YoshiRyu (talk) 11:56, March 14, 2019 (EDT)
Heck, maybe we can even start talking about semi-echo and pseudo echo, like maybe Young Link is actually a semi-clone and a semi-echo (different yet similar animations could be what's qualify as a semi-echo)... YoshiRyu (talk) 12:00, March 14, 2019 (EDT)
Let’s not complicate matters. This was only meant to argue Ganondorf’s, Pichu’s, and Young Link’s status, not to create some “semi-echo” status. Frankly, this comments section wasn’t even supposed to exist. Lou Cena (talk) 19:11, March 14, 2019 (EDT)
And I think you won't find and agreement because you don't all have the same idea about what a clone is supposed to be, that's an issue ;) YoshiRyu (talk) 20:13, March 14, 2019 (EDT)
The issue isn’t what subtypes of clones there are though. The issue is if judging them strictly off of their moves’ animations is really the best choice. Because there are certain characters who have many moves with similar animations, but completely different non-attack animations, and are way too different from other characters in their category to justifiably be in the same position as said characters. Ganondorf is comparable to Luigi, and Young Link is comparable to Falco. I’m not sure if there’s any good way to put what I’m trying to communicate here, but he psudeo-clone disticntion is fine as it is. It’s only Ganondorf, Young Link, andmaybe Pichu I have problems with, so there’s no need to make a “semi-echo” distinction. That would be unneccesarily complicated. Lou Cena (talk) 15:29, March 16, 2019 (EDT)
"The issue is if judging them strictly off of their moves’ animations is really the best choice." I don't think there is any choice in the matter. Melee, SSB4, and the general fanbase all use the base idea of "attack animations are the only real important part" as defining clones. We shouldn't be making decisions on who's a clone in SSBU and then warping our definition of "clone" to fit, it should be the other way around, and if any characters don't "seem" or "feel" correct then oh well. Toomai Glittershine ??? The Ghostbuster 06:44, March 18, 2019 (EDT)
Is this still true tho ? With all the people contesting that this or this character is a clone because he plays totally differently, and especially now echo fighters are a thing, are people still commonly using this concept to talk about animation similarities ? YoshiRyu (talk) 17:09, March 18, 2019 (EDT)
I think the fanbase at large is hung up on "echo" being the new "clone" and hasn't adjusted their expectations accordingly as we have. Toomai Glittershine ??? El Pollo 07:13, March 19, 2019 (EDT)
While Pichu and Young Link have been argued to be semi-clones (particularly the latter), nobody seriously thinks that Dr. Mario is a semi-clone despite not being an echo fighter. You are correct that the “echo” term is now accepted to be the new name for clone, people have adjusted themselves to consider Dr. Mario a full clone, even outside of this wiki. Lou Cena (talk) 12:40, March 19, 2019 (EDT)

Starting a new paragraph before things become unreadable. There are some situations where a character plays completely differently but is unarguably a full clone due to sharing almost every animation, such as the four Marths. However, my arguement was that Young Link and Ganondorf do not fit that mold (opening it up for Pichu as well because I’ve seen arguements for it. I personally think things are fine with the psydeo, semi, and full clone titles. The problem is that Ganondorf and Young Link are way too different from the others in their current category to be in that group. Even in the cloneosity chart, Young Link and Ganondorf are way too far in percentage for them to be considered the equivalent of others in their category. The difference between Young Link and Pichu is a full 5.5%, and the difference between Ganondorf and Toon Link is 9.4%. Wih Young Link, while the cloneosity hart is admittedly better proof that he’s a full clone, he’s still way too different from the other listed full clones to really be one. Ganondorf, on the other hand, is at 50%, and even then several moves are listed as thre same despite not even sharing close enough animations, such as his up tilt. While it’s close in animation to Falcon’s, it causes the zoom effect, and a kick is a fairly common up tilt anyways (such as on Samus, fox, or zero suit). And about the point on how we should follow what the fanbase should form our definition, I’ve seen plenty of people on both reddit and gamefaqs put Ganondorf and Young Link on the same levels as Wolf and Falco respectively. They’re comparable enough that I feel like they have earned their titles as pseudo and semi clones respectively. Lou Cena (talk) 17:29, March 18, 2019 (EDT)

If you're going to be referencing my chart, you need to do so correctly. (First of all, check your math.)
