Talk:Clone

Archives

1. 1
2. 2
3. 3
4. 4
5. 5
6. 6

Pseudo-Clones?

Are Pseudo-Clones really "necessary" to included? If Wolf, Lucas, Luigi (Ultimate) and Dr.Mario (Ultimate) are not technically "clones", why list them as such? I tried reading what was stated before to properly understand, but I could not find a "clear" answer. If someone could give me a "nutshell" explanation for including Pseudo-Clones, it would be much appreciated. Wolff (talk) 00:54, April 1, 2019 (EDT)

Yes they are actually, Wolf, Lucas, Luigi, and arguably Ganondorf now (which is still being debated) are far more distinct from their base characters than the likes of Falco, Young Link, Ken, Roy, Toon Link, and Isabelle. Dr. Mario isn’t a psudeo-clone; quite the contrary actually. He’s a full clone. Lou Cena (talk) 02:25, April 1, 2019 (EDT)

That is not actually answering my question. My question is about using the term "Pseudo-Clone" at all. Why state a character to be a clone if they aren't really a clone (in that installment)? Example: If Lucas is not a clone of Ness, why state that he is? Example 2: Luigi was a clone in 64, and a semi in all others but Ultimate. If he is a "psudeo" in Ultimate, then why list him at all for Ultimate? Psudeo is another word for fake. What purpose is there to include a section for "fake-clones"? If the case for Psudeos is that they "were based on another character" or "were a clone before", then it still does not make sense (to me) why Psudeo should be included. Wolff (talk) 16:19, April 1, 2019 (EDT)

The wiki is there to document the concepts related to Smash, not to dictates them. The smash community uses the idea of "pseudo-clone" since Wolf, hence the need to explain this concept here. Getting rid of it would be disinformation. YoshiRyu (talk) 18:29, April 1, 2019 (EDT)

You may not remember, but ever since Brawl came out there has always been huge debate over how to define Wolf. He was clearly not a full clone, and he was too different to be a semi-clone, but he was also too similar to not be any sort of clone at all. The pseudo-clone classification was made to give Wolf a box to sit in, and happens to be useful for other characters as well. Toomai Glittershine The Indescribable 18:36, April 1, 2019 (EDT)

I was aware of that debate. I just was not sure if it was really necessary. I guess it is then by that logic. Thank you! Wolff (talk) 18:49, April 1, 2019 (EDT)

Enough is enough We have been arguing about how to treat the clones since the damn game released months ago. We'll go with Toomai's research and leave it at that. I don't want to see any more discussion about clones, unless it's contesting specific parts of his research specifically (as in X move is not a clone of Y move). SerpentKing 18:52, April 1, 2019 (EDT)

I would like to contest this. We already have official word from Nintendo AND datamined information (multiple sources in fact) that directly contradict Toonmai's research. He even admitted that what the developers consider clones changes between games (see Falco vs Daisy for example). None of the full clones in Ultimate (what the team call echoes) significantly differ in the following aspects.

Jump Height Movement Speed (especially aerial movement speed) Falling Speed Traction Proportions such as height and boneset. Basic attack and non attack animations (echoes may have a few exceptions to this) General damage output and knockback power Weight Grab and throw power (even Ken's Hell Wheel has the same power as Ryu's move) Basic parameters and coding in general (such as AI) are over 90% identical to the base character. Bolded are things that are outright identical.

These things all change for non-echoes and clones of the past. Isabelle for example has two special moves that are completely different in operation and serve completely different purposes, and Dr Mario has drastically altered physical attributes (some stuff like jump height were even tweaked by hand this time). Ken absolutely falls under a full clone because the vast majority of his tools are outright identical or extremely similar to Ryu's even in damage and knockback and the changes he has are mostly for flavor (matching SF2 Turbo) and don't really affect how he plays. Dr Mario's changes affect how he plays in a much bigger way. His position in tier lists is indicative of this. --5.81.71.60 18:14, April 3, 2019 (EDT)

Just to say, the above had been banned to be a MemoryMan sock. SugarCookie 420 20:46, April 3, 2019 (EDT)

I'm worried about him now. Please don’t take this as an attack or anything, but as I stated in my previous message, I'm concerned about someone else’s mental state, et cetera, et cetera, and I certainly don’t want to cast aspersions anybody’s way. The point is, I feel these discussions are becoming a bad case of déjà vu, and as much as I want to stop this, the truth is… I can’t (at least, not at this moment).

Post-Scriptum: Though this might sound presumptuous, I also feel that the debate on what makes a clone has gone on a bit too long, and I wish not to comment on the matter. Thanks for reading. 24.6.47.241 19:12, April 4, 2019 (EDT)

Ganondorf’s up tilt and psudeo-clone status, and the qualifying percent for a psudeo-clone

Ganondorf’s moves are enough to qualify him as a psudeo-clone. All of his ground attacks are different, and even if he shares the same aerials, no other clone archetype has such polarizing differences on moves with the same animations. He should definitely be moved to the psudeo-clone category, though I’m curious about your thoughts on this. If arguements stating that he’s a psudeo-clone are convincing enough, he will be moved, and if arguements stating that he’s a semi-clone still are convincing enough, he will stay.Lou Cena (talk) 02:21, April 1, 2019 (EDT)

As per the wishes of many users, I’m going to be a bit more specific here. The last time I brought Ganondorf’s semi-clone status to questioning, somebody added that his up tilt was a different move but left him as a semi-clone, and in all honesty, that’s even less desirable. He’s currently sitting at exactly 50% on the cloneosity chart, do if one more move that is not labeled as different by Toomai is in fact considered a different move, then less than half of ‘Dorf’s moveset is different, which will effectively push him into psudeo-clone status. So, I’ll give my say in this first: Ganondorf’s up tilt is different and he’s a semi-clone. It has a frame difference of about 30 frames, which is already extremely polarizing. This isn’t even accounting for the fact that it has much more knockback and damage, has elemental effects where Cap doesn’t, and even has a Special Zoom, while again, Falcon’s does not. Sure, its animation is similar, but it has far too many differences from Falcon’s to be considered the same move, and the frame difference alone should honestly drop this one as a “similar move”. Lou Cena (talk) 22:03, May 1, 2019 (EDT)

After doing the math, if Ganondorf’s up tilt is considered a different move, he would share 11/24 or 45.83% of his moveset with Captain Falcon. If we count it as half because of the similar animation but different application, he shares 11.5/24 or 47.9% of his moves. While the cloneosity chart lists the qualifier as a pseudo-clone as 30-45%, even that is fairly questionable, especially when the semi-clone qualifier is 45-80%. I think an 5% is a fair margin to shave off of the semi-clone qualifying percent and added onto the pseudo-clone qualifier. This will make the qualifying percents from a 15% margin for psudeos and a 35% margin for semis to a much more reasonable 20% margin for psudeos and 30% margin for semis. Lou Cena (talk) 00:34, May 2, 2019 (EDT)

Young Link’s semi-clone status, down special, and opposite-handed strikes

Young Link’s animations are enough to qualify him as a semi-clone. He holds his sword in his other hand, which while it has been arued to be easy because he mirrors Link’s animations, the mirroring not exact, and would have taken extra work. If arguements stating that he’s a semi-clone are convincing enough, he will be moved, and if arguements stating that he’s a full clone still are convincing enough, he will stay. Lou Cena (talk) 02:21, April 1, 2019 (EDT)

Problem with YL and TL's current write-up is that they ignore most of adult/BotW Link's changes. I'd say they both count as Semis given that BotW Link has new animations for almost every attack, both the kids are shorter and lighter with different fall speeds, he has remote bombs and recoverable arrows and the whole grab thing going on. Guybrush20X6 (talk) 20:18, April 3, 2019 (EDT)

That’s part of the reason why I think Young Link is a semi-clone now. Link’s Down Special has a different animation and the item works completely differently, and the cloneosity chart didn’t seem to take into account that YL has a rapid jab and adult Link does not. There’s also the fact that adult Link holds his sword in opposite hands as the other two Links. While this has been argued to simply be mirrored from Link’s animations or taking from his previous appearance, I don’t think it’s safe to completely ignore them. Perhaps counting those moves as 0.8:1 instead of 1:1 would be a decent way to remedy this issue? Lou Cena (talk) 22:10, May 1, 2019 (EDT)

I did the math: if we count Young Link’s tilts, smashes, aerials, and pummel as only 80% cloned from Link’s, as well as discounting his down special (which is too different from Link’s to be considered the same move) and his final smash (we should only count cloned moves based directly on that character, not half counting if it’s based on another character), then 16.85/24 of Young Link’s moves are the same, which means that he shares 70.208% of his moveset with Link. Lou Cena (talk) 17:36, May 3, 2019 (EDT)

Ness and Lucas' Dash Attack

According to the article, dash attack is listed as one of the similar moves between Ness and Lucas for Brawl, Smash 4, and Ultimate. But when I look at the dash attack animation for both characters and knowing the properties of both, I can't really say I agree with this claim. What do you guys think? --23.17.208.28 05:05, April 11, 2019 (EDT)

Should I add in that Hero shares some attacks with other characters?

