Talk:Fighter

Archives

1. 1
2. 2
3. 3

Kill the "non-playable characters" section and rename this to List of playable Super Smash Bros. series characters

It's time we define this articles scope so we can quit having these long drawn out articles. Serpent  King 13:49, 11 February 2019 (EST)

Slight change to this proposal (if anyone who has already voted has a problem with it leave a comment below), This article is to be split into List of playable Super Smash Bros. series characters and List of non-playable Super Smash Bros. series characters. Serpent  King 18:58, 11 February 2019 (EST)

If this page is going to be a list of all playable characters (as opposed to just the playable fighters on the character select screen), there should probably be an addendum about Master Hand (SSBU). Smore (talk) 19:22, 27 February 2019 (EST)

Support

1. Remove. According to the official Smash website, the playable characters are known as "fighters". I propose changing the name of the article to "List of Super Smash Bros. fighters". An article including all (or just the non-playable) characters in Smash could be made with this article's current title as a compromise. Smore (talk) 17:34, 11 February 2019 (EST)
2. Support if and only if the non-playable characters receive their own article. If this is decided against, then I oppose. Alex the Jigglypuff trainer 17:38, 11 February 2019 (EST)
3. Support, as long as we define character. Are Smash Run enemies considered characters? Subspace? WoL? If not, then why not? Why are boss characters counted then? If we were to list all the characters in the Smash series, this page'll be incredibly long. SugarCookie 420 17:36, 11 February 2019 (EST)

   This article would become only playable characters, another one created for nonplayables...this is more of a split than a move now that I think on it. Serpent  King 17:57, 11 February 2019 (EST)

4. Definitely lop that section off into its own article. I made a section about this earlier (though without a vote), so of course I'm on board. We can hash out stuff like alternate characters and genders and what an NPC should be later, but if one thing gets done I'd want it to be that article getting sliced. (Also, I second Smore's idea of making this page into "Fighters" or "List of SSB fighters" or something of that nature.) Ahemtoday (talk) 02:26, 12 February 2019 (EST)
5. Immence support The chart in this page has been moved to the page non-playable characters and it fits more on that page anyway. it just makes sense to have this page be exclusivly playable charecters.Xtra3678 (talk) 08:04, 25 February 2019 (EST)
6. Support. A page for List of Super Smash Bros. fighters and a separate on with NPCs sounds good. The Character page could be left as a redirect. --Meester Tweester (talk) 18:39, 4 March 2019 (EST)

Neutral

• Depends: I support this on the basis of two circumstances: that the non-playable characters get their own page, and that major alternate characters are listed under the main ones. Alternate characters are still playable, therefore deserve having a section here. Lou Cena (talk) 13:56, 11 February 2019 (EST)

Would not be against having a nonplayable article. Serpent  King 13:57, 11 February 2019 (EST)

We could also have a small section for background characters, and links to the Pokemon and AT list articlesSerpent  King 14:11, 11 February 2019 (EST)

Customizable and Transformation

Use background color to represent "Customizable" and "Transformation" conflict with "Unlockable", and these have notes. so should delete.--Capstalker (talk) 23:05, 14 February 2019 (EST)

I wasn't hugely on board with those when they were added either, but I came around while I was editing their colors to be not-terrible.

• I presume the reason "Customizable" exists is because there's some debate as to whether Mii Fighters count as unlockable, considering you can create them immediately after starting the game. In any case, the "Customizable" background color is a subset of the unlockable color. It's like complaining the 3DS Unlockable color conflicts with the regular one.
• As for transformation characters, they're considered an extension of another character, so the character that actually has a CSS slot is the one that gets the color. Which makes sense to me: it's not like you can unlock Zelda and not Sheik.

I think the table is still perfectly understandable with this information in place, so I reckon it should stay. Ahemtoday (talk) 02:53, 15 February 2019 (EST)

Move

I believe that the page non-playable character shows all the info on this page about npc's and more, and thus the info on this page should be removed. I also believe that this page should be moved to the page playable characters I would like to hear other peoples thoughts about this though before doing this.Xtra3678 (talk) 08:12, 25 February 2019 (EST)

Back to this topic again, as the draft appears to be done and implemented on non-playable characters and thus, it feels like it is the best idea to remove all npc information on this page, and move this pages address to List of playable Characters, or Playable Characters. Xtra Talk Edits 13:51, March 17, 2019 (EDT)

I think the new name of this article should be Fighters (or Playable Characters), with List of fighters (or List of playable characters) redirecting to it. In the same respect, I believe List of Super Smash Bros. series characters, List of Characters, and Characters should redirect to a disambiguation page in case people are looking for Non-playable characters. Smore (talk) 21:42, March 23, 2019 (EDT)

I agree. Right now the title is a little too long.

