| Latest revision |
Your text |
| Line 100: |
Line 100: |
| *[[Piranha Plant]]'s usual design is used for [[Piranha Plant (Pit of 100 Trials)|a variant]] in TTYD (with a localization inconsistency we acknowledge) | | *[[Piranha Plant]]'s usual design is used for [[Piranha Plant (Pit of 100 Trials)|a variant]] in TTYD (with a localization inconsistency we acknowledge) |
| *[[Cleft]]'s design is used for [[Moon Cleft]] in TTYD, then reversed back to normal Cleft for SPM (with a localization inconsistency we acknowledge) | | *[[Cleft]]'s design is used for [[Moon Cleft]] in TTYD, then reversed back to normal Cleft for SPM (with a localization inconsistency we acknowledge) |
| Also there's the established [[Talk:Bomber Bill#Hotel Mario|"judgement call we shouldn't be making"]] principle in regards to contradicting the only sources on the matter we have; in this case in-game explicitly calling them Cheep Cheeps. | | Also there's the established [[Talk:Banzai Bill#Hotel Mario|"judgement call we shouldn't be making"]] principle in regards to contradicting the only sources on the matter we have; in this case in-game explicitly calling them Cheep Cheeps. |
|
| |
|
| '''Proposer''': {{User|Doc von Schmeltwick}}<br> | | '''Proposer''': {{User|Doc von Schmeltwick}}<br> |
| Line 227: |
Line 227: |
| ==Similar appearances== | | ==Similar appearances== |
| Could we get rid of the Similar Appearances, please? It's merely just describing green Cheep Cheeps as in saying "These Cheep Cheeps are green and could be similar to Deep Cheeps". [[User:PrincessPeachFan|PrincessPeachFan]] ([[User talk:PrincessPeachFan|talk]]) 09:00, October 22, 2024 (EDT) | | Could we get rid of the Similar Appearances, please? It's merely just describing green Cheep Cheeps as in saying "These Cheep Cheeps are green and could be similar to Deep Cheeps". [[User:PrincessPeachFan|PrincessPeachFan]] ([[User talk:PrincessPeachFan|talk]]) 09:00, October 22, 2024 (EDT) |
| I deleted the similar appearances part and just briefly put down how Green Cheep Cheeps have appeared years before Deep Cheeps and how the former's coloration may have inspired the latter's coloration like how on our article for [[Gloomba]] we state how their color is reminiscent of the Goombas in the underground levels in the original [[Super Mario Bros.]] However, if anyone does restore that part, I have no problem. [[User:PrincessPeachFan|PrincessPeachFan]] ([[User talk:PrincessPeachFan|talk]]) 19:52, October 23, 2024 (EDT)
| |
|
| |
| ==Mario Maker Design Cameo, Hold The Blurp==
| |
| {{Settled TPP}}
| |
| {{Proposal outcome|passed|7-1|classify Deep Cheep's Mario Maker appearance as a design cameo}}
| |
| Before anything else, I want to acknowledge that folks seem to be, quite understandably, tired of talking about this fish. I get why that's the case, and after reviewing previous discussions to prepare this proposal, I share in that feeling. For that reason, I'm going to try to keep this brief.
| |
|
| |
| As the previous proposal played out, I noticed a few users, myself included, either indicated support for or cast an initial vote of support for the Deep Cheep portion of the proposal while expressing reservations about it including Blurps or changing their vote upon realizing it included Blurps. In light of that, I thought it '''worthwhile to give the proposal one go ''without'' Blurps included'''.
| |
|
| |
| The aim of this proposal is to reclassify Deep Cheeps' appearance in ''Super Mario Maker'' and ''Super Mario Maker 2'' as a "design cameo". The effect of this will be relatively minor, only changing the labels on a couple images in the SMM/SMM2 galleries and tweaking the SMM paragraph on the Deep Cheep page to say something along the lines of "In Super Mario Maker, Super Mario Maker for Nintendo 3DS, and Super Mario Maker 2, green Cheep Cheeps use the design of Deep Cheeps in the New Super Mario Bros. U game style. Though sharing the design of Deep Cheeps, they do not chase Mario, swimming endlessly in a straight line like all other green Cheep Cheeps in these games."