When I was watching the trailer, I couldn’t help but notice his similarities to Link and Marth, with his shied and dash attack resembling Link, while his up smash and back air resembles Marth. Should I add that in as a little blurb below the table? Lou Cena (talk) 13:07, June 12, 2019 (EDT)

• A jumping slash attack similar to Link's. This is presumably his dash attack.
• An attack where he performs a two-handed downward slash in front of him, resembling Ike and Ganondorf's forward smashes, as well as Roy and Chrom's Flare Blade. This is presumably his forward smash.
• A single upward thrust, which resembles Marth's up smash. This is presumably his up smash.
• An aerial attack where he swings his sword around him, resembling Ike's neutral aerial.
• An aerial attack that is a sword swipe behind his back, which resembles Toon Link's back aerial. **This move completely turns around the Hero in midair after use, much like Marth's back aerial.
• An attack where he performs an upward kick, presumably his up throw or up aerial. Somewhat resembles Ken's up aerial.

It seems like The Hero takes a lot from a bunch of different characters. Obviously he doesn’t seem like he’d be a psuedo-clone of any one character, but he rips a suspicious amount of moves from a lot of characters. Lou Cena (talk) 13:24, June 14, 2019 (EDT)

Characters taking a lot from other fighters isn't something new, or, in this case, noteworthy. Aidan, the Rurouni 13:26, June 14, 2019 (EDT)

Ken

Shouldn't Ken's Up Aerial be labeled under the differences section? It's its own move for all intents and purposes (different animation since it's a kick instead of a punch, in addition to distinct properties, such as only hitting once without being disjointed and being special-cancellable)--190.166.140.92 18:37, July 6, 2019 (EDT)

Jigglypuff Pseudo-Clone?

I have an entry listed on the cloneosity discussion page about this, but the tl;dr is that jab and back throw were listed as cloned moves in Smash 64 but not in Melee, despite neither move changing significantly for either Kirby or Jigglypuff (i.e. the moves should be ranked the same for both games). Ranking these moves as cloned in Melee would bump Jigglypuff's clone rating firmly above the 30% pseudo-clone threshold. From what I've researched, this would also mean that Jiggs is most likely a pseudo-clone in every game afterwards. b2jammer (talk) 23:14, July 18, 2019 (EDT)

Daisy

3.0.0 didn't take the only differences Daisy had with Peach, there are still others.

-Daisy has less startlag when running, and less startlag on some attacks too.

-Her bomber goes further and faster.

-She's slightly shorter than Peach.

-Her forward Smash is shorter but stronger, and also has more vertical range than Peach.

-Her B-air is weaker than Peach's while her F-air is quicker.

Essentially, Peach is more of a power character, while Daisy is more of a speed character.

All of these supposed differences are completely false. All of Daisy's attacks function exactly the same as Peach's, with the same animations, frame data, damage output, knockback, hitbox placements, range, attack effects etc. Her size and speed is also identical as well. She does have different idle and running animations, but that's it. The only gameplay difference she legitimately had was that her down special turnips had different knockback values, something that was removed when Joker was released. I do think she would benefit from being made more unique though. Zakawer2 (talk) 08:14, October 3, 2019 (EDT)

Differences between Echoes and non-Echoes

It seems like they only relegated Echoes to characters that were introduced in WiiU/3DS and Ultimate. All prior clones (64, Melee, and Brawl) they seem to have purposely tried to declone moreso than an Echo Fighter. I think the main thing about an Echoe Fighter is that they share the same shape/skeleton and weight to their counterpart, while all the non-Echoes have a completely different skeleton and/or weight. Daisy seems to have an extremely slight hurtbox difference, but it's so slight and she is basically the same as Peach otherwise, thus she's an Echo Fighter. Dr. Mario who's not an Echo seems to have the same skeleton as Mario, but he's quite a bit heavier and has a lot of other different attributes otherwise (speed, power output, different standard and special attacks that function differently than Mario's, much stronger back throw), thus he's not an Echo.

Hello. We already had a very long back and forth about echoes (mostly because of me). The current definition on the page is the result of that discussion. Short story: echos are low budget fighter, that's a technical reality. The budget cut is mostly done throught animation recycling, as animation is a insanely huge part of a fighter development in Smash (emphasis on insanely), and animation recycling indeed requires that the characters use the same rig (aka skeleton). What makes an clone not an echo is rather that, despite being a clone, the fighter still have its very own set of animations, and therefore required a normal budget. Dr Mario is not an echo because he doesn't use Mario's animations. YoshiRyu (talk) 12:13, November 21, 2019 (EST)

Also, you need to sign your messages by putting 4 "~" at the end, it will do this: YoshiRyu (talk) 12:18, November 21, 2019 (EST)

I can add to this. When Nintendo announced Daisy for Smash, they explained exactly what seperates an Echo from someone like Dr Mario very clearly.. Translated, it says that echoes have basically the same speed, jumps, weight, and attack power as their original counterparts. This is true of Ken and Chrom but is not true to Dr Mario and Young Link for example. --Pontiusbrave (talk) 14:31, November 25, 2019 (EST)

There is no consistent metric for determining whether a fighter should be considered an echo or not, because even Nintendo isn't clear on how similar echo fighters should be. Also it's interesting that you should happen to know about Daisy's hurtbox change, as this is definitely not common knowledge...although I do happen to know a certain other individual who knows about it. Alex the Jigglypuff trainer 14:38, November 25, 2019 (EST)

There isn't a consistent metric, but there definitely is a difference between someone like Ken and someone like Dr. Mario, namely, in how extreme their gameplay differences are. Dr Mario is at least .4 units slower than Mario whilst Ken isn't even .2 faster than Ryu. Ken also jumps the same height as Ryu and has roughly the same manuverability. The Daisy hurtbox thing is actually common knowledge seeing as how many people in comments talk about it as it's her only difference. --Pontiusbrave (talk) 14:48, November 25, 2019 (EST)

The stats thing is bogus. It's just an over-simplification made to fit in a direct presentation. Having similar stats is a by-product of recycling an animation set, but it's not what makes an echo an echo (there are fighters with similar stats that aren't echoes). If you use the same jump animation, the fighter will often jump the same height because otherwise it wouldn't feel natural; if you use the same run animation, the fighter will often run the same speed because otherwise it wouldn't feel natural, and so on, and so on. The low-budget definition will always be true, that's what an echo fighter is at it's core, the stats definition you're using will only be true until Sakurai decides otherwise, then it won't be anymore. So you shouldn't cling to much to it. YoshiRyu (talk) 15:07, November 25, 2019 (EST)

Unsure what you mean by stats. Are you talking about things like speed and weight? Because those aren't tied to animations at all. Mario and Dr Mario have the same running animation, but they run at different speeds. The same thing is true Ken and Ryu, Ken has the exact same running animation but runs slightly faster. I think Doc's animation is maaaaaaaaybe slightly slower than Mario's, but the point still stands, same animation, different stats. Samus and Dark Samus have the exact same weight, and jump the same height, but have different jumping animations. I think Dark Samus technically jumps very very slightly lower because her hurtbox after a jump isn't has high as Samus, but regardless, same stats, different animation. Animations aren't tied to the characters' stats at all. 8.40.199.25 15:42, December 18, 2019 (EST)

Stats are not technically tied to animation, indeed, but if you're making a big AAA game, you're gonna make animations that fit the stats of your characters. The human brain is smart, it always can tell when something doesn't feel natural. If your character moves faster that its animation implies, you're going to feel like he is sliding forward, if he moves slower, that he is "forward moonwalking"; if your animation don't perfectly fit the speed, the character's feet won't stick to the ground like they're supposed to do (You can just speed up the animation, but the human brain is going to spot that too). In the end, that's just how 3D animation is done, Sora Ltd and Nintendo don't do that kind of amateurish mistake. And it's the same for any animation: for a jump, for instance, without you even knowing it, you're brain is still going to analyse every detail of the motion, and if the impulse doesn't fit the strenght the character seems to be putting in its jump, your brain is going to tell you that something seems weird. Because the basis of echo fighters is animation recycling, they often end up having similar stats with their original, but that not a cause for an echo, rather a consequence. As for your exemples, Mario and Dr Mario don't actually have the same run animation, I've checked (make them running toward each other, you'll see that one of them has movements that feels more powerful). And Ryu and Ken are basically cheating: they use a 2D based animation remade in 3D that your brain is already used to, Ken is goofy when he runs, but you don't notice it because you've already seen that for decades (plus the animation itself is played faster for Ken, which prevents the sliding feet effect). Samus and Dark Samus aren't relevant here, of course it is possible to make two different "runs" with the same speed. YoshiRyu (talk) 16:56, December 18, 2019 (EST)

