Talk:Omnislash / Omnislash Ver. 5

Is it reasonable to create this page?

I would be surprised if the attack at ~2:21 in the trailer isn't Cloud's final smash; Cloud is seen with the aura and the attack is shown to be powerful. While we don't see Cloud lose the aura, is it fair to create this page? Nyargleblargle (Talk | Contribs) 18:24, 12 November 2015 (EST)

Didn't it have a name? Omnisword or something? Idk, I don't do FF. Aidan, the Wandering Space Warrior 18:24, 12 November 2015 (EST)

Yeah, but we don't have official confirmation of the name. Nyargleblargle (Talk | Contribs) 18:27, 12 November 2015 (EST)

We do. The text box is pretty upfront and clear about it.--Totoofze47 (talk) 06:51, 17 November 2015 (EST)

I dunno, it might be a Ryu-type situation where you have a choice, or the Final Smash depends on limit breaks. Nyargleblargle (Talk | Contribs) 07:15, 17 November 2015 (EST)

Yeah. It could easily be some weird unique thing and until we know for sure, as an encyclopedia (that's like my catchphrase or something) it's not right to assume. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by a turkey! Or maybe DatNuttyKid. 07:16, 17 November 2015 (EST)

Ehhhhhhh, I'd hold off. It can afford to be a sentence in his main page until we know for sure. We're not rushing to make his other special move pages. Miles (talk) 18:25, 12 November 2015 (EST)

Fair enough, but those weren't as implied to be a specific input (aside maybe the recovery move). Nyargleblargle (Talk | Contribs) 18:27, 12 November 2015 (EST)

I strongly disagree (and not just because I already made it). We've always made pages for Final Smashes once we've seen enough of them (which we have), and as a mostly casual reader I would want such a page to exist. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by a turkey! Or maybe DatNuttyKid. 22:16, 14 November 2015 (EST)

In that case, I'd look to hear other users' opinions on the subject. Miles (talk) 22:17, 14 November 2015 (EST)

What does one lose from making a page for his Final Smash? A minute amount of time and effort now. What does one gain? A minute amount of time and effort later. It's trivial, but DatNuttyKid already made it. I don't understand the push to NOT have it. Aardvarkian (Talk • Contributions) 22:19, 14 November 2015 (EST)

We did the same for Dark Pit and Duck Hunt. So why can't we do it here? Aidan, the Wandering Space Warrior 22:20, 14 November 2015 (EST)

I know we don't really care, but Smashpedia already has an Omnislash page...as well as other specials. Personally, I don't see the harm in waiting for more information/a release to fully document it. Serpent King 22:21, 14 November 2015 (EST)

Correction: We're not supposed to care about Smashpedia. Aardvarkian (Talk • Contributions) 22:30, 14 November 2015 (EST)

It's currently 3-2 in favor of keeping (not counting Nyargle because he said leaving it out was fair, but also pointed out why it was unfair... so...).

Here's how I see it: In a month (maybe less, maybe more, but sometime in December) we're going to learn more. I already dun goofed and made the page not knowing this discussion existed; why would we delete the skeleton just to recreate it in about a month as a full-fledged page? It's honestly wasted energy to try to get a consensus in the first place. The page will have to exist eventually; we've made this type of page in the past with Mewtwo, Dark Pit, and Duck Hunt, so it's consistent with previous decisions... It just seems like a stupid debate. ---Preceding unsigned comment added by a turkey! Or maybe DatNuttyKid. 23:29, 14 November 2015 (EST)

Translation issues

So far, there's been a ton of translations I've been doing back and forth on Cloud's page.

This is because I've been flipping through this wiki, KHWiki and FFWiki. Not only does it apply to Cross Slash (from "Wicked Cutter" to "Bane-slash" to "Ominous Slash/Cutter" to "Misfortune Slash/Cutter"), but Omnislash I feel is having the same issue as well.

I feel this is an issue with the translations of "kyuu" and "ha". KHWiki on the Summon Sleight section insists on making it "Super-ultimate War-god Commanding Slash".

Seeing as I'm a stupid prick who's made some bad edits and tries to make some consistency here and there, I'm not sure what's a proper translation all three wikis can agree on. I need some help here (yeah right, I'm sure people are going to say "with all the bs edits we had to revert from you, you don't deserve our help"). --SneaselSawashiro (talk) 22:41, 5 April 2016 (EDT)

Cloud's line

I have a voice clip, without the echo, if anyone wants it (you can go ahead and email me at aidanthegamer5@gmail.com if you want me to send it). He says something along the lines of "Tsuki ga naga tana". (I dunno. I just formatted it in the way I thought it would work.) Aidan, the Wandering Dragon Warrior 12:57, 8 April 2016 (EDT)

Translation

The translation of what Cloud says (Tsuki ga nakkata na) translates to: “There was not something wrong”, not “Your luck runs out”. Japanese is something of a hobby for me, but just to confirm I wasn’t mixing something up, I checked multiple translation engines and they all agreed with me. 72.133.91.93 09:23, 26 September 2018 (EDT)Blueflame105

My sources (which include a friend of mine that speaks and is studying Japanese) suggest that the intended meaning is "Your luck runs out." If "wrong" were to be used, there would be a 違う in the phrase, which there is not. ツキ, while being the katakana pronunciation for "moon", can also be written as つき, which does mean luck.