Sounds reasonable to me. Ahemtoday (talk) 02:40, March 27, 2019 (EDT)

I agree with the move. Since we split this page and the NPC page, we should clarify playability. Also, why on earth is this title so long right now? Instead of saying “List of...” just have it as “playable character” or “fighter”. Lou Cena (talk) 18:38, May 11, 2019 (EDT)

Should be Fighter. It's the term that's most often used to describe playable characters by official sources, and it's self-explanatory in regard to playability. --Burb (talk) 15:46, May 23, 2019 (EDT)

Bump. Lou Cena (talk) 03:12, May 30, 2019 (EDT)

Um, I have yet to see anyone against the idea, and the move notice has been up for months now. Maybe we should just go ahead. Ahemtoday (talk) 23:59, May 30, 2019 (EDT)

Yeah there's absolutely no reason to move this page. Like whatsoever. Miles (talk) 01:09, May 31, 2019 (EDT)

How come? We don’t need to call this page “List of Super Smash Bros. Series Characters” when shorter alternatives exist. We especially don’t need to call this page “List of”, especially when other pages that are also lists are simply called “unlockable character” and “up tilt”. There’s more to this page than the list; it’s also a description of veterans and newcomers. We don’t need a seven-word title when a one- or two-word title would suffice. I know redirects exist, but there’s no reason the main page should have such a bloated title. Lou Cena (talk) 01:28, May 31, 2019 (EDT)

Those are not simply lists; they also have a term to define and discuss. "Character" is self-explanatory enough that it does not require much in the way of definition, so this page is primarily a list - and generally speaking, lists on wikis include "List of" in the title. The only shortened form I might be willing to consider would be "List of characters", but even that seems like an unnecessary change to my mind. Miles (talk) 09:30, May 31, 2019 (EDT)

”Character” was already off the table, because yeah, I agree, it’s too simple. I was thinking of “Fighter”, since that’s what Salurai mostly refers to them anyways. However, “List of Characters”, “List of Playable Characters”, or “List of Fighters” is actually pretty fair. What deems that unnecessary? Lou Cena (talk) 10:40, May 31, 2019 (EDT)

I mean the reason this was named charecter was because it used to include npcs but it no longer includes them so i see no reason to call it charecter anymore, because we can now higher specify its purpose to fighters instead of just charecters. XtraTalk Edits 10:52, May 31, 2019 (EDT)

I do think that "fighter" as a term is less preferable to use in the page title than "character" or "playable character". I suppose "List of playable characters" could be acceptable as well. But I would certainly encourage you to wait for more input before moving such a major page. Miles (talk) 11:02, May 31, 2019 (EDT)

My idea: Akin to the boss page, descriptions could be given to each of the fighters in order to flesh out the article. In that case, this article could possibly lose the 'list of' modifier and become 'playable character' or 'fighter'. Smore (talk) 15:13, May 31, 2019 (EDT)

This sounds good in concept, but it’s just going to be bloated if we do this with 80 characters. The format of this page is fine. I just think the name should be shortened. Lou Cena (talk) 18:00, May 31, 2019 (EDT)

I guess I'll throw my hat in the ring: The article that has the big ol' table of all the stages is titled Stage. The article that has the big ol' table of all the items is titled Item. The Mode article may not have a big ol' table, but it does list all the modes and is also listed in the sidebar like the rest. If we follow that convention, this page should be titled "Character" or "Fighter". Ahemtoday (talk) 16:24, June 2, 2019 (EDT)

After further consideration, I'm inclined to support "List of playable characters" over all other options. Can I get an informal Support/Oppose tally on that? Miles (talk) 17:51, June 2, 2019 (EDT)

You were actually the only one who opposed a move in general, and since you support a move now, that means there are no oppositions. To specify what each one of us wants, You and I want to rename it to “List of playable characters”, Xtra wanted to rename it to simply “playable characters”, Smore wanted to rename it “Fighter”, I don’t know what Ahemtoday wants, and we may need to have more discussion on which one to rename it too. I think we have a solid consensus that the page should be given a shorter title; it’s what to call it that we’re disagreeing on now. Lou Cena (talk) 19:03, June 2, 2019 (EDT)

Oppose Granted, this page is primarily a list, but so are other similar pages such as non-playable character and stage. More content can always be added (e.g. timeline of when the characters were added; facts and figures on character representation within each game; alternate costume table; etc.) My vote is for Fighter, but I also could get behind Playable Character with a reference to the term 'fighter' near the beginning of the article (similar to articles with both fan-given and official names). -Also, as Ahemtoday pointed out, all the sidebar articles using the same naming convention would look slick. Smore (talk) 23:37, June 2, 2019 (EDT)

Throw my hat in the ring for Fighter. Ahemtoday (talk) 22:56, June 3, 2019 (EDT)

My vote is for Fighter as well. — Ardub23 (talk) 23:26, June 9, 2019 (EDT)

I'm okay with Fighter. Sakurai likes to call them fighters and the term has been common in the Smash community. SeanWheeler (talk) 11:16, June 10, 2019 (EDT)

I agree with calling it Fighter, it's easy to understand and convenient. There are a lot of page description characters that forget to add playable premises, Fighters is no ambiguity.--Capstalker (talk) 12:19, June 12, 2019 (EDT)

If my vote counts for anything, I am also in favor of Fighter, so it can match Boss and Stage. Xm0c (talk) 18:36, June 14, 2019 (EDT)

So far it looks like everyone except for me and Miles agree on Fighter. I do think we need to shorten this title, but I’m actually relatively flexible. I think Fighter would actually work, though we should probably have more discussion and more reasons given before moving this page. Lou Cena (talk) 19:03, June 14, 2019 (EDT)