Talk:Fighter

Archives

1. 1
2. 2

Fighter Numbers

So in both the reveal trailer and the website, each fighter was given a number according to the order they were introduced into the series. The question I want to ask is if we should consider this something that deserves to be listed, on this page and on character infoboxes.

If we do end up going for listing fighter numbers on this page, it would also give us an official way to order the characters, since no game's CSS (before Ultimate) has every Smash character ever on it. Note that the table can be sorted by any column, so viewers can still order characters alphabetically or however.

(I would have made this a proposal, but I made my account specifically to do that and I don't want to wait four days.)

Edit: Be sure to also check out my related discussion point on the character infobox talk page!

Vote below. --Ahemtoday (talk) 17:41, 14 June 2018 (EDT)

Yes, list the numbers of each character

1. Support. I mean, I wouldn't have brought it up otherwise. It's the most official order for every fighter currently in Smash, it can easily be extended, and it's not as though it would be a huge undertaking to put them there. As for character infoboxes, we already list character's species, gender, and place of origin; and I would argue that these numbers are more pertinent to Smash than all of those. --Ahemtoday (talk) 17:41, 14 June 2018 (EDT)
2. List the numbers, but don't sort them by default in that order. I think it should be an option to list them by Ultimate's official order, but it's not an order that any other installment uses, so it might be overemphasizing Ultimate if we used that as the basis of the list. Nyargleblargle (Contribs) 17:48, 14 June 2018 (EDT)
3. List the numbers. I agree! If we can make it official, then let's do it! Dragonfirebreath25 (talk) 17:50, 14 June 2018 (EDT)
4. I agree with Nyargleblargle. Unknown the Hedgehog 17:52, 14 June 2018 (EDT)
5. Put the numbers in a column. That way, people can sort by them if they want to. Aidan, the College-Bound Rurouni 17:56, 14 June 2018 (EDT)
6. Agreed. It is official after all. Definitely needs a column. Master Zach (talk) 17:58, 14 June 2018 (EDT)
7. Ultimate Support. I did just do it after all. RobSir zx 19:32, 14 June 2018 (EDT)
8. Support Fully agree with Nyargleblargle. In addition, the characters are now sorted ingame by fighter number. Awesomelink234, the Super Cool Sonic Fan Leave a message if needed 02:09, 15 June 2018 (EDT)
9. Even official media from Ultimate is using the numbers https://www.smashbros.com/en_US/fighter/index.htmlShideravan (talk) 19:27, 24 June 2018 (EDT)
   • The order in Smash ultimate fighter selection sorting follow the official number orderShideravan (talk) 19:27, 24 June 2018 (EDT)
   • It is not arbitrary and uses a historical precedent in the order of fighters first seen by the public, as can be seen here: https://sourcegaming.info/2018/06/14/what-do-smash-ultimates-character-numbers-mean/ Shideravan (talk) 19:27, 24 June 2018 (EDT)

     The precedent itself is pretty arbitrary, and as I state in my argument below, doesn't appear to serve a useful purpose unless we later find it's something important in-game like the character unlock order (and even then, that means it's only important for the SSBU pages, not really this one). Toomai Glittershine The Quiet 06:46, 25 June 2018 (EDT)

10. I agree with Shideraven. The only reason I do is because the official website numbers them. I think we should at least include the numbers in the character's info box. Unowninator (talk) 23:33, 24 June 2018 (EDT)
11. I support even if it's just putting the number in the Smash Ultimate infoboxes. There's not reason we should ignore the numbers entirely Guybrush20X6 (talk) 06:29, 14 August 2018 (EDT)
12. (I am just an anonymous user, so my statement may not mean much.) I feel like we should put the characters in their numbered order. Yes, this is the first time we have an actual confirmed order. The last time this happened (in a sense) on the wiki was for Smash 64, where the characters matched their select screen locations. None since have matched the order like that on the wiki, instead being ordered by the game series inclusion into Smash with a few exceptions. One of the concerns I saw in a counterargument was that it only applies to Ultimate. Yes, it currently does only apply to Ultimate, and should probably only be applied to the correlating Ultimate pages, including the main page. “But Echo Fighters will be out of place”, only Lucina and Dark Pit would be since we’d keep the newcomers page. If they were to keep the numbers and Daisy were to become her own fighter in a possible 6th installment, then that would only apply to the 6th installment and the correlating pages. Another concern I saw was “people can sort by them if they want to”: I cannot see that being possible with the current list. Unless it was for it to be alphabetical like Poké Ball Pokémon. On the character pages, we can do something like what we’re doing to the stages that were in Melee. For example, Onett is “Eagleland: Onett”. The characters on their Ultimate page can be like “10: Ness”. I really like how it is currently done on the Mario Wiki for Ultimate https://www.mariowiki.com/Super_Smash_Bros._Ultimate With the only surprising thing being that it’s on the Mario Wiki and not the Smash Bros. Wiki. They even included the character’s series’ logo, and if there’s additional info (Like with Pokémon Trainer and pallet swaps). All that said, I feel like we should at least sort them by their number/select-screen-location. 47.199.44.226 (talk • contribs) 12:34pm, 14 August 2018 (EDT) (<--I posted this here by Mistake)
13. Just thought I'd bring up that the characters are sorted by their number in the actual game. During the Direct, Sakurai said, "Stages are now in chronological order, just like the fighters," or something along those lines. Awesomelink234, the Super Cool Sonic Fan Leave a message if needed 21:27, 17 August 2018 (EDT)