Daisy and Peach have different running animations but run the same speed. Mario and Dr Mario have the same running animations but run at different speeds. Of course, the speed of the animation is tied to the run speed. Equip spirits and you can see that the animation plays faster or slower depending on the speed. Animations are tied to stuff such as moves yes, but not the properties of the moves. You can easily have the same side B animation either be a single hit knockout attack or multi-hit combo attack. Custom moves in Smash 4 were basically done like this. Dr Mario and Mario share almost every animation like other clones do, but they have different stats. The real reason why was balancing. If you change stats around you need to test the changes against a variety of situations to see if it feels right. This can take a short amount of time if the change is just minor, but if it's a big change you would need to test it extensively and that can eat up a lot of development time. Probably the reason why custom moves were scrapped in this game. --Pontiusbrave (talk) 18:50, January 1, 2020 (EST)

I'm not going to repeat myself again and again. I know what I'm talking about, and you don't (Mario and Dr Mario don't have the same running animation, period; it doesn't matter that those two animations look similar to your non-expert eye, they're still two totally separate sets of bones rotations, a slightly different animation is still a different animation which means an extra task for the animators, while almost all of Daisy's animations are simply copy-pasted from Peach's files). Balancing is a factor too, true, but the amount of work required to balance a fighter in Smash is nowhere near the amount of work required to animate it. You're however probably right for the custom moves scraping. YoshiRyu (talk) 16:53, January 6, 2020 (EST)

They do have the same boneset though. Dr Mario's boneset and Mario's boneset is the same. Dr Mario has the stethoscope and no hat, but other than that, no differences. In games if two characters have the same body shape it makes sense to re-use a rig. Other users have pointed out that it's already possible to alter mechanics without exactly altering animations. Custom Moves literally did this in Smash 4. Equipment and Spirits also do this. --Pontiusbrave (talk) 08:56, January 12, 2020 (EST)

I don't know if this is what separates echoes and non-echoes, but all known echo fighters are full clones from the same universe. The only exception is Pikachu/Pichu and Link/Young Link.--Snstar2006 (talk) 17:50, June 22, 2020 (EDT)

Being of the same universe does not make a clone an echo fighters. However, it is a requirement, echo figthers will always be from the same universe as their original for a basic reason: if not, the stacking option would make an unintuitive mess of the fighters selection screen. And Sakurai doesn't do unintuitive messes. Sometime, it's as simple as that. But being from the same universe is not enough for a character to be an echo fighter. What makes a character an echo fighter is the ability for the dev team to make it at a very low cost by mostly reusing assets from another fighter. Echo fighters are basically copied files with a reasonable degree of editing. An echo fighter is, simply put, a cheap fighter. Pichu and Young Link are not copies, they both have their own full set of assets. So same universe, not a defining criteria, but still a prerequisite. YoshiRyu (talk) 08:18, June 23, 2020 (EDT)

I agree, that's exactly my point. But also if two characters has the exact same moveset + some tweeks (full clone character) or characters like Ganondorf and Capt Falcon (full clone in the past), they are still not an echo fighter of the other, because they are not from the same universe. --Snstar2006 (talk) 18:45, June 27, 2020 (EDT)

Several problems with the Ultimate section

• Every full clone only has at most 3 unique moves listed. Except Young Link, who has 7 listed. Even Pichu and Dr. Mario only have 3 unique attacks listed. In my opinion, Young Link should be listed as a semi-clone, not a full clone.
• A couple of "semi-clones", namely, Falco and Ganondorf, share less than half of their movesets with their base characters, which I believe is criteria for being a psuedo-clone. Falco only shares his down smash, back air, down air, pummel, grab, neutral special, side special, up special, and Final Smash. Ganondorf only shares his Nair, Bair, Uair, Dair, grab, neutral special, down special, up special, down throw, and back throw. Those are both less than half of their movesets (9/24 and 10/24 respectively).
• Toon Link is said to be "one of the least unique semi-clones", but according to the chart, he's actually the 3rd most unique, only after the two who are arguably psuedo-clones. I'd make a case for Toon Link being a Psuedo-clone, but I don't feel like I have a strong argument for him like I do for Ganondorf and Falco. He shares his neutral attack, up throw, down throw, Uair, Dair, neutral special, side special, up special, forward tilt, down tilt, down smash, and pummel, or 12/24, which is borderline semi or pseudo.
• All of Terry's tilts, as well as his up smash, and all aerials except Nair and Uair are shared with Ken and Ryu. That's a full 7 shared moves, as many as Wolf shares with Fox, so there's a case to be made that he's a psuedo-clone.
• Luigi's forward and up tilts are not listed as moves that Luigi shares, even though those clearly take inspiration from Mario. Obviously that's not going to affect his status, but it's jarring knowing that they're the same but it isn't acknowledged.

72.203.118.154 04:34, January 10, 2020 (EST)

Most decisions that you listed here were the resut of this, so I recommend you take a look. CookiesCreme 07:03, January 10, 2020 (EST)

That chart has problems too though. It doesn't include Terry, Toon Link is still the 3rd most unique semi-clone (after two that are arguably pseudo), the range for pseudo clones is way too tight in comparison for the ranges for full clones and semi-clones (a tiny 15% in comparison to a whopping 35% for semis and 25% for full clones), and it calls some different moves the exact same (i.e. Link's down special with the other two links, Roy's Final Smash, and Ganondorf's up tilt)). 72.203.118.154 10:52, January 10, 2020 (EST)

Well, here's another chart that may interest you. RickTommy 06:46, January 11, 2020 (EST)

To be honest? I prefer the second chart's system. Even though it's completely out of date, it acknowledges a different move outside of it being slightly conceptually similar (such as Wolf's blaster not being counted as similar at all to Fox's). What I noticed is that the first chart focuses on conceptual/animation, while the second one focuses on its application in competitive. Since not counting similar concepts at all is going a little overboard (especially in cases like Ultimate Dr. Mario or Melee Falco, who have the exact same animations but different knockback and damage), I suggest we do an in-between chart that counts for around 0.7/1 instead of 1/1 for moves with similar concepts like Ganondorf's up tilt, Young Link's down special, and Wolf's neutral special (though Roy's Final Smash is 100% unique). 72.203.118.154 13:56, January 11, 2020 (EST)

Of the points I didn't cover on User talk:Toomai/Cloneosity: Luigi's f-tilt and u-tilt should indeed be on the page, but someone removed them for some reason. I'm putting them back. Toomai Glittershine The Brass 15:17, January 11, 2020 (EST)

Ganondorf and Falco

I noticed a little edit war between Toomai and Trainer Alex over whether Ganondorf's up tilt is cloned from Captain Falcon or not. What I noticed is that since Toomai decided to not undo Alex's edit again, 10/24 of Ganondorf's moves are considered different (the same ones I mentioned above). Aside from the aforementioned up tilt, his forward throw is listed as different on this page, but not on Toomai's chart, and Toomai did not remove that during his cleanup. Personally, I feel like both mores are different enough (his forward throw in particular now has a completely distinct animation from Captain Falcon, and I hold the same reasons as Alex for up tilt). Regardless, if either his up tilt or forward throw is unique but not the other, that's 11/24, or 45.8% (essentially within psuedo-clone range). If both are unique, then it's 10/24 (or 41.67%, more of a psuedo-clone than Luigi). Either both of these moves are not listed as different moves, or Ganondorf should be listed as a psuedo-clone. If even one of them is considered different, mathematically he should be a psuedo-clone. It doesn't make sense to list over half of his moveset as different and call him a semi-clone.

I also noticed that during Toomai's cleanup, he didn't touch Falco at all, despite him only having 9/24 moves listed as shared. I actually don't play Falco all that much, so I unfortunately don't have an argument here, but I do know that their down tilts, which are listed as different, are the same visually (which Toomai's chart reflects). I'm not familiar with the rest of either his or Fox's moves to properly compare them, but there are several others inconsistent with this page and Toomai's chart that should be called into question, and if less than half of his moveset is shared with Fox, mathematically he falls within psudeo-clone range (as I mentioned with Ganondorf, 11/24 is 45.8%, which is within psuedo-clone range). 72.203.118.154 13:57, January 12, 2020 (EST)

To specify more on Ganondorf and Captain Falcon's forward throws, Ganondorf's and Captain Falcon's forward throws in SSB4 both have their body move from their back facing the screen to their front if they are facing right. Ganondorf has a new forward throw in Ultimate where he faces front to back (while still facing right, keep that in mind), while Captain Falcon keeps his old one. 72.203.118.154 01:20, January 13, 2020 (EST)

I would not be surprised to find I missed some stuff in my cleanup, so don't look too far into it. Maybe in the near future I'll go over it again and be more thorough. Toomai Glittershine The Awesome 06:50, January 13, 2020 (EST)

Is Falco's Down Tilt In Super Smash Bros Ultimate A Same Move Or A Different Move?

First off, remember to sign your comment with four tiles. Second off, yes, Falco's Down Tilt is a cloned move of Fox's. This explains what moves are cloned and how similar they are. Diddy Kongstar (talk) 14:17, July 27, 2021 (EDT)

Is Pichu's F-tilt a different move or not?

The different moves box says it is, but the attributes box states that "its new forward tilt is the same as Pikachu's". Which one is it? 72.203.118.154 18:44, February 26, 2020 (EST)

Sorry about that, I added it to the list of unique moves but didn't realize the next box said it was still cloned. The move's animation was changed from Melee to no longer be a 2 legged kick like Pikachu's. Alex the Weeb 18:58, February 26, 2020 (EST)

Should Jigglypuff count as a Semi-Clone in Smash 64?