| |
|
| |
| Why would we make this change? That rests on two main points. One, the game itself refers to the enemy exclusively as "Cheep Cheep", and two, these enemies do not exhibit the chasing behavior which distinguishes Deep Cheeps from other green Cheep Cheeps. Doc presented a nice succinct list of evidence of these two points in [[Talk:Deep_Cheep#Consider_the_Super_Mario_Maker_games_a_design_cameo_rather_than_a_full_appearance_-_take_3|her previous proposal]], so I will re-present those here.
| |
| <blockquote>
| |
| *They're called Cheep Cheeps by the in-game labels and voices (unlike [[Galoomba]]s and [[Goombud]]s which are treated differently from [[Goomba]]s and [[Goombrat]]s in both cases, as well as [[Jumping Piranha Plant]] from [[Piranha Plant]])
| |
| *They're treated as the "basic" ones while the red ones are treated as the secondary kind - it wouldn't make sense for an explicit variant to be used as the "normal" kind - in all other cases in these games, the variants always go second (like [[Fire Piranha Plant]], [[Blooper Nanny]], and [[Boo Buddies]], for example). Cheep Cheeps are ''not'' derivative of Blurps or Deep Cheeps; it is the other way around.
| |
| *They just move forward in all styles, again averting the "search" aspect of "Search Pukupuku."
| |
| </blockquote>
| |
|
| |
| Now, to quickly address some potential points of concern:
| |
|
| |
| <blockquote>Enemy behavior frequently changes from game to game, and where there are inconsistencies, it's better to base these decisions off design.</blockquote>
| |
|
| |
| While I broadly agree with this and I think Waluigi Time raises a very good point with his Porcupuffer example, I would make the case that Deep Cheeps are a rare case where emphasizing design over behavior isn't the best criteria, and I make that case because regular green Cheep Cheeps exist. With something like a Porcupuffer, there is nothing else it could be so long as it maintains its design. A Porcupuffer could dance a jig, and it still couldn't be mistaken as anything else. With Deep Cheeps, they're entirely identical to a regular green Cheep Cheep except for angry eyes. If we ever have an emotive Cheep Cheep or Deep Cheep on our hands, we'd best use behavior as the distinguishing factor, or we'll have quite the hard time distinguishing them!
| |
|
| |
| <blockquote>This creates inconsistencies with Blurps or certain types of Blocks referred to be generic names in-game.</blockquote>
| |
|
| |
| I wouldn't say it creates an inconsistency with Blurps because Blurps in SMM/SMM2 retain their design ''and'' behavior. In past appearances, they swam forward endlessly. Here, they swim forward endlessly. When it has both the same design and same behavior, I'd call that a full-on appearance. It looks like a duck ''and'' quacks like a duck, so even if the game doesn't explicitly call it a duck, we can.
| |
|
| |
| As for other potential inconsistencies, such as the Blocks SmokedChili brought up in the previous proposal, while they do demonstrate well why we should be cautious about trusting the in-game voice and labels alone, I'd say they're in a similar boat to Blurps. They retain their design ''and'' function and aren't visually indistinguishable from other items. Thus, we can confidently continue to identify them as making a full appearance.
| |
|
| |
| <blockquote>Isn't this a whole lot of hoopla for a proposal that will affect, at most, four sentences and a few image labels?</blockquote>
| |
|
| |
| There is no rebuttal or counterpoint to this one! It sure is! I think it's honestly fine if this goes either way, and I'm ready to see this discussion rest. Like I said, I just thought it would be wise to give this a go without the Blurp effect attached, since that did seem to change things for a number of users in the previous versions of this proposal.
| |
|
| |
| '''Proposer''': {{User|Hooded Pitohui}}<br>
| |
| '''Deadline''': November 15, 2024, 23:59 GMT
| |
|
| |
| ====Support====
| |
| #{{User|Hooded Pitohui}} Per proposal.
| |
| #{{User|Nintendo101}} Per proposal. Good summary and write-up.
| |
| #{{user|Doc von Schmeltwick}} - Fillet the freak.
| |
| #{{User|Hewer}} I'd still rather include Blurp as well for consistency, but I guess this is better than nothing.
| |
| #{{User|PrincessPeachFan}} Clean up.
| |
| #{{User|ThePowerPlayer}} Per proposal.
| |
| #{{User|EvieMaybe}} per propoisson
| |
|
| |
| ====Oppose====
| |
| #{{User|Shy Guy on Wheels}} per like the previous seven proposals on this subject. the facts haven't changed, and neither should this page.
| |
|
| |
| ====Comments====
| |
