User talk:Omega Tyrant/Clone charts: Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary |
Omega Tyrant (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
||
Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
Reflector should be a single X, as it has a completely different animation and (to my knowledge) knockback angle. Note that Wolf's reflector has actually been claimed as a counter for its function, whereas Fox's does not. Also, I'm not sure why you included Marth and Ike here, since I've never heard them called clones... [[User:Mr. Anon|Mr. Anon]] ([[User talk:Mr. Anon|talk]]) 20:39, 23 September 2011 (EDT) | Reflector should be a single X, as it has a completely different animation and (to my knowledge) knockback angle. Note that Wolf's reflector has actually been claimed as a counter for its function, whereas Fox's does not. Also, I'm not sure why you included Marth and Ike here, since I've never heard them called clones... [[User:Mr. Anon|Mr. Anon]] ([[User talk:Mr. Anon|talk]]) 20:39, 23 September 2011 (EDT) | ||
:I'll change it accordingly then. | |||
:For Marth and Ike, look at past revisions of the clone page, and old talk page discussion. There were seriously people who saw them as some sort of cloness <span style="font-family:Edwardian Script ITC; font-size:12pt">[[User:Omega Tyrant|<span style="color:forestgreen">Omega</span>]] [[User talk:Omega Tyrant|<span style="color:forestgreen">Tyrant</span>]]</span> [[Image: TyranitarMS.png ]] 22:05, 23 September 2011 (EDT) |
Revision as of 21:05, September 23, 2011
My main gripe with this is your definition at the top of "cloned move" and "semi-cloned move". You say that the main differences between a clone move is the hitbox data, while the main differences between a semi-cloned move is the "function" - which you proceed to define as hitbox data. You probably didn't intend this but you basically contradicted yourself with your terminology.
My secondary gripe is how you interpret the function/operation of special moves. I really don't see how you can consider PK Flash and PK Freeze non-cloned when you consider Falcon Punch and Warlock Punch to be semi-cloned (in Brawl), as they have the same differences: different animation/graphics, different damage/knockback/hitbox effect, identical operation.
Speaking of "operation", I think it's the primary way that most players (i.e. those who aren't interested in the technical sutff) perceive special moves to be clones of each other. If the controls and results of a special move are the same as another they're likely to start thinking "A is like B but with X difference", which is indication of at least semi-clone standing in their mind. Combined with the fact that most such players mentally differentiate characters by their most outstanding/memorable traits (i.e. their special moves), this results in pairs like Fox/Wolf being called semiclones or clones by the general public, as they aren't interested enough in the finer details to understand the full differences of the special moves, and they probably don't care about the individuality of regular attacks. It's like indivisible atoms, or centrifugal force - it's not technically correct, but it's good enough for most people, and as such it's the most common point of view. Toomai Glittershine The Bold 23:56, 22 September 2011 (EDT)
- For point A, I probably could have worded that better. By hitbox data, I'm primarily referring to knockback and minor angle alterations. I'll reword accordingly.
- For point B, PK Freeze freezes opponents, while PK Flash simply hits them upwards. Such a function difference doesn't exist between Falcon/Warlock Punch. Plus with Freeze, how much control you have over it is drastically more than with PK Flash. With Falcon/Warlock Punch, there is no such control difference between the two. However, I'll admit this is one of the "gray area moves", and I felt PK Freeze has enough to be considered a non cloned move.
- For point C, I recognise that, and it's part of why this page was created, to inform those who otherwise don't look beyond simple operation. As you could agree, simply having the same operation shouldn't be enough to call something a cloned move, as otherwise, nearly every up special would be a cloned move under that judgment, as well as neutral special projectiles. Omega Tyrant 00:36, 23 September 2011 (EDT)
Just a quick thing, I think Fire Fox/Wolf deserves one X. In terms of an offensive move, they're very different, but in terms of a recovery move, they're very similar. Otherwise (par Reflector), Fox & Wolf aren't clones in any way. That is all. ToastUltimatum Complaints Box 13:48, 23 September 2011 (EDT)
- Simply operating similarly as a recovery isn't enough. Otherwise, we would be calling many recovery moves clone moves of each other. And you can't expect recovery moves to be that different in operation. Also, the offensive mechanics still apply to their recovery mechanics.
- For Reflector, they both function by creating a fast reflector shield around them that semi-spikes opponents, and give invincibility frames. It could be argued they're semi-cloned moves however. Omega Tyrant
- Yeah, they did all they could to make Reflector different. I use it surprisingly often for its counter aspect. But as you gave it an XX, I was just agreeing with you. ToastUltimatum Complaints Box 14:15, 23 September 2011 (EDT)
Reflector should be a single X, as it has a completely different animation and (to my knowledge) knockback angle. Note that Wolf's reflector has actually been claimed as a counter for its function, whereas Fox's does not. Also, I'm not sure why you included Marth and Ike here, since I've never heard them called clones... Mr. Anon (talk) 20:39, 23 September 2011 (EDT)
- I'll change it accordingly then.