Kirby and Jigglypuff share no similar special moves and Jigglypuff borrows some moves from Kirby similarly to how Captain Falcon borrows some moves from Samus. Diddy Kongstar (talk) 20:30, March 14, 2020 (EDT)

I think this is reasonable. I've always thought saying Jigglypuff was a full clone in Smash 64 was a bit reaching and not entirely true to the character. Even their similar moves have different properties and sometimes even animations (like back aerial). Hitbox Enthusiast Zeck (talk) 15:39, June 26, 2020 (EDT)

The wiki has developed its own very specific (and slightly arbitrary) methods for defining different levels of clone and any and all efforts to redefine them tend to go ignored (as this one did for three months), so you're probably out of luck. TheNuttyOne 17:22, June 26, 2020 (EDT)

hold up she is listed as as semi-clone tho TheNuttyOne 17:22, June 26, 2020 (EDT)

Luigi in SSBU

I believe Luigi should not be in the clone listing of SSBU due to many reasons I will list. Mario and Luigi have, first and foremost, extremely different attributes that make them nowhere near alike when in battle. Luigi is much slower than Mario and also jumps much higher.

Shared moves :

I removed FTilt and UAir recently and explained why on my edit but I'll include them below. These moves are often talked about when comparing the brothers but for most of them, they're different.

• Forward tilt : The move's animation was completely changed as Luigi does a different kind of kick with way more endlag that Mario's

• Up tilt : While both are uppercuts, Luigi starts much lower and doesn't spin on himself when executing the move, making them different in animation.

• Up smash : Mario's animation doesn't make him jump as far as Luigi and he has one less active frame as well as an outward angle and no sourspot.

• Neutral aerial : Completely different angle and power which make the move have different uses in battle. Animation is also not 1:1 although similar. Sex kicks are pretty common in Smash.

• Back aerial : Mario has less active frames than Luigi and doesn't have a sourspot on its clean hit. It's also weaker than Luigi's sweetspot and boasts much lower endlag which makes a combo extender rather than a finisher.

• Up aerial : By far the most different move between the two. Luigi has more start up with more active frames and a late hit (4-7 → 5-7/8-11) and an entirely different animation that executes slower due to the active frames and has Luigi's torso remain parallel to the ground during startup. Luigi's foot also starts much higher than Mario with smaller hitboxes, making it bad at catching opponents when used out of a short hop. Also, they're not the same at all in terms of power and utility. Mario's has more overall power, allowing it to kill at high percents and a vertical angle for ladder combos. Luigi's up aerial is instead much weaker with a more horizontal angle, completely differenciating its combo tree.

• Neutral special : Luigi has an entirely different animation and different properties on his Fireballs which make the move very different in terms of uses.

• Up special : Luigi's Super Jump Punch goes straight up and has a clean/late hit combo that boasts tremendous power, differenciating it from Mario's diagonal movement and weak multihit properties despite the moves sharing their name.

With only 3 moves you can truly call cloned (yet with different properties), I would like Luigi to be removed from the SSBU clone table. characters can borrow moves from other characters without being clones like Hero's dash attack being taken from Link, his forward smash resembling Ganondorf's, etc. Hitbox Enthusiast Zeck (talk) 16:08, June 26, 2020 (EDT)

I wanted to add my own input to how these moves have acted throughout the Smash games.

Attributes :

• Luigi has always had different attributes to Mario being slower, jumping higher and having lower traction. Additionally, Mario gained the ability to wall jump and Luigi gained the ability to crawl in later games. Luigi also gained a tether grab and zair in Ultimate. Naturally, this alters the general way that they play, and the difference between their attributes has only gotten larger in every new instalment.

Changed moves :

• In 64, Mario and Luigi mostly shared the same animations for their attacks except for dash attack, down tilt, taunt and forward smash. Even forward smash only had a non obvious change to its animation which most people would not notice. In Melee, Luigi gained a lot of new animations and altered hitbox properties/frame data for moves such as up tilt, forward smash, forward aerial, down aerial, up special and Luigi got a completely different side B. In Brawl, Luigi got a new voice and more new animations. Now in Ultimate, Luigi has a completely different grab and throws as well as some other adjustments, making him more unique than ever.

Shared moves :

• Forward tilt : Mario and Luigi have never had the same forward tilt. In 64, they shared the same animation but Luigi's was weaker and had a shorter lasting hitbox. In Melee, Luigi's is faster and stronger. In Brawl, Luigi's has a new animation, has more active frames and it is stronger than Mario's although Mario's now has less ending lag and his down angled forward tilt is stronger. In Smash 4, the same thing applied but to a lesser extent (and Luigi's down angled forward tilt was fixed). Now in Ultimate, Luigi's has a noticeably different animation to Mario's.

• Up tilt : In 64, they were mostly the same but Luigi's had a slightly bigger hitbox and launched at a slightly lower angle. Starting from Melee, Luigi's received a very different animation and Luigi's has a different launch angle and is stronger. They also have slightly different frame data.

• Up smash : In 64, they were mostly the same except Luigi's had a slightly bigger hitbox. Starting from Melee, Mario and Luigi's have different animations and properties.

• Neutral aerial : In 64, they were the same except Luigi's late hit made a slightly different sound effect when it connected. Starting from Melee, Luigi's has a completely different angle and power. Starting from Smash 4, the animation is not 1:1 although similar.

• Back aerial : They were the same in 64. In Melee, Luigi's was stronger and lacked a weaker late hit. In Brawl, Luigi's was stronger and lasted longer but had more ending lag. This was carried over into 4/Ultimate, except Luigi's now has a sweetspot/sourspot, it lasts for a shorter amount of time (although it still lasts longer than Mario) and it has even higher ending lag.

• Up aerial : These moves were the same in 64 although they have slowly become more different from each other. In Melee, Luigi's was stronger but had higher startup lag with a shorter duration. In Brawl, Luigi's was still stronger while also now lasting longer than Mario's (although Luigi's gained a worse auto-cancel window). In Smash 4, Luigi's now has less ending lag than Mario's and this was taken even further in Ultimate (with the Mario and Luigi now having different animations). The more noticeable difference however is that Mario's now has a vertical angle while Luigi's has a more horizontal angle. This overall means that Mario's is suited for juggling with Luigi's is a more situational combo tool.

• Neutral special : Luigi's fireballs have always shot straight while Mario's dropped and bounced although starting from Melee, Luigi has an entirely different animation. Luigi's fireballs have more ending lag in Melee although starting from Brawl, they have less ending lag than Mario's. The strength of the fireballs also differ in every game except for Melee. They overall have different uses mainly due to how the fireballs are shot.

• Up special : Luigi's Super Jump Punch originally had the same animation in 64 although starting from Melee, it goes straight up, making it more suited for recovering vertically but less so for recovering horizontally and the move's functionality has always been very different. It has a clean/late hit combo that boasts tremendous power, differenciating it from Mario's diagonal movement and weak multi-hit properties despite the moves sharing their name. Luigi's also has more startup and landing lag compared to Mario's starting from Melee.

Personally, I would still call Luigi a semi clone myself as while he does technically have unique animations and he generally plays differently, with some moves having very different properties, he is still similar to Mario in quite a few ways. Various moves are still similar both in terms of animations and functionally (although not identical) and Luigi still has elements of Mario in him, which would still make a casual player see him as a clone. I can see an argument for him not being a clone anymore but it's not like he wasn't a clone before, because he most definitely was and there are still overlaps between him and Mario. I just wanted to highlight that Luigi has only gotten more unique as time has gone on and I wanted to add to this because I thought it would be fun. User:SuperSqank (talk) 17:22, June 26, 2020 (EDT)

My post was solely for Luigi's presence on the SSBU table. I think the pseudo-clone title prior to SSBU is fair. Hitbox Enthusiast Zeck (talk) 17:23, June 26, 2020 (EDT)

While I understand your point, from what I understand, what is considered a "different move" is based on if its animation and concept are completely different, hence why moves like Wolf's blaster, Link's bombs, and Roy's final smash are all listed as the same move. Function in terms of frame data, knockback angle, and damage tends to get ignored, otherwise there wouldn't be longstanding debate on Ganondorf's up tilt. Most of Luigi's differences you listed are properties rather than animations, and those that were animation differences are more minor than say, a punch vs. a kick. I agree that fireball and maybe forward tilt are different moves, but the rest are different because their combos are different instead of their concept and animation, which is what is considered. If most of Luigi's moves were considered different because they have different combos, Lucina and Chrom wouldn't even be on this list. 72.219.72.215 18:53, June 26, 2020 (EDT)

