Editing Talk:Swoop
From the Super Mario Wiki, the Mario encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 143: | Line 143: | ||
:::::I've mentioned before how ''Encyclopedia Super Mario Bros.'' is just not a good source for keeping track of legitimate name changes since it segregates information by game and isn't organized like, say, a wiki, but I admit I'm unfamiliar with ''Super Mario Pia''. I suppose my biggest question is: who wrote it and how closely were they working with Nintendo? One of the recent licensed ''The Legend of Zelda'' books, ''Hyrule Encyclopedia'', ended up having a disclaimer that stated the authors took creative liberties with the source material, which meant that a lot of its unique (and questionable) information was taken with a huge grain of salt -- does ''Super Mario Pia'' have a similar statement? Also, the name [http://megaman.wikia.com/wiki/Batton Batton] isn't that uncommon, being a simple derivative of a loanword that rolls off the tongue. Enigmas from ''Super Mario RPG'' have an entirely different attack move on top of that, splitting into a swarm of miniature bats. Regardless, that isn't an argument for splitting the ''Super Mario Galaxy'' bat into its own article, but moving the information from Swoop to Enigma, which is not in the scope of this proposal. [[User:LinkTheLefty|LinkTheLefty]] ([[User talk:LinkTheLefty|talk]]) 14:30, 28 September 2017 (EDT) | :::::I've mentioned before how ''Encyclopedia Super Mario Bros.'' is just not a good source for keeping track of legitimate name changes since it segregates information by game and isn't organized like, say, a wiki, but I admit I'm unfamiliar with ''Super Mario Pia''. I suppose my biggest question is: who wrote it and how closely were they working with Nintendo? One of the recent licensed ''The Legend of Zelda'' books, ''Hyrule Encyclopedia'', ended up having a disclaimer that stated the authors took creative liberties with the source material, which meant that a lot of its unique (and questionable) information was taken with a huge grain of salt -- does ''Super Mario Pia'' have a similar statement? Also, the name [http://megaman.wikia.com/wiki/Batton Batton] isn't that uncommon, being a simple derivative of a loanword that rolls off the tongue. Enigmas from ''Super Mario RPG'' have an entirely different attack move on top of that, splitting into a swarm of miniature bats. Regardless, that isn't an argument for splitting the ''Super Mario Galaxy'' bat into its own article, but moving the information from Swoop to Enigma, which is not in the scope of this proposal. [[User:LinkTheLefty|LinkTheLefty]] ([[User talk:LinkTheLefty|talk]]) 14:30, 28 September 2017 (EDT) | ||
::::::The Mega Man enemy is one of the main reasons I didn't include "Merge to Enigma" as an option, as well as the fact that they don't have the hive mind-esque swarming behavior, and the fact that the name is obviously intended to just be taken from the English word for bat. The Japanese word for any version of "bat" is irrelevant here; it's taken from the English word. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 18:17, 28 September 2017 (EDT) | ::::::The Mega Man enemy is one of the main reasons I didn't include "Merge to Enigma" as an option, as well as the fact that they don't have the hive mind-esque swarming behavior, and the fact that the name is obviously intended to just be taken from the English word for bat. The Japanese word for any version of "bat" is irrelevant here; it's taken from the English word. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 18:17, 28 September 2017 (EDT) | ||
::::::Knowing that the validity of the book was important to know, I scanned {{ | ::::::Knowing that the validity of the book was important to know, I scanned {{media link|SMP page 98 opt.png|page 98}}, which indeed contains the authors, copyright and the copyrights involved. You can see that the degree of involvement of Nintendo is ''collaboration'', 「協力」, making it an official book. Also, there's not the sentence you mentioned before - that's understandable, since there is no real story to be told here. Since the page containing Swoop and Bat also contained Boss Bass, I'm adding the link to an excerpt of it containing the relevant information {{media link|SMP page 62 excerpt.png|here}}. At this point, we have contradictory information coming from ''Super Mario Galaxy'''s object names and official information released after. I don't know how much