  1. You admit that it shows Young Link as more of a clone than a semi-clone, given he's 3.6% away from the next clone and 8.4% away from the next semi-clone, but then proceed to claim he's "way too different" without elaboration. That's an argument that's hard to take seriously.
  2. You compared Ganondorf (SSBU) to Toon Link (SSBU). But Luigi (SSB4) is between them, so this isn't completely valid. In fact, because Ganondorf (SSBU) and Luigi (SSB4) are very close to each other while there's a fair gap in either direction to the next character, if you want Ganondorf (SSBU) to be a pseudo-clone, you must also call Luigi (SSB4) a pseudo-clone. You cannot have them in different categories. This is another part of the reason I feel Ganondorf (SSBU) is still a semi-clone - he's still real close to Luigi (SSB4), who is even less arguable.
  3. "a kick is a fairly common up tilt anyways" That doesn't matter for the fact that Ganondorf (SSBU)'s up tilt is still cloned. You also bring up Fox as an example that shares the move, but Fox's is a completely different type of kick that's not even comparable in animation, so I get the feeling you're not looking at things in-depth enough.
  4. I brought up the "general fanbase"'s tendancy to focus on animations because it matches the official definition of clones in all pre-SSBU games, and thus means that us focusing on attack animations isn't an official-only viewpoint. It doesn't mean we should automatically follow whatever they do (see: Wolf's status in Brawl).
Toomai Glittershine ??? El Pollo 07:13, March 19, 2019 (EDT)
  1. I admit that I screwed up with arguing for Young Link that time, but considering how all of his attack animations are altered, I still think he’d qualify as a semi-clone. I know they are mostly just mirrored attacks, but they still had to be adjusted based on his arm placement. While technically, he was less work than Falco, Nintendo still had to adjust his animations beyond mirrored attacks. I’m aware that Dark Samus has a different idle animation, but her arm placement is roughly the same. You say that Young Link could have been ported over from SSB4 Link, thus reducing the amount of work. That’s a fair arguement, but Link himself changed substantially in Ultimate (new dash, final smash, grab, reworked specials, completely different model and animations, etc.), that the workload reduced to port Young Link was removed so that a roughly equal amount of work was put into reworking Link. Additionally, we don’t know if Young Link was actually ported from Smash 4 Link.
  2. I’m going to be completely honest here: I’ve seen just as much arguements that Luigi was about on Lucas’s level back in Smash 4 and Brawl. While he doesn’t match up the chart as well as SSBU Ganondorf does (Luigi being at 52.8%), he was undeniably more different than many of the other semi-clones. He’s roughly around 6.8% further from SSBU Toon Link and SSB4 Ganondorf (both of whom are undeniably semi-clones). That’s still a substantial difference that may be worth looking into. About Wolf not being listed as any type of clone for years, again, he was always worth being considered a psudeo-clone had the definition been established at the time. While he was not a semi-clone, he should have been listed as a clone archetype in an “other” section at the bottom at the time. The ontl reason why people called Wolf a semi-clone wa sbecause we didn’t have a name for his type of clone at the time, not because he was factually not based on Fox. Lou Cena (talk) 12:40, March 19, 2019 (EDT)
If you dig through the page history you'll see a lot of consternation over what exactly to do with Wolf, and the most recent pre-rewrite status was that he was indeed placed in an "other" box at the bottom. The new "pseudo-clone" idea formalizes this. Toomai Glittershine ??? The Non-Toxic 06:52, March 20, 2019 (EDT)
I just checked, and yeah you were right about Wolf being there. My bad. However, I’ll open up this debate to include SSB4 Luigi as well. I completely forgot that he was listed a s a semi-clone in SSB4, and I do think it may be worth looking into. I know your chart doesn’t include the physical attributes of fighters, but with how distinct certain characters are becoming in comparison to others in the same category, it may be worth being included in there. Maybe for the cloneosity chart, physical attributes such as speed and weight should be (minimally) counted. Maybe 0.01% for every point of weight, running speed, falling speed, air speed, and walking speed? This way, Ganondorf and SSB4 Luigi could be dropped down to Psudeo-clone. Lou Cena (talk) 21:33, March 20, 2019 (EDT)