I think it's unfair to classify a move as the same because the animation is similar. For instance, Luigi's UAir has a completely different animation than Mario's, but it's grouped with it because it's an upwards kick. That kind of move isn't really uncommon and an up aerial like Captain Falcon's actually shares more similarities to Mario's due to similar body movement. I honestly think at this point people look at body proportions and as soon as the characters do the same movement, they group the animations as cloned. Luigi's up tilt is another good example of this as Luigi starts the animation lower and doesn't spin on himself, making both animation pretty different for, once again, a common move amongst characters in this roster. I think it's unfair to judge solely on animation especially when said animations aren't the EXACT same. Luigi only has 3 moves with the actual same animation as Mario's versions, being up smash, back aerial and neutral aerial. Every other move is different in animation. Hitbox Enthusiast Zeck (talk) 21:38, June 26, 2020 (EDT)

There are plenty of moves that are still clearly the same concept that have very different animations, such as those I mentioned above, as well as all of the Fire Emblem counters sans Chrom's, and many of Dark Samus' moves. This isn't just a Luigi issue. If Luigi has to be taken off of the list because of slight animation differences, that opens up a new realm of problems. Toon Link has more animation differences in his entire moveset because of his different body shape, so should he be taken off the list? I personally think Luigi is fine being listed as a psuedo-clone. The moves should only really be considered different if it's a slap vs. a punch, not a uppercut vs. a slightly lower uppercut. 72.219.72.215 00:46, June 27, 2020 (EDT)

I understand your point, but I think the definition of a clone as it is on Smash Wiki is too broad and is sort of flawed. I also think listing Wolf, Falco, Ganondorf and other characters who were clearly made very much different from their base character as semi/pseudo-clones is reaching. I would only include full clones (and Ken due to Echo status) in Ultimate, honestly. Ultimate decloned essentially every non-Dr. Mario fighter that was previously cloned. Hitbox Enthusiast Zeck (talk) 02:00, June 27, 2020 (EDT)

A couple of things. First of all, Luigi's up air is much more similar to Mario's as you are making it out to be. The startup is almost identical, the legs move relative to each other in the same way Mario's do, and the ending animation is very similar as well. The only significant difference is the angle of Luigi's body relative to his legs during the kicking portion of the move. Secondly, there are many other aspects of Luigi's animations that show that he hasn't fully outgrown his history as a clone of Mario, such as his shared crouch, rebound, tumbling and hitstun animations. Even the game's tips keep comparing him to Mario. Alex the Weeb 05:42, June 27, 2020 (EDT)

(Indent reset) I'm adamant about Luigi's up aerial because its animation difference from Mario is the reason why the move is not that good when rising. If it had Mario's animation, it would be able to hit tall characters when Luigi is rising. Mario's leg is also moves much faster, leading to less active frames. the recoil from the leg moving is also handled differently. I see the difference extremely well because not only am I a Luigi main, I also have checked countless animations and focused on attacking animations. The difference in animation between Mario and Luigi may not be as drastic as it is between Marth and King K. Rool, but it's there and it does have significance in Luigi's uses of his "cloned" moves. Hitbox Enthusiast Zeck (talk) 18:06, June 27, 2020 (EDT)

Is Young Link in SSBU a full or semi clone?

He's listed as a full clone in Melee and a semi in Ultimate, with the different moves section talking about how Link uses his right hand while the others use their left. However, the notes says this: "While Link now holds his sword in his right hand while Young Link and Toon Link still use their left, their animations are simply mirrored, which does not affect their clone status." which one is it? Did Link switching hands make Young Link a semi or not? 72.219.72.215 21:53, July 12, 2020 (EDT)

I assume you you mean Young Link on the topic, but Link being right-handed now doesn't affect Young Link's and Toon Link's clone status as it's an aesthetical difference. Young Link is now a semi-clone in Ultimate not because of him changing, rather Link changing so much from how he was in Melee. Links loss of a rapid jab, Remote Bombs, loss of a tether recovery/grab, different dash attack, and different Final Smash make Young Link more different from him without changing. This is why most people often compare Young Link and Toon Link to each other rather than Link to Young Link. If Link was like how he was in Smash 4, then Young Link would still be a full-clone. Diddy Kongstar (talk) 13:39, August 1, 2020 (EDT)

I meant Young Link, and the problem is that I thought there was an inconsistency of him being listed as a semi-clone, but the notes stating that his clone status did not change. Now that I know that while the hand-changing didn't affect his clone status, many other factors did. I appreciate the explanation very much. 72.219.72.215 16:29, August 1, 2020 (EDT)

Trivia about Mario, Link, and Marth being the only characters to have more than one clone

While it is accurate for this three characters to be listed, why isn't Fox listed? He has Falco and Wolf derived from him and pseudo-clones are a sub-type of clones just like full clones and semi-clones. If pseudo-clones are excluded from that piece of trivia, then characters who started as semi-clones might as well be too, which would make it only Mario and Marth. Diddy Kongstar (talk) 10:44, July 30, 2020 (EDT)

Ehhhhhhh, Wolf. When Wolf was in Brawl, his status was very unclear and heavily debated since brawls release. Even though we list Wolf as a pseudo clone, we acknowledge the fact that Wolf either has different animations and properties. S3AHAWK (talk) 13:42, July 30, 2020 (EDT)

Wolf was (and still is) very commonly agreed to not actually be a "clone" of Fox. There's a lot of Fox in Wolf, yes—both share similar attributes and have a few similar moves—but saying that determines clone status would be the same as implying Lucario is a clone of Mewtwo. Aidan, the Rurouni 13:52, July 30, 2020 (EDT)

A lot of clone statuses are debatable because of how broad the description of it is. I don't consider Falco or Wolf to be even close to Fox nowadays and Wolf was never really cloned from Fox at all in my opinion. Hitbox Enthusiast Zeck (talk) 14:13, July 30, 2020 (EDT)

Lucario as a clone of Mewtwo is a bad example since they only share one move. That would be like saying Charizard is a clone of Bowser or King Dedede is a clone of Kirby because they share a similar Neutral Special like with Lucario and Mewtwo. Wolf on the other hand has all Special Moves derived from Fox, similar Final Smashes, and a similar Neutral Air and Dash Attack in Ultimate. That’s why he’s marked as a “clone”, but with a sub-type of a Pseudo-Clone. Diddy Kongstar (talk) 00:42, August 2, 2020 (EDT)

Notice how I specified, in referencing how similar Fox and Wolf are, "both share similar attributes and have a few similar moves." The same could easily be said for Mewtwo and Lucario—both have floaty movement in the air, use a type of energy for attacks (dark energy for Mewtwo, aura for Lucario), and have a similar neutral special (a charged ball of energy) and side special (a command grab)—but the case isn't made, because it's understood that Lucario isn't a clone of Mewtwo (despite common misconceptions stating otherwise when Brawl first came out). Neither Charizard and Bowser nor King Dedede and Kirby are valid counter-comparisons, due to (aside from the general "heavyweight" archetypes shared by Charizard and Bowser, and the multiple jumps shared between King Dedede and Kirby) neither pair having similar fighters. Also worth mentioning is that, while Wolf's specials were derived from Fox, they had noticeable differences that made them stand out as special moves. Aidan, the Rurouni 01:57, August 3, 2020 (EDT)

Having similar attributes doesn’t always make someone a clone or similar. For example, Captain Falcon is above average weight while Ganondorf is a super heavyweight, yet Ganondorf is still a semi-clone of Captain Falcon. Calling Mewtwo’s and Lucario’s Side Special similar just because they’re command grabs would be like saying Bowser’s and Ganondorf’s Side Specials are similar because they command grabs. Their Side Specials function and look completely different with Mewtwo’s able to reflect projectiles and Lucario’s dealing normal knockback if the opponent’s not close enough. I feel the whole Echo Fighter label ruined how people see clones because now, they see it like they have to nearly identical with small differences. Diddy Kongstar (talk) 20:24, August 3, 2020 (EDT)

Suggestion on changing how clones are determined

Seeing as how there are suggestions of labeling Jigglypuff in all Smash games but 64 as a pseudo-clone of Kirby and labeling Terry as a pseudo-clone of Ryu, I propose a change to when a fighter can be considered a clone. Since Special Moves are usually the moves that most express fighters, how about the fighter can be up for clone consideration if at least two of their Special Moves are similar? Of course, this would take 64 Jiggypuff off of semi-clone status and just mentions of similar moves and animations like with Captain Falcon. Diddy Kongstar (talk) 21:32, August 2, 2020 (EDT)

I agree it needs a change but I think that special move thing wouldn't affect anyone besides Terry and Jigglypuff even though clone status should be revoked from many more characters. Hitbox Enthusiast Zeck (talk) 21:37, August 2, 2020 (EDT)

To me, I personally agree we should do this. My question is, should we discuss it here or make it a page to propose? S3AHAWK (talk) 21:56, August 2, 2020 (EDT)

Maybe a page to propose it. Diddy Kongstar (talk) 22:51, August 2, 2020 (EDT)

I think the way it is now is way less convoluted. Each move takes time to make, special move or regular attack. The only thing I'd maybe change is that Ganondorf and Falco are probably psuedo-clones in Ultimate, but other than that, I think the current system is fine. 72.219.72.215 23:22, August 2, 2020 (EDT)