we can count on ''Super Mario Galaxy 2'' because the game [http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2010/03/22/news-miyamoto_3a00_-nintendo-made-a-super-mario-galaxy-1.5.aspx was explicitly stated to be an add-on of ''Super Mario Galaxy'' in the initial phases of development], and with games based on other games [[Mario Kart 8 Deluxe in-game statistics#Weight (WG)|copy-pasting]] [[Mario Kart 8 in-game statistics#Weight (WG)|is definitely]] [[Mario Kart 7 in-game statistics#Weight (Param_Weight)|a thing]] - after all, the player is not supposed to look at those data. Anyway, returning on topic, the internal name of the objects is surely interesting, as if anything it tells us that those bats were meant to be Swoops; still, the 2015 material still points to them being distinct by name and appearance, with the ''Super Mario Pia'' outright stating that they are different enemies. I wonder if what we are watching is just the beginning of their development - internal name - and the end result - different official name and appearance. Regarding the Enigma similarity, I'd say an unofficial vote has already been made, so unless someone wants to reopen the discussion in another moment I guess we'll just keep this to the Trivia like we are doing with Dorrie and Bahamutt.--[[User:Mister Wu|Mister Wu]] ([[User talk:Mister Wu|talk]]) 19:18, 28 September 2017 (EDT) | ||
:::::::The fact that an entry for [[Boss Bass]] / [[Cheep Chomp]] is on the {{ | :::::::The fact that an entry for [[Boss Bass]] / [[Cheep Chomp]] is on the {{media link|SMP page 62 excerpt.png|same page}} proves my point about these official Japanese books having some extremely iffy information/organization with regards to name changes, however. It states that the enemy fish debuted as "''Baku Baku''" in ''[[Bubba|Super Mario 64]]'' when we know clearly thanks to ''[https://i.imgur.com/Y5X3lRz.jpg Yoshi's Island DS]'' that it's a name change and visual update for the ''[http://hit930.sakura.ne.jp/hitjapan/book3/P1212070114.JPG Super Mario Bros. 3]'' fish (indeed, its subsequent redesign in ''New Super Mario Bros.'' onwards is a purple version of this same appearance - we can actually have Boss Bass and Cheep Chomp share the same article with these details). [http://i.imgur.com/MF1dZ7H.jpg The] [http://i.imgur.com/HYeUOpv.jpg same] [http://i.imgur.com/dqFFR51.jpg phenomenon] [http://i.imgur.com/3OabVR8.jpg is] [http://i.imgur.com/z9vOPNp.jpg present] [http://i.imgur.com/Z6Iudls.jpg in] ''Perfect Ban Mario Character Daijiten'', and is also in ''Encyclopedia Super Mario Bros.'' (for example, the Giant Land enemy variants don't have matching names with their later counterparts) and can be seen on [https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%90%E3%82%B5%E3%83%90%E3%82%B5#.E8.BF.91.E7.A8.AE Japanese Wikipedia] when it considers Enigma and Batton to be the same thing. These books are valuable resources, but they should still be held to some degree of scrutiny because they obviously take name changes at face value and do not reflect our concept of it as outlined in [[MarioWiki:Naming#Name_changes|policy]]. Granted, a lot of name changes can be chalked to translation differences over time, but that's not always the case. [[User:LinkTheLefty|LinkTheLefty]] ([[User talk:LinkTheLefty|talk]]) 20:00, 28 September 2017 (EDT) | ||
::::::::I personally consider Boss Bass and Cheep Chomp to ''be'' different, but at the same time I think the ''intent'' was probably for them to be the same, with the color change coming about to avoid confusion with the similarly-sized [[Big Cheep Cheep]], especially given the low resolution ''[[New Super Mario Bros.]]'' has. But that's a different discussion. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 20:29, 28 September 2017 (EDT) | ::::::::I personally consider Boss Bass and Cheep Chomp to ''be'' different, but at the same time I think the ''intent'' was probably for them to be the same, with the color change coming about to avoid confusion with the similarly-sized [[Big Cheep Cheep]], especially given the low resolution ''[[New Super Mario Bros.]]'' has. But that's a different discussion. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 20:29, 28 September 2017 (EDT) | ||