No, the numbers aren't notable enough

1. No. I don't see any actual supporting arguments here.
   • "It could be official." Even ignoring the "could", SW:OFFICIAL says "so what?". I'd also like to note that the numbers are extremely arbitrary in the sense that they depend on the order Sakurai chose to reveal characters in the past, so they're not particularly useful unless we determine they have an in-game purpose.
   • "It can easily be extended." Yes but will it be? If the next game ignores the numbers, we're left with an incomplete set and might have to remove them. And what happens if someone gets decloned? Melee's clones were absolutely clones at the time; would Sakurai have assigned them "echo" status if he'd considered the idea? We might end up with a per-game list of numbers and that kind of defeats the purpose.
   • "It's not hard to add them." ...so what? A lot of stuff is "easy", that doesn't mean it's correct.

   Now, here's my main argument for leaving the numbers out: There's currently no evidence that the numbers are actually important. I happen to think they're just marketing hype for the "all veterans are returning" shtick. If it turns out that they designate the unlock order or something else in-game, then sure add them to the relevant SSBU pages. (After all, "it's easy", so there's no need to scramble to do it now, right?) But for now? No thanks. Toomai Glittershine The Spectrum 10:09, 15 June 2018 (EDT)

   Your second point is honestly a pretty big concern. Maybe we could integrate the numbers into the Ultimate column somehow as a solution for the incomplete set thing?

   However, I don't think SW:OFFICIAL means that we shouldn't offer the numbering as an option to sort through the list at all; there's not really any precedent for ignoring official info entirely as far as I can recall. We cover unofficial terms and subjects because that makes it easier to view comprehensive information about the series, so I don't see why that shouldn't be the case for official material as well. I could see plenty of people choosing to sort this list based on Ultimate's order because of how it kind of encapsulates the evolution of the roster. Also, as for the marketing hype point you made, we discuss the Dojo and Pics of the Day pretty often and reference them in articles, so why not do the same for this game's marketing materials? Nyargleblargle (Contribs) 19:29, 15 June 2018 (EDT)

   Yes the officialness point is a weak one, I'm not going to try to debate it. More important are the "what about the future" and "it's not particularly useful" ones. In fact, I thought of something to add to the "not useful" point: even though Sonic was practically added to Brawl after everyone else, late enough to cause a delay, he's not the last Brawl newcomer in the Sakurai Numbers because he was revealed on the website before Dedede and a bunch of others. It's almost anti-useful in that sense.

   The pic-of-the-day stuff is different because it generally always contained in-game content. As far as we know, the numbers do not exist in-game. Toomai Glittershine The Jiggy 22:48, 15 June 2018 (EDT)

2. Nah The numbering order is confusing, and overall, it's just not important enough to have it. Serpent  King 19:32, 24 June 2018 (EDT)

   What I mean by confusing by the way is that it makes no sense to have "echo" characters listed as the same character, plus it could easily get confused that these numbers are actually character IDs, which they aren't. Also, there's the fact that this order only applies to one game of 5. As far as I know, none of the other games number their characters this way.

   Also sorry for the revert, I didn't know this conversation existed., but either way, a consensus should be reached before the change is implemented Serpent  King 19:38, 24 June 2018 (EDT)

   This is indeed an additional good point. The fact that clones are marked as a non-number (i.e. a number plus an additional marking) means the entire list cannot be treated as a bunch of numbers. This also aligns with my earlier point about the future - say Daisy gets decloned in SSB6, she goes from 13e to 65 and pushes down everyone after that. Then the whole thing's permanently out of whack until we scale back down to only caring about it on a per-game basis (which isn't relevant to this page specifically). Toomai Glittershine The Quiet 06:46, 25 June 2018 (EDT)