Special Moves are usually what represent the fighter the most. Other attacks usually don’t have too many references to the character, which is why it’s often to see multiple fighters using a similar move despite not being clones of each other. 64 Captain takes a few animations and moves from Samus, but is not a clone because he has many different moves from her. Hero shares some moves with Link and other sword fighters, but isn’t anywhere close to similar to any of them. Special Moves are usually the most diverse moves fighters have, so having similar Specials makes it more obvious they’re a clone. As for Falco and Ganondorf, I still see them as semi-clones because they still share many moves with Fox and Captain Falcon respectively and don’t have many differences like Luigi, Lucas, and Wolf do. Diddy Kongstar (talk) 00:26, August 3, 2020 (EDT)

Regardless of how much special moves "represent" a character, that doesn't change the fact that the rest of the moveset (i.e., standard attacks, aerials, throws) is present, and thus should be taken into account when determining how much of a clone one character is from another. You make this very case in your own argument: to quote what you just said, "64 Captain takes a few animations and moves from Samus, but is not a clone because he has many different moves from her." Aidan, the Rurouni 01:50, August 3, 2020 (EDT)

Also, as an aside, who legitimately has tried to make a case for Terry being a pseudo-clone of Ryu? If anyone has actually tried to suggest that, then I'm sorry, but that's just complete stupidity. Aidan, the Rurouni 02:01, August 3, 2020 (EDT)

Also because Captain Falcon shares no similar Special Moves to Samus. Looking at the cast of clones so far, they share at least two Special Moves with their parent. This makes it easier to determine if a fighter is a clone rather than just borrowing some moves from another fighter. The Fighters Pass fighters for example borrow several regular moves from other fighters, but are not clones of anyone because of how small of the moves they borrow are and that they share no Special Moves with anyone else. Incineroar shares some moves with King K. Rool such as Down Smash, Neutral Air, and Up Throw, but Incineroar clearly isn’t a clone of K. Rool and Incineroar is still a unique fighter. The similarities in regular attacks would determine if the fighter is a full clone, semi-clone, or a pseudo-clone if they share two or more Special Moves. Diddy Kongstar (talk) 20:16, August 3, 2020 (EDT)

So what you're suggesting is if two fighters have a similar special move then that should determine whether or not they should be within the clone status. That doesn't make sense for anything besides pseudo clones, and even still it's debatable whether or not they fit into the pseudo clone status just because they "share" special m9ves. As Aidan said "Regardless of how much special moves "represent" a character, that doesn't change the fact that the rest of the moveset (i.e., standard attacks, aerials, throws) is present". When taking other clones into consideration we also take into account their attributes, animations, standard attacks, etc, otherwise if we're using special moves as the de facto in determining if someone is a clone, then we might as well label Lucario as a pseudo clone of Giygas because they "share" a neutral special, despite having different attacks and attributes.

Or again if we're using special moves as the main factor, then Dr Mario would be a semi clone instead of a full clone because they only share their side and up specials, but the reason they're considered full clones is because almost all of their other attacks besides down and (to an extent) neutral specials are almost identical in terms of animations and what they are.

Also, I need to ask... who legitimately ever suggested labeling Terry as a pseudo clone of Ryu? Anyone with common sense who owns the game would know that they are completely unrelated (aside from those special control stick inputs I guess but still). Omegα Toαd 22:58, August 3, 2020 (EDT)

What I’m suggesting is that if they have at least two similar Special Moves, then we can look at all of the other attacks to determine what type of clone they are. It’s not only evaluating the Specials, but clones tend to share Special Moves with their parents and that helps differentiate it from being a clone of someone or just taking moves from someone else while still being unique. Dr. Mario is obviously still a full clone. Diddy Kongstar (talk) 23:41, August 3, 2020 (EDT)

Do clones tend to share specials? True, but this is not the case for all clones. Jigglypuff in 64 doesn't share any specials with Kirby, but she shares many attributes (six jumps, floaty lightweight character) and non special attacks (b throw, dair, etc) with him to the point where she was cloned to some degree. Characters don't need to have at least two special moves to be considered clones, if we say Jigglypuff is not cloned from Kirby to some degree because she doesn't share any special moves then that would be false as mentioned above. Omegα Toαd 00:17, August 4, 2020 (EDT)

Going back to the case of Captain Falcon in Smash 64, you can admit he is cloned from Samus to some degree, but have different Special Moves and a few common moves to not make him a true clone. Similar case for Jigglypuff in 64. Diddy Kongstar (talk) 11:47, August 4, 2020 (EDT)

This suggestion implies that a character with an entirely identical moveset but no shared special moves is not a clone at all. This is like saying that Fox and Wolf are more similar than a 1111 Mii Brawler and a 2222 Mii Brawler. This seems rather silly. Toomai Glittershine The Multifaceted 07:28, August 4, 2020 (EDT)

The Mii Brawlers are the same fighter though. That's not a good comparison. Diddy Kongstar (talk) 11:47, August 4, 2020 (EDT)

Well in that case how about this comparison. Going by your suggestion, you're saying Lucario fits into the clone status more than Jigglypuff in 64 does because Lucario shares a special move with Giygas, but Jpuff doesn't share any with Kirby. That doesn't make sense. Omegα Toαd 19:47, August 4, 2020 (EDT)

You’re taking it out of context. The rest of the moveset is compared if they have at least two similar Special Moves to another fighter. Lucario only shares one Special Move with Mewtwo and no other moves are similar regardless. Diddy Kongstar (talk) 21:02, August 4, 2020 (EDT)

Reguardless if me and Toomai's examples are "out of context" or not, what you're suggesting appears to be is that a character can only be considered a clone if they share at least two special moves with another character. If they have a completely identical moveset but don't share at least two special moves, then they're not a clone what so ever. That's just stupid. Omegα Toαd 21:12, August 4, 2020 (EDT)

Because there’s never been a character whose moveset is identical to another’s without having similar Special Moves. 64 Jigglypuff is never even considered a semi-clone from other sources or people. Especially since Jigglypuff is even labeled fully unique in subsequent entries here, which wouldn’t make much sense for someone who was a semi-clone in the first entry and didn’t get too many move changes in Melee. Diddy Kongstar (talk) 23:55, August 4, 2020 (EDT)

You are neglecting the referenced claim that Jigglypuff (along with the rest of the unlocakble characters in SSB64) was chosen and designed specifically to reuse some of Kirby, which in some ways is the purest definition of being a clone of some sort (saving development time/effort by reusing assets). Toomai Glittershine The Spectrum 07:36, August 5, 2020 (EDT)

Then that would make 64 Captain Falcon a type of clone of Samus because he also was designed to reuse attacks and animations. That argument doesn’t work well, especially when many don’t consider Wolf to be any type of clone despite also being designed to reuse animations to get him in Brawl. Diddy Kongstar (talk) 11:41, August 5, 2020 (EDT)

You're missing the point. Out of her 19 moves, 11(.66) were copied from Kirby, which is more than half of her moveset. Ignoring specials only ~6 of her normal attacks are unique (counting specials ~8.5), that's why she's a clone. Aside from her moveset she also has other attributes shared with Kirby, for example being a small, floaty lightweight with 6 jumps, to add to her clone status. Meanwhile C Falcon only shares only 4(.25) of his moves with Samus, making him a fighter who shares minor aspects with another, but is otherwise a unique fighter, much like Ness. It's not just using the model structure of their parent fighter that makes them a clone, it also has to do with the moveset as a whole (not just specials) that determine how much of a clone they are. This explains what would and wouldn't be considered a clone by actual objective measures. Omegα Toαd 01:49, August 6, 2020 (EDT)

Even then, there are issues with the chart. Like how Jigglypuff’s Neutral Attack (2/3) Down Tilt, and Back Throw are considered cloned moves in 64, but not in Melee despite still being very similar. In addition, Jigglypuff’s pummel animation prior to Ultimate is similar to Kirby’s. By that logic and accounting for the unlisted similarities, that would make Jigglypuff a pseudo-clone of Kirby in Melee and possibly subsequent Smash entries depending on how the Final Smash affects it. Diddy Kongstar (talk) 02:23, August 6, 2020 (EDT)

We need more terms.

Listing Doc, Chrom or Pichu as the same as a character like Daisy, Richter or Dark Samus is utterly ridiculous. If you want to call those first 3 "full clones" I get that, but disagree - either way we cannot lump these two vastly different types of clone together. The simplest solution would probably be to rename one class of clone -like, say Doc would be a "virtual full clone", or something amoung those lines while Daisy is a "full clone" - those names are merely examples, but I'm sure we can come up with something better. -What could possibly go wrong? - BubzieBobkat (talk) 15:39, August 31, 2020 (EDT)

Short of making a "glorified pallet swap" category or something, I'm not sure how that would work. You're absolutely right that those 2 sets of clones are not in the same league, but the Wiki is notoriously traditionalist when it comes to dealing with clones, so I don't really think there's a way we could really implement an extra category without a complete overhaul of our categorization, that would also consider significant functional differences with moves. Alex the Weeb 15:51, August 31, 2020 (EDT)

It’s just a wiki thing. The Cloneosity page is what determines what kind of clone a fighter is, like how 64 Jigglypuff is a semi-clone of Kirby despite not sharing any special moves. It’s determined by a percentile rank depending on how similar the moves are to the “parent”. Diddy Kongstar (talk) 23:04, September 1, 2020 (EDT)

Does Nana being a CPU-controlled clone of Popo count as notable trivia?

