Talk:Clone/Archive 6

current talk page

Archives

1. 1
2. 2
3. 3
4. 4
5. 5

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  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)