3. Omit them. Toom and SK have hit the main points for me. Miles (talk) 14:13, 14 August 2018 (EDT)
4. Whoops! I feel that I posted on the wrong discussion page. I was asking about the characters' numbers on Ultimate's talk page (https://www.ssbwiki.com/Talk:Super_Smash_Bros._Ultimate) when "Awesomelink234, the Super Cool Sonic Fan" told me it was being discussed here. I was under the impression that "Awesomelink234" meant that the discussion for Ultimate's page (and corresponding character pages) was here. If this discussion is for the general list of playable character in Smash, then I do not see it working for the previously stated, as it is just a general list for the series as a whole and is subject to change in the future. Number currently only apply to Ultimate. 47.199.44.226 (talk • contribs) 12:34am, 16 August 2018 (EDT)

Well then if it only applies to Ultimate, just put the fighter numbers on its character template and leave the rest of them alone. Awesomelink234, the Super Cool Sonic Fan Leave a message if needed 21:25, 17 August 2018 (EDT)

Neutral

1. I think that at this stage it might be best to wait for the game's release and see if these numbers are used anywhere in the game. If they turn out to just be a trailer thing then no, but if they are actually used in the game somewhere then yes. Alex the Jigglypuff trainer 07:09, 25 June 2018 (EDT)

---

Alright, looking back on this: it is 10-2 in favor of adding the numbers. If that's not consensus, at least votecount-wise, I'm not sure what is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahemtoday (talk • contribs) 04:40, 14 August 2018 (EDT)

Just because a lot of people want something done doesn't mean it's necessarily the right thing. I look over the support votes and I don't see a whole lot of reasons aside from "we should do it because it's official". On the other hand, the oppose section has several reasons that votes in the support section have yet to counter. In any case, I think we should wait for the game to be out before we make a decision, because the most important thing is if the numbers are in-game as opposed to simply in promotional content. (It won't really help their case on this page, but in SSBU infoboxes and such.) Toomai Glittershine The Jiggy 21:34, 14 August 2018 (EDT)

NPC Specification

If we're putting notes about Ridley's Boss/Hazard appearances in the Playable Characters chart, shouldn't we also have ones for Charizard and Little Mac's Pokeball/Assist Trophy appearances? It feels a bit inconsistent not to. --Burb (talk) 08:12, 15 June 2018 (EDT)

Smash Bros. Universe unlockable characters

It has been confirmed in the Nintendo Direct: E3 2018 that your starting roster is the original N64 roster, and everyone else will be unlockable. It is discussable if the 4 unlockable N64 characters will be unlockabe too or not, but looking at how it was presented: all 12 characters faded in as he said which were available from the start, and all other characters slided in as he talked about unlocking characters, making it look like all 12 original will be available from the start. Liggliluff (talk) 08:17, 15 June 2018 (EDT)

The direct didn't use definitive wording. Your roster may be as small as the original fighters. I don't think that's confirmation. It's more like when Sakurai said there might be one or two more third-party characters in Brawl. He didn't mean it literally; he was introducing it as a concept. TheNuttyOne 20:56, 15 June 2018 (EDT)

According to GameXplain's video coverage of the Famitsu interview of Sakurai and the Ultimate's development; it sounds like it's definitely decided that the starting roster is the Smash 64 roster. At least the non-Smash 64 characters can be marked as unlockable.

On the topic of if the unlockable Smash 64 characters will be starters or unlockable; as the statement was that the Smash 64 characters were starters, and not the starter Smash 64 characters were the starters, all 12 should be expected to be unlocked. Looking back at the E3 2018 video, all 12 character faded in (the unlockable a moment after) as he talked about the starters, and everyone else slided in whilst he talked about unlockables.

Either way, I think it's starting to be pretty clear that all the non-core 12 characters will be unlockables.

Liggliluff (talk) 23:56, 22 June 2018 (EDT)

Wario Was INTENDED for Melee

If someone can put intended there he was intended. Source Gaming Sourced many interviews with Sakarai stating had there been more time, Wario wouldve been the first to get in: https://sourcegaming.info/2016/04/29/duflupdate/ WarioLoafer

About the perfect attendance crew section

It says that the original 12 will be starters in Ultimate, but on those four fighter pages and the Ultimate page itself it is said that is unknown. If those pages say that then why do we have that information in that section? George Jones 21:45, 27 July 2018 (EDT)

By leaving them blank since we don't know, that happens to also be the definition of "starter character" for the table. Aidan, the College-Bound Rurouni 22:08, 27 July 2018 (EDT)

I don't really think the "non-playable characters" section should be on this page.