::::::::I would like to point out what happened to [[Baby Bowser]], who then became almost identical to [[Bowser Jr.]]. Initial appearance and name matters, and if an enemy becomes similar to another enemy in the subsequent games we should always check if we are looking at another Baby Bowser case. Names and appearance matter a lot to Nintendo, as together they tend to be an important part of the IP, when both official name and appearance change I think the name change theory should be discussed, not the official material that legitimately lists enemies having different appearance and different official name as being separate. Returning on point, this case is different as Swoops never changed their name nor appearance as much as to resemble those bats in the ''Super Mario Galaxy'' games - even in ''Super Mario 64'' they had a round nose -, neither do enemies with the name of the latter return in subsequent games and become similar to Swoops. So we should try to see if there are other explanations that might have led to the object name being the same, such as Swoops being the starting point of what then became a different species.--[[User:Mister Wu|Mister Wu]] ([[User talk:Mister Wu|talk]]) 20:58, 28 September 2017 (EDT) | ::::::::I would like to point out what happened to [[Baby Bowser]], who then became almost identical to [[Bowser Jr.]]. Initial appearance and name matters, and if an enemy becomes similar to another enemy in the subsequent games we should always check if we are looking at another Baby Bowser case. Names and appearance matter a lot to Nintendo, as together they tend to be an important part of the IP, when both official name and appearance change I think the name change theory should be discussed, not the official material that legitimately lists enemies having different appearance and different official name as being separate. Returning on point, this case is different as Swoops never changed their name nor appearance as much as to resemble those bats in the ''Super Mario Galaxy'' games - even in ''Super Mario 64'' they had a round nose -, neither do enemies with the name of the latter return in subsequent games and become similar to Swoops. So we should try to see if there are other explanations that might have led to the object name being the same, such as Swoops being the starting point of what then became a different species.--[[User:Mister Wu|Mister Wu]] ([[User talk:Mister Wu|talk]]) 20:58, 28 September 2017 (EDT) | ||
::::::::::I mentioned the "they were probably Swoops in early development" in the above spiel. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 21:30, 28 September 2017 (EDT) | ::::::::::I mentioned the "they were probably Swoops in early development" in the above spiel. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 21:30, 28 September 2017 (EDT) | ||
::::::::::I presume one reason for the Boss Bass / Cheep Chomp coverage gap in ''Super Mario Pia'' can be due to the writers not using ''Yoshi's Island DS'' as reference material given the {{ | ::::::::::I presume one reason for the Boss Bass / Cheep Chomp coverage gap in ''Super Mario Pia'' can be due to the writers not using ''Yoshi's Island DS'' as reference material given the {{media link|SMP page 98 opt.png|credits}}, but on "name change theory" - [http://i.imgur.com/MF1dZ7H.jpg again] [http://i.imgur.com/HYeUOpv.jpg it] [http://i.imgur.com/dqFFR51.jpg demonstrably] [http://i.imgur.com/3OabVR8.jpg isn't] [http://i.imgur.com/z9vOPNp.jpg a] [http://i.imgur.com/Z6Iudls.jpg theory] (those alone would cause an organizational mess). The Baby Bowser and Bowser Jr. example doesn't hold water because they are established characters with their own irreconcilable origins and history, not just any random obstacle for the player to overcome - I'm pretty sure no one was wracking their brains over which was which because that's information that can be gleaned easily from paying the slightest attention to the in-game story, but subjects like these don't have such luxury. How about another one - Sledge Bros., which were originally named "''Himan Bros.''" (Overweight Bros.) in Japanese and are currently called "''Mega Bros.''" since their major reappearance? ''Encyclopedia Super Mario Bros.'' lists its legacy name in the ''Super Mario Bros. 3'' section (pg. 36) - should we split the article as a result? Do we have a Baby Bowser / Bowser Jr. situation on our hands? Of course not; that'd be unnecessary and confusing when the simplest solution of a deemed rename is already in practice. It's absolutely an observable fact, not just a theory, that name changes do happen now and then even in Japanese material. Judging from ''Perfect Ban Mario Character Daijiten'', ''Encyclopedia Super Mario Bros.'' and now what little I've seen of ''Super Mario Pia'', official book writers seem to generally operate on a stricter policy that doesn't factor basic name changes and instead preserves older names verbatim. At any rate, on "BasaBasa" - how can we look for filename explanations when we're not privy to that information? [[User:LinkTheLefty|LinkTheLefty]] ([[User talk:LinkTheLefty|talk]]) 23:16, 28 September 2017 (EDT) | ||