Granted, substituting that into the phrase (to form つきがなかったな) does pop out "I did not have a chance" when plugged into Google Translate, but still, that makes more sense (and is closer to the intended meaning) than "There was not something wrong". The problem with a lot of programs that can translate phrases is they can only go so far when translating a phrase (especially in a language like Japanese), because there are also context clues that one has to look for in both the character and the way in which they speak. If you ask me, "Your luck runs out" is both A. an appropriate phrase for Cloud to say and B. an appropriate phrase for the situation (you're about to be hit by the end all be all of attacks - your luck's run out, buddy). Aidan, the Rurouni 10:39, 26 September 2018 (EDT)

Name

The name is listed as Omnislash / Omnislash Ver. 5 on the Move List as of 10.1.0. However, I don't believe it should be moved, as both versions of the move are functionally identical regardless of how they're named. Even compared to examples like Gun / Gun Special, which have at least have altered properties, the only differences between the two version of the move are aesthetic, and therefore it's fine to keep it under Omnislash. I would like to hear others' thoughts on this, however. ~ StrawberryChan (talk) 21:02, December 22, 2020 (EST)

Oppose a move. Indeed, this is purely an aesthetic difference; through testing, I found that both do 64.5% total with the 1v1 multiplier. All examples at least have other differences, such as Joker and Hero's various different specials. Awesomelink234, the Super Cool Gamer (talk) 21:07, December 22, 2020 (EST)

I Oppose moving as well Omegα Toαd, the Toαd Wαrrior. (BUP) 21:19, December 22, 2020 (EST)

I support a move because it's listed that way in the move list now, apparently. We can add "referred to simply as Omnislash in Smash 4" into the article to compensate. Aykrivwassup (talk) 21:24, December 22, 2020 (EST)

Support: whether the change is purely aesthetic is completely irrelevant (in fact, that was directly stated during the presentation, so there was no need to test if they did different damage); this is the way the moves are officially referred to in the game now. On a separate note, I'm also surprised to see that Omnislash Ver. 5 is not in the infobox at all yet, though this could be due to the usual uploader being asleep right now. 72.219.72.215 00:06, December 23, 2020 (EST)

SmashWiki doesn't have to be official. ~ StrawberryChan (talk) 00:07, December 23, 2020 (EST)

It's not restricted to only being official, but considering how other multi-named special moves were also recently moved (Hero's, Joker's, etc.), there is no reason to not follow suit here. 72.219.72.215 00:10, December 23, 2020 (EST)

The Joker ones are pretty egregious and should probably be simplified back to their base versions as well. Nothing of value is lost in having this page be simply titled "Omnislash". Miles (talk) 00:13, December 23, 2020 (EST)

I'll give this change being purely aesthetic as a good reason to keep this one the way it is, but the Joker ones absolutely should stay the way they are, since those changes are not aesthetic, and moving them back would be the egregious option in my opinion. If there is a functional difference at all, then there is no fine line between what should and should not have slashes in their titles, and it would just be better and more consistent to put slashes in every multi-special move where they actually have different functions instead of thinking about arbitrary values of what counts as major or minor. 72.219.72.215 00:31, December 23, 2020 (EST)

Adding onto this, I brought up a reason not to: the difference in the move is purely aesthetic and doesn't affect gameplay, compared to other multi-name moves where there is a gameplay difference. This was the main reason for differentiating Gun and Gun Special, for example. ~ StrawberryChan (talk) 00:16, December 23, 2020 (EST)

Strongly oppose. The slashes are the most obnoxious thing in titles and it is mostly unnecessary anyway but is definitely not necessary here. They're both Omnislash. We don't gotta do stupid things because the game does 'em. TheNuttyOne 00:23, December 23, 2020 (EST)

Oppose: Honestly, I think those moves with the slashes should be split because they're different moves mapped to the same input. SeanWheeler (talk) 19:25, December 23, 2020 (EST)

Strongly oppose, It's kinda pointless because both are Omnislash, and it's just an aesthetic change Thegameandwatch The Nerd 19:45, December 23, 2020 (EST)

yeah i oppose for the same reasons above as it is a asthetic change S3AHAWK The Festive One 20:21, December 23, 2020 (EST)

'Yeah, I already moved it. -CirbyoKieeb (talk) 21:00, December 23, 2020 (EST)

Support. Aesthetic change or not, SmashWiki is not official or whatever, I'm of the camp that we should be referring to moves as they are in the game's move list. At the very least, we should have a redirect for Omnislash Ver. 5. I see that we already have that redirect, but we still should be renaming this page. Black Vulpine of the 🦊Furry Nation🐺. Furries make the internets go! :3 21:25, December 23, 2020 (EST)

My thoughts exactly. (I already voiced my support.) Aykrivwassup (talk) 22:48, December 23, 2020 (EST)

Strong oppose. I'll be making a forum post discussing the handling of stuff like this in general soon (probably not too soon because of Christmas, but relatively soon) to explain my full reasoning, but the short of it is that not even the damages or knockback change; it's literally the same exact move, just with a different coat of paint. Aidan, the Festive Rurouni 00:34, December 24, 2020 (EST)

At the very least, we should just upload a gif of Omnislash Ver. 5 to show readers the aesthetic differences if they don't know what it looks like. Diddy Kongstar (talk) 16:42, December 24, 2020 (EST)

Oppose. I feel like this is on the same vein as Peach/Daisy Blossom in that aside from animation/aesthetic differences it's the same move (It's a variation of Omnislash, deals same damage, etc.). CookiesCreme 13:02, December 31, 2020 (EST)

Is Omnislash V5 the only attack with non-cosmetic attack differences between alts?

I know Captain Falcon had a very slight width difference between his Melee alts or something but seeing as Cloud's Omnislash V5 used through half his alts seems to have more slight differences to the regular Final Smash that aren't just cosmetic but are technically different in the attack field, is this the only instance of an attack being different beyond cosmetics between alt costumes?