I have an idea: Maybe for the cloneosity chart, physical attributes such as speed and weight should be (minimally) counted. Maybe 0.01% for every point of weight, running speed, falling speed, air speed, and walking speed? This way, Ganondorf and SSB4 Luigi could be dropped down to Psudeo-clone, and YL down to semi-clone, without affecting Pichu or Dr. Mario enough to drop them as well. Does hat sound fair? Lou Cena (talk) 22:18, March 25, 2019 (EDT)
Any system that uses a sliding scale on numerical attributes (e.g. speed, weight, attack stats, etc) is going to be far more inaccurate simply because a) you have to pick out which ones should be counted at all, and b) you have to select the strength for each of them independently (because many of them have different units). There's no need to be so complex just to make some people feel like their opinion is correct. Toomai Glittershine ??? The Inconceivable 06:45, March 28, 2019 (EDT)
I can see what you’re talking about it being conplex, but I disagree that ignoring them entirely is the correct answer either. Despite not taking as long as changing an animation entirely, there is still more work in changing numerical attributes than in not changing them. Instead of basing it on how different the numerical scale is, perhaps basing it on how many are different instead (for example, all of Ganondorf’s and Wolf’s are different from Falcon’s and Fox’s, but Lucas’s weight is the same as Ness’s and Mario’s). Perhaps 0.05% for each one would work? After all, whether a character can wall jump or crawl is counted in your chart, so I don’t understand why something like weight or running speed would be ignored completely.
Also, I hate to bring this up again, but despite a consensus not being a vote, when you’re the only person who’s considering Ganondorf a Semi-clone and Young Link a full-clone out of a good portion of users, then that should probably alarm you that there is a flaw in only basing it off (inconsistently) of animations. You say it would be too complex, but I’m actually trying to work out a working system right now by. Before we bring up Wolf again, this situation is different; people were arguing that Wolf was on the same level as Falco in terms of being a Fox clone. This is arguing that YL isn’t on Pichu/Doc/most Echo’s level or Ganondorf/SSB4 Luigi aren’t on Roy/Ken/Isabelle/TL/Falco’s level. One can clearly see that Young Link and Doc are clearly not the same kind of clone, just like how it was clear that Wolf and Falco weren’t. If worse comes to worse, we may need to create a “modelswap” subcategory specifically for Daisy, Dark Samus, and Richter. As for why I’m not listing Melee Falco or Lucina (who are listed as 100% on the list) in this category, it’s because they do have major differences despite not having different animations (which is also part of my issue wih the cloneosity chart, as all of Lucina’s attacks have some sort of difference compared to Dark Pit’s three). I’m sorry if I sounded harsh, but this isn’t just “some people’s opinion”. Just because this isn’t a vote, when you’re the only one who thinks that, then it’s not that they have a wrong opinion; it’s more likely something that should be looked into instead of being brushed aside. Lou Cena (talk) 19:28, March 28, 2019 (EDT)
This is why you shouldn't start discussions by squeezing people into a vote count. When someone adds a comment to a discussion, they are likely to return to see what their comment did. When someone makes a vote, they are much more likely to believe they're done contributing and not return to see if their opinion changes when new information/arguments arise. It's even more difficult to put stock in a vote count when it's several weeks behind the discussion. (And this doesn't mean we should go around and advertise people to come back, because who's going to want to read this all at once? They would've had to have been reading it as it progressed in order to remain interested.) Toomai Glittershine ??? The Resolute 06:49, March 29, 2019 (EDT)
You’re absolutely correct that a vote count isn’t really healthy for a discussion. Would it be possible to move this entire section to the archive, and restart the debates for Ganondorf, Young Link, Pichu, and SSB4 Luigi, only this time without the vote numbers. Something like the four sections below. No votes, just simple discussions about these four. The vote topics would be moved to the archive. Lou Cena (talk) 03:04, March 30, 2019 (EDT)
Retrieved from "https://www.ssbwiki.com/index.php?title=Talk:Clone/Archive_6&oldid=1615566"