Obviously they shouldn't be mentioned on any of the main tables, due to both of them being half a character, but perhaps it should be mentioned in the trivia section that "While the Ice Climbers have no characters cloned from them, the partner climber - Nana by default - acts as a CPU-controlled clone of the leader."? 72.219.72.215 00:13, October 4, 2020 (EDT)

The thing is that are the same aside from the partner having a meteor smash on their forward aerial. Plus, the half character thing you mentioned as they’re one total fighter. Diddy Kongstar (talk) 20:04, October 7, 2020 (EDT)

What Happened to Lucas in SSBU?

Toonami's chart shows he still qualifies as a Pseudo-Clone in SSBU. So why is he missing from the SSBU section of the main article? Toonami's bracket show you need less than 30% of copied moves to be considered a unique character while Lucas has 32% of his moves copied from Ness. So either somebody forgot to add Lucas or Toonami's rankings are outdated. --Skibot99 (talk) 12:39, November 27, 2020 (EST)

Pyra and Mythra

From what I can tell, they have the same aerials, tilts, and smash attacks. Besides one being strong and the other being fast, it seems like the main differences are in their specials. In that case, should they be added to the Ultimate table as semiclones, or should we wait until we see more of their movesets? 72.219.72.215 19:28, February 17, 2021 (EST)

Any such claims absolutely should wait until we know what their movesets are in full detail. Miles (talk) 19:33, February 17, 2021 (EST)

Now we've seen their movesets in full; they share basically all of their non-specials. Can somebody add Pyra and Mythra to the table as semiclones? 72.219.72.215 09:55, March 4, 2021 (EST)

Young Link listed as a Full Clone on the Cloneosity table but Semi-Clone on this article

It notes 87.5%+ of attack animations are full clones and Young Link has 88.5%. So should Young Link be changed to full clone here (and on his fighter page) or does this article not necessarily follow Toomai's research?

107.150.23.200 20:22, March 5, 2021 (EST)

I agree, I don't quite get why Young Link is categorized as a semi-clone in this article, and would like to see this addressed. Omega Tyrant 20:52, March 5, 2021 (EST)

I can defend Young Link being categorized as a semi-clone. Toomai's chart doesn't count the Links' down specials as different despite BOTW Link's being completely decloned in Ultimate. Similarly, the FS is listed as 0.5 instead of 0. While Triforce Slash is unchanged from previous games, it should have absolutely been treated as completely decloned regardless of if the original or the clone received the change. If we discount these two mistakes by subtracting 1 for the down special and 0.5 for the final smash, Young Link's actual score goes from 21.25/24 to 19.75/24 (82.2%), which is very slightly more of a clone than Pyra/Mythra. Thus, Young Link should stay listed as a semi-clone. 72.219.72.215 22:02, March 5, 2021 (EST)

I fixed the page. Sometimes it gets changed and no one notices, such as this. Toomai Glittershine The Yellow 22:31, March 5, 2021 (EST)

I'm going to assume you thought that the main reason people think Young Link is a semi-clone now is the mirrored animations, a mistake I made too. But right now, the only reason why your chart counts Young Link as a full clone is because you counted the final smash as 0.5 when it shouldn't matter if the original or the clone got a new move, and counted their bombs as the same despite them being completely different in both animation and function (I'll admit YL's up tilt shouldn't be listed as different on this page at all). Saying Link and his counterparts still share a down special is like saying Pyra and Mythra share a neutral special for being short-ranged charging attacks (yes I know those two are semi-clones anyways). If you look at my math above, Young Link actually barely falls into the semiclone category if his bombs are counted as different and the final smash isn't counted as 0.5. 72.219.72.215 23:03, March 5, 2021 (EST)

It can matter whether it's the parent or the clone that has a move changed. In this case, Young Link in SSBU is rather explicitly a "legacy Link", using the typical Link moveset while the one called "Link" does a few unique things because of the "Link gets tweaks to fit the most recent Zelda game" guideline. In a perfect world we wouldn't have to consider this sort of "history", but the reality is we do. Toomai Glittershine The Steppin' 15:52, March 6, 2021 (EST)

I can see the analogy you're going for, but the work made to change the original Link is the same effort that would have been made if Young Link got a new final smash instead. For example, your chart lists Luigi's down special and down air as 0, even though that is the exact same situation where Mario got his moves changed but Luigi didn't. Likewise, the chart correcty gives Pichu's nair a score of zero, despite the fact that Pikachu got the new move while Pichu's was unchanged. It seems like this whole "the parent getting the new move doesn't count for being different" nonsense is thankfully only present on the Links' down special and final smash and Roy's neutral special, but it's a problem on Young Link because that actually changes his percentage from barely a full clone to barely a semi clone.72.219.72.215 16:10, March 6, 2021 (EST)

You seem to be under the impression that the Link bomb change is substantial enough to count the moves as not cloned at all. I tend to use a rule of thumb for "could one be an SSB4 custom move of the other?" for special moves, and this certainly qualifies (the only difference being what causes the bomb to explode). Toomai Glittershine The Awesome 23:25, March 6, 2021 (EST)

If the move didn't have an extra detonation animation or if Link's bombs were always like that, I'd agree. However, it should be noted that besides Palutena and the Miis, none of the customs added extra animations to my knowledge, so the extra detonation animation would automatically disqualify the new bombs from being a custom of the old ones. I could probably see the original self-detonating bombs as a custom for the new ones if customs still existed, but objectively the new down special is more complex than the old one because it's a three-step process (spawn, throw, detonate) instead of two-step (spawn, throw), so it should be counted as different even if customs still existed based on the new down special being more complex than the old one. There's also the fact that the bomb model, bomb properties, and animation all changed when they were previously exactly the same between Link and Young Link. For reference, Luigi did get an animation change to his neutral special in Melee, but the fireball itself didn't change from the first game, whereas Link's down special changed both the animation and the bomb itself. You correctly count Falco's down special and Ganon's side special as completely different due to their new animations and functionalities starting in Brawl, but refuse to do the same for Link's new down special despite this being the exact same situation. I'd even say Link's down special is more decloned than these two moves because Falco's reflector still has the same model and Ganondorf's side special has the same startup, while Link's down special bears absolutely no resemblance to his previous one outside of conceptually being a bomb, which in that case I guess he shares a down special with Banjo, Steve, and Samus too. Counting the new bombs as exactly the same is ignoring both the most prominent change made to Link in Ultimate and a huge chunk of effort made to declone Link from his counterparts. 72.219.72.215 00:42, March 7, 2021 (EST)

By your own rules, an extra animation is basis to count a move as at least half score, so I'm not seeing the excuse for counting Link's down special as not substantially different enough when it literally is by your own rules. I said this in my previous comment, but the presence of the new down special having an additional detonation animation kind of makes the custom move analogy earlier you gave null in this instance. I can maybe see the excuse for Roy's neutral special now since Marth's new animation is simpler, but Link's down special should be automatically considered decloned based on getting extra animations, regardless of any hypothetical custom move theories. If a clone has attacks that involve more animations than the parent - which represents being given new, unique animations for the sake of differentiation - the move's clone score is halved.

I am also aware of the next paragraph saying "The inverse is not true... this doesn't require any additional differentiation effort.", and I would agree with this if Link's down special always had these properties and then Young Link simplified it, but if you want to consider the characters' "history", the simpler bombs were in smash before the more complex ones. It clearly took the same differentiation effort to change Link's down special and final smash as it would have been if Young Link got these changes instead, and to claim otherwise would be stubborn. It doesn't suddenly take less overall effort if the original got a bunch of changes instead of the clone; the effort just gets redistributed. The work made to create BOTW Link with a new final smash and down special and port Young Link with no changes besides getting Link's old final smash is the same overall effort as if Twilight Princess Link was ported over with no changes and Young Link was reworked. As low effort as pasting SSB4 Link's final smash on Young Link is, Link's final smash doesn't resemble the old one at all. In this case, I think a good analogy would be to think of Young Link as the original and BOTW Link as the semi-clone. You don't have a problem with counting Young Link's dash attack as completely different even though Link got that change in Young Link's absence, so it baffles me how stubborn you're acting about Link's new down special and final smash to the point where you either partially or completely ignore both your own guidelines about a new move having extra animations and the effort it takes to create a new move. 72.219.72.215 03:49, March 9, 2021 (EST)

I could see an argument to count the bombs as being only semi-cloned rather than cloned. (They do still fit the custom move guideline, with the theoretical changes being "detonates on hit" and "disable manual detonation animation".) But even if this were the case, the presence of Toon Link (who is of the same clone "family") also having the same bombs as Young Link complicates matters. For comparison, it is generally agreed that Dr. Mario's down special is still cloned, even though Mario doesn't have it in that slot anymore and it kind of comes more from Luigi now. In a world where I didn't mark Young Link's bomb as being cloned from Link, I might instead mark it as cloned from the related Toon Link, which would not change a thing. (And to be honest, that's probably how the devs did it, since it'd be a lot easier than importing data from three games ago.) So I think it's best to simply accept that not enough differentiation was done to say the bombs are distinct. Toomai Glittershine The Cloronic 08:21, March 9, 2021 (EST)