:::::::::::Incidentally, you picked up a {{ | :::::::::::Incidentally, you picked up a {{media link|SMP Sledge Bro.png|case in which the name change is officially acknowledged in the ''Super Mario Pia''}}. But at this point I think it's better to consider an interesting recent example. Even though in the original ''[[Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga]]'' the [[Beanerang Bro]]s. had the same official name of the [[Boomerang Bro]]s. and a very similar attack, they were separated from the latter just due to their appearance which was somehow reminiscent of other enemies in the game. [https://www.mariowiki.com/index.php?title=Beanerang_Bro&diff=next&oldid=2295639 It turns out that the editors were right]. In this case, in which the appearance is different, the attack is slightly different as well, but [https://i.imgur.com/GWYSIkz.jpg even the official name was reported to be different from day one], and Nintendo never showed Swoops similar to Bats and Bats similar to Swoops, we shouldn't follow a similar criterion, which proved to be correct? And by the way, I'm definitely not undervaluing the importance of the internal names, which are an important and reliable source of information which in my opinion shouldn't be ignored. Also, I'm not suggesting splits based just on appearance, of course, in this case also the official name is different.--[[User:Mister Wu|Mister Wu]] ([[User talk:Mister Wu|talk]]) 20:55, 3 October 2017 (EDT) | ||
@Camwood There is no proof those were intended to be Missile Bills other than their attack. Remember, the Japanese name for Bull'seye/Missile Bill was the same as the one for Bullet Bill up until New Super Mario Bros. Wii, so there's a lot of ambiguity. It's possible that the purple ones are intended to be Missile Bills, but it's equally possible the chasing ones found in ''Super Mario 64'' and ''Super Mario Galaxy'' were intended to be them as well, because in Japan at the time, they had as much distinction as a red or green Cheep Cheep. They were considered merely differently-acting versions of the same thing. Also of note is that the English name for the chasing Bullet Bills in ''Sunshine'' is simply "Purple Bullet Bill," matching up with its "Killer (Purple)" Japanese name. Finally, Bats don't even attack much in the same way as Swoops, since Swoops are always found roosting at first, then will attempt to fly into him before being on their way, including in ''Super Mario 64'', and always have a squint. Bats are often found on the wing at first, and will constantly attack while never flying off of going back to roosting after an attack, and have huge bulging eyes. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 17:51, 29 September 2017 (EDT) | @Camwood There is no proof those were intended to be Missile Bills other than their attack. Remember, the Japanese name for Bull'seye/Missile Bill was the same as the one for Bullet Bill up until New Super Mario Bros. Wii, so there's a lot of ambiguity. It's possible that the purple ones are intended to be Missile Bills, but it's equally possible the chasing ones found in ''Super Mario 64'' and ''Super Mario Galaxy'' were intended to be them as well, because in Japan at the time, they had as much distinction as a red or green Cheep Cheep. They were considered merely differently-acting versions of the same thing. Also of note is that the English name for the chasing Bullet Bills in ''Sunshine'' is simply "Purple Bullet Bill," matching up with its "Killer (Purple)" Japanese name. Finally, Bats don't even attack much in the same way as Swoops, since Swoops are always found roosting at first, then will attempt to fly into him before being on their way, including in ''Super Mario 64'', and always have a squint. Bats are often found on the wing at first, and will constantly attack while never flying off of going back to roosting after an attack, and have huge bulging eyes. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 17:51, 29 September 2017 (EDT) |