I just got done editing its "Notes" subsection, and working on it made me think about whether it really should be there. Honestly, I don't think it should, and here's a numbered list of reasons as to why:

1. The entire rest of the page is about playable characters. Including stage bosses on a page that is mainly about playable fighters just seems strange to me. I could forgive it if this was a Mortal Kombat situation where the bosses are basically just overpowered regular characters you can't select, but the problem is:
2. Most characters on that list behave nothing like playable fighters. Tabuu and Metal Face are in no way beholden to the same rules as regular fighters, which makes it weird that they're on this page. The notes on Sandbag literally admit it's not treated as a fighter anymore.
3. The list is a mishmash of characters with completely different roles, with barely any common thread between them. Multi-Man Smash teams, Sandbag, stage bosses, Subspace bosses, regular stage hazards, old bosses that are just variations of fighters - the list is all over the place. And, yes, there's a distinct definition on the page of what the list includes, but the problem is:
4. The definition of the list - "can fully interact with playable characters in-game, but are normally non-playable" - could also extend to every defeatable Assist Trophy and every single Subspace and Smash Run enemy. Of course I'm not suggesting we actually add all of these in, but the point is: if we actually were comprehensive about this list, it would be ludicrously massive.

So, in short, the list is so broad that it's a jumble of miscellaneous information shoved into an article that it's not really under the purview of. What do we do about it?

Well, my suggestion is as follows:

1. Remove the current form of the list from this page entirely. As I said above, the page is about playable characters aside from that one segment, and many characters in that segment don't resemble fighters at all.
2. Add a cross-game table to the Boss page. This table can include the Hands, Subspace bosses, and stage bosses - but not Sandbag or the Flying Man or whatever.
3. The rest of the information is already elsewhere on the site. The Flying Man and Nabbit don't fill up a table on their own, so they don't really need one. Same with Sandbag. There's already the enemy team] page to get the Fighting Team information.

It's voting time! Ahemtoday (talk) 10:01, 11 August 2018 (EDT)

Remove the NPC Table

1. Remove it. I mean, I brought it up in the first place. Ahemtoday (talk) 10:01, 11 August 2018 (EDT)
2. Remove. Change the name of the article to "List of Super Smash Bros. series fighters". An article including all characters in Smash could be made with this article's current title as a compromise. Smore (talk) 00:16, 19 August 2018 (EDT)

Keep the NPC Table

1. The page is not strictly about playable characters. The name even says "List of Super Smash Bros. series characters"; nowhere does that imply exclusively covering playable ones. Aidan, the College-Bound Rurouni 10:11, 11 August 2018 (EDT)

   (Am I allowed to reply in indents like this?) Indeed it doesn't, but by that logic, this page should technically include every character that's ever been in Smash Bros.: Assist Trophies, Subspace enemies, and non-fighting stage hazards like Kraid included. Ahemtoday (talk) 10:19, 11 August 2018 (EDT)

   (You are, but use #s and colons instead of spaces; the latter messes with how it looks on the page.) Perhaps I wasn't clear: I'm not necessarily supporting keeping it as I am pointing out a flaw in your argument; this page isn't exclusively "playable characters" as you have made it out to be, and instead is generally about characters. Though, if you want a counter to your claim that we should include everything, pages shouldn't be so large that they cannot load; the one we are discussing is already 37KB in size, and including all references to every character would make it even bigger. Aidan, the College-Bound Rurouni 10:35, 11 August 2018 (EDT)

   I'll concede the page isn't currently exclusively about playable characters, and that we shouldn't include literally every character ever mentioned in Smash Brothers. However, if we aren't going to mention literally everyone, we need to draw a distinct line between what's included and what isn't - and the current line is fuzzy at best, wherein every Smash Run enemy and every damageable Assist Trophy "should" be included in the NPC table according to the definition of what goes there (but not according to common sense). With this in mind, I'd say that making the page about playable characters would draw a completely unambiguous line, fix all the issues I mentioned previously, and trim down the page. Ahemtoday (talk) 11:57, 11 August 2018 (EDT)

   Maybe we define it as characters that are mandatory to fight in a single player mode but cannot be selected in multiplayer? This would include Subspace enemies and bosses but exclude Assist Trophies, stage bosses, and Smash Run enemies. I’m sure it could be optimized further to be more sensible. Nyargleblargle (Contribs) 21:43, 12 August 2018 (EDT)

   That definition leaves us with 58 characters on that list, most of which are stuff like Primids and Floows. Not really a fan of having such a bloated list. Ahemtoday (talk) 22:05, 12 August 2018 (EDT)

Unused Brawl Characters

According to Sakurai, Villager, Pac-Man and the Miis were all supposed to end up in Brawl but they didn't for varying reason. Should they be mentioned on the table since other cut characters are mentioned? (Dr Mario, Roy, Ice Climbers etc.). Thanks Ice Cream Melee (talk) 10:15, 16 September 2018 (EDT)

The same is also true for Chrom in Smash 4 Ice Cream Melee (talk) 10:18, 16 September 2018 (EDT)

The difference there is that they're not necessarily unused, but rather "considered but never implemented". Aidan, the Rurouni 11:04, 16 September 2018 (EDT)