Even though I disagree with counting moves as cloned based on a third character since the comparison is supposed to be between just the first two, I can't argue that copying from a third character is less effort than if all three had different moves. I still think Young Link is a semi-clone, but he's so borderline between semi and full that ultimately it's not a big deal. Since neither of us are changing our viewpoints, I'll leave the debate here for now and wait if somebody else can give a more convincing argument than me. 72.219.72.215 20:11, March 9, 2021 (EST)

I feel that cloned moves should only be judged on how similar they are to the parent, not with a third character as well. Dr. Tornado should be considered a decloned move from Mario, but he would still be a full clone. Young Link's and Toon Link's bombs should both be listed as half-cloned moves from the Remote Bomb. Personally, I see Young Link is a semi-clone in Ultimate (ignoring being left-handed since that's an aesthetical difference) and find it odd to group him with Dr. Mario and Pichu, who are way more similar to their parent than Young Link is from Link. Diddy Kongstar (talk) 14:56, March 10, 2021 (EST)

After seeing that Toon Link has the same dash attack as Young Link, I can now agree with Young Link being a full clone, due to quite literally all but one of his differences (rapid jab) from Link simply being shared with Toon Link. Could somebody add that specific detail to either the table or the note about Young and Toon Link being semi-clones? 72.219.72.215 14:50, March 15, 2021 (EDT)

"Toon Link can be considered a semi-clone of Young Link..."

Now that the article has changed Young Link back to a full clone, is this note below the table still relevant or even correct? 217.138.255.198 06:03, March 6, 2021 (EST)

1. Young Link is not a full clone. The chart didn't count the down special as different and only counted the final smash as half different despite the fact that it shouldn't matter that the original changed instead of the clone. If these two mistakes get reverted, Young Link barely makes the mark for semi-clone. 2. Regardless, Toon Link and Young Link are both semi clones of Link, therefore by the transitive property they are semi clones of each other. This is especially true because both are faster and weaker versions of Link. 72.219.72.215 14:08, March 6, 2021 (EST)

I agree. Young Link and Pichu should not be listed as full clones. Two of the major factors in making a full clone (balance, and animation), were not saved. I also think Ken should be listed as a full clone. --109.150.126.53 01:33, October 8, 2021 (EDT)

King K. Rool and Incineroar psuedo-clones?

Incineroar has the same down smash, neutral air, down air, forward air, up throw, and all floor attacks, and both of their down specials are counters of some kind. If we count the down specials as half-cloned, they share 6.5/24 moves, or 27%, in the limbo section of Toomai's chart. I asked him if this would qualify them as psuedo-clones, but he hasn't responded. I personally don't think they're psuedo-clones, but I want to check if this mentality is shared among everyone else, partially because I have a tendency to think characters are less cloned than they actually are, and partially because these two characters share a suspicious amount of moves. 72.219.72.215 20:28, March 18, 2021 (EDT)

I advise you to actually look at their animations frame-by-frame in Ultimate Frame Data (K. Rool here and Incineroar here), and realize how silly this suggestion is, their animations are not identical at all. Similar type of attack =! cloned move (otherwise you would be calling all nair sex kicks cloned, all downward stomps cloned, all 1-2 sweeping down smashes cloned, and so on), and if you want to call their down specials cloned because they're counters, that's essentially like saying all projectiles are cloned because they're the same type of move. Omega Tyrant 20:51, March 18, 2021 (EDT)

Understood, thank you. I wanted to make sure if my mentality of them not being clones of any kind was shared with everyone else, and I got my answer. Sorry if this was disruptive, I just don't fully trust myself after being proven wrong about Young Link's classification due to forgetting to take into account Toon Link. 72.219.72.215 21:12, March 18, 2021 (EDT)

Mistake about SSB clones

I think it's meant to say Samus and Captain Falcon share the same UP Tilt, not down tilt. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.30.210.113 (talk • contribs) {{{2}}}

It's both, actually. This is Samus's down tilt and this is Captain Falcon's down tilt. CookiesCreme 00:23, April 23, 2021 (EDT)

I don't think so, actually. Samus does a sweep where as Falcon does a poke. Even animation-wise, they both aren't too similar to each other. Señor Mexicano (talk) 00:34, April 23, 2021 (EDT)

Hmmm you're right, and up tilt is more similar between the two. CookiesCreme 01:02, April 23, 2021 (EDT)

I've changed it from down tilt to up tilt. Their up tilts are essentially the same with the only difference being that Falcon's is faster. Señor Mexicano (talk) 00:28, April 24, 2021 (EDT)

New category of clone - True Clone.

Smash Ultimate has made it clear that a new type of clone exists, the true clone. The true clone is so similar to the original fighter they are not considered their own characters when it comes to competitive play or even any discussion about character ability. The wiki and community have made this distinction already with certain characters having merged competitive play sections. The following characters could be classed as a true clone: Dark Pit (SSB4/SSBU), Daisy (SSBU), Richter (SSBU), Dark Samus (SSBU). This makes 4 fighters, greater than the amount of clones in Smash 4 and enough to put in a category. Dark Pit could maybe be debated as he has gameplay differences in his side special and neutral special, as well as a completely different Final Smash. --86.139.250.217 19:07, October 5, 2021 (EDT)

How do you define a "true clone" using only data taken directly from Smash Ultimate (as in: Ultimate putting those 4 fighters apart)? All the game does is say whether a character is an echo fighter or not. It does not consider characters like Ken having substancial differences from the base character. Hitbox Enthusiast Zeck (talk) 19:17, October 5, 2021 (EDT)

SmashWiki isn't official. If it was then we would be classifying Dr Mario as a semi-clone along with Lucas, and Ken as a full-clone along with Daisy, and Young Link and Isabelle as quasi-clones as they don't share body types. I guess we can use the fact that the wiki itself has already partially made the distinction.. --109.150.126.53 06:12, October 7, 2021 (EDT)

I don't think this idea is necessary or even all that useful because it goes against the main premise of our definition of "clone", which is based on how many animations are shared and how many special moves function the same (which mostly aligns with what the devs consider a clone/echo). I don't see the need in creating an additional category that requires additional rules to be defined. Toomai Glittershine The Sharp 07:47, October 7, 2021 (EDT)

These 4 characters are the only ones to have the exact same hitbox data values (excluding elemental effects and sounds) for at least 90% of their attacks. Surely that must count for something? They are also the only characters to share a section in the official Japanese guide.--81.140.206.87 14:31, October 11, 2021 (EDT)

You could argue that the developers did add additional rules to what defines a clone. Compare Fox and Falco in Melee to Peach and Daisy in Smash Ultimate. There is clearly a difference, and it's character handling and functionality, not just attack animations. Even then "full clones" like Pichu or Young Link in Ultimate actually share a total of zero animations with their base character thanks to having a different skeleton, and get separate balancing, which basically goes against the entire point of making a clone easy to implement in the first place. No one really considers Pichu or Young Link to be a clone in the same vein as Dark Samus or Daisy, not even the developers. --109.150.126.53 07:54, October 7, 2021 (EDT)

Alright, I guess I should probably throw my hat in the ring as well, since I did do a project on this topic. As of right now, the Wiki only considers animations when deciding how cloned 2 characters are. This obviously has some shortcomings, as it effectively results in fighters with radically different playstyles, such as Dr. Mario, being listed under the same banner as characters that are glorified pallette swaps like Daisy and Richter. In order to distinguish between the two, we would have to acknowledge that animations are not the only way in which 2 characters can be distinguished between, and that things like attributes, hitbox data and frame data all play a role in how similar fighters are in practice. The problem with this is that we would need to develop some kind of way to quantify these differences, based both on their number and severity, without the article becoming even more subjective than it already is.

The question then becomes, can we do this, and should we do this? Personally, I think the answer to both of those questions is yes, but I'm obviously biased as someone who has been frustrated with this article's methods for a while. What do you guys make of this? Alex the Weeb 12:48, October 12, 2021 (EDT)

Mario & Mr. G&W’s Up and Forward Smash

It is stated that he shared most of his attributes (except for his weight, air speed and air acceleration) with Mario in Melee, indicating he started development based off of Mario until being developed into his own unique character. You forgot to put both of their Up and Forward Smashes because their Up Smash are headbutts while their Forward Smash use fire after the attack. 112.210.229.126 01:58, July 2, 2023 (EDT)

Being the same general broad type of attack or sharing a single property doesn't make a move cloned. Their forward smashes are radically different in every way that I shouldn't need to explain, while their up smashes have different animations and nearly everything about their move data is completely different. If you were to call those moves cloned, then it would be effectively calling all moves that are punches cloned, all kick moves cloned, all sword swing moves cloned, etc. Omega Tyrant 10:18, July 2, 2023 (EDT)

I think I would count their up smashes as identical but you are kind of right. 112.210.229.126 12:07, July 3, 2023 (EDT)