Talk:Big Cheep Cheep

First appearance

Apparently it appeared in Legend of Zelda: Four Swords Adventure, which was released before New Super Mario Bros. Seeing as this is the Mario wiki shouldn't it's first appearance in the Mario canon be its first appearance, or should it be its Zelda appearance? Yoshi876 (talk)

just put both. --Glowsquid (talk) 13:17, 22 April 2013 (EDT)

Just did some browsing and there is nothing on it Yoshi876 (talk)

Except on the Cheep-Cheep from the zelda wiki it mentions giant cheep-cheeps that appear in Four Swords Adventures. Marshal Dan Troop (talk)

But was it confirmed as a Mega Cheep-Cheep, for all we know, it's just a bog standard larger version and not a Mega one Yoshi876 (talk)

Iterations

This talk page or section has a conflict or a question that needs to be answered. Please try to help and resolve the issue by leaving a comment.

So, as we know, Boss Bass/Big Bertha is called "Kyodai Pukupuku" (Giant Cheep Cheep) in Japanese, corresponding to "Kyodai" versions for Goombas, Troopas, and Piranha Plants that are around today and not particularly changed, using the identifier "Deka" (big). In English, these all formerly had very creative names, but now settle on a stock "Big" title. Deka Pukupuku, however, is physically quite different from Kyodai Pukupuku, with the old design instead going to Bakubaku. While it would seem odd that Boss Bass and Big Cheep are the same, a new factor was given to us recently: the related Porcupuffer, normally not the voracious sort, eats Mario like a Boss Bass or Cheep Chomp in Super Mario Maker 2. The point I believe this gives us is attributes of behavior are relative and subject to change per developers' whim. Boss Bass was always intended as a large version of the jumping Cheeps from SMB3 with the added detail of being able to eat Mario, while Big Bertha was a large version of the Cheeps that lazily swim back and forth, with the added detail of brooding Baby Cheeps. Heck, the Baby Cheeps themselves are proof that these are just giant Cheep Cheeps, as why would they brood a baby of a different species? The smooth fins are also just enlarged from Cheep Cheeps' own non-detailed sprite for that game, which I have worked on many, many times. As more proof, the filename for the NES Remix 2 stamp of Boss Bass is "PukupukuBig," being alongside "NokonokoBig" for Big Koopa Troopa. This means that Boss Bass is still considered the "big Cheep Cheep." Now, between Kyodai Pukupuku and Deka Pukupuku, there was also the "Ōkina Pukupuku" (as called by Message Block) in Yoshi's Story, which also means "Big Cheep Cheep." This I also believe to b an early iteration of Big Cheep Cheep; it's literally an enlarged version of the Cheep Cheep render model for the game, and the red ones act like Boss Bass, with a few minor differences to account for gameplay. This type of large Cheep Cheep also cameos in Mario Gold and Super Circuit, before the current iteration appears in Four Swords Adventures and New Super Mario Bros, where they are just an enlarged version of those games' non-carnivorous Cheeps. So what happened to the eating? It was given to the Bakubaku, which in turn would made more similar to the original Big Cheep Cheep, the Boss Bass. Bakubaku was never Kyodai Pukupuku; they were the same size as Pukupuku in SM64, after all.
Basically, what I'm getting to is this: both Boss Bass and Story Blurp are the same as Big Cheep Cheep and should be merged, ending this "fish" debacle once and for all. If Big Goombas can start reproducing by fission, Big Cheep Cheeps can get ahold of their appetites. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 03:25, September 1, 2019 (EDT)

I'm not too sure. I'm opposed to merge any of these, but i have no arguments. -- FanOfYoshi 07:54, September 7, 2019 (EDT)

As for the Boss Bass, i didn't pay attention, but i'm opposed to it anyways. See Kyodai Hanachan and Deka Hanachan. -- FanOfYoshi 08:17, September 7, 2019 (EDT)

With those, they are a distinctly different size anyways, and they aren't one of the things from SMB3, and there's that unused data thing with them. All the Kyodai of SMB3 are merged with the Deka of today.....except this. As for why you have no arguments, it's because there's no logical reason for them to stay split. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 13:11, September 7, 2019 (EDT)

Just because internal filename is "big" does not mean insta-merge. Nintendo tend to use filenames like this. (but other enemies are an incomparable situation). Blurp came out with two colors named differently, yet still lumped together, unlike Boss Bass and Big Cheep Cheep. And no, it's not because there's no logical reason to keep them split that i have no arguments, it's that i do want to counter your arguments, yet mines won't be valid with all what you said. It'll avoid speculation, unlike merging. -- FanOfYoshi 08:14, September 8, 2019 (EDT)

There is, however, logical progression with the enemy evolution - Boss Bass / Big Bertha is treated as the giant counterpart of Cheep Cheep in the original game, whose trademark behavior went to the large Cheep Cheep with a color variation (in Yoshi's Story design), which lost the behavior but stayed as a big Cheep Cheep in newer games (in traditional design). Yoshi's Story is effectively the missing link here, where they changed it to be a scaled-up Cheep Cheep but still had Boss Bass behavior. As for the internal filename being "big" not meaning insta-merge, in normal cases there'd be room for doubt - but that sidesteps the fact that the file was named within the original game's context over 25 years later, and the developers could have simply named it "bakubaku" like just about every other modern instance of Cheep Chomp. Yes, there is an exception with Wiggler due to circumstances (which, by the way, does not have this filename oddity), but on the other hand, look at an article like Mega Block (which shares the same "big" Japanese descriptors as the merged Big Cheep Cheep article would have). Honestly, I wasn't on board with this idea at first, but the more I thought about it, the more it made sense. LinkTheLefty (talk) 09:32, September 8, 2019 (EDT)

Exactly! I've been entertaining this thought for quite some time myself, but didn't want to go through with it without knowing the file name for NES Remix 2 (as pointed out previously, there's no "conceptual" in this case due to being based off a game that's multiple decades old) or actual textual proof that the "Blurps" were meant to be the same as Boss Bass and Big Cheep (which I now have). At this point, I see no reason to keep them split other than to make things "easy" at the cost of being less accurate. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 12:57, September 8, 2019 (EDT)

Hmmm... -- FanOfYoshi 02:04, September 9, 2019 (EDT)

Just chiming in to say I'd also be in favor of a merge. Niiue - Who has lost his tail? 04:04, September 9, 2019 (EDT)

Thanks, anyone else who supports or opposes, please chime in too so I can tell how popular this is. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 15:37, September 9, 2019 (EDT)

I think the Yoshi's Story Blurps are Big Cheep Cheeps, as regular ones appeared in that game and had the same design, except obviously smaller, so I support that being merged (Also, I think their appearance in Mario Golf should just be merged with Cheep Cheep). As for Boss Bass, I'm not really all that sure, but I'm thinking no on that one for now, since they do act different and have a different design (distorted pupils, bigger mouth, smaller fins). --DeepFriedCabbage 16:43, September 9, 2019 (EDT)

The fins proportional to the main Cheep Cheep's would take more tiles to animate, which on the NES is a major factor. Note how Big Koopa Troopa had a disproportionately large shell compared to the normal one. As for the big mouths, that's just behavioral, and the Story red ones act basically the same. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 17:08, September 9, 2019 (EDT)

So that leaves the distorted pupils, which could be a minor design change... --DeepFriedCabbage 17:41, September 9, 2019 (EDT)

The eyes already had to be scrunched a little to make room for the mouth, and probably to make it clear from the get-go they were dangerous. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 17:58, September 9, 2019 (EDT)

The only way i can see a merge working, is if the wording is handled similarly to what we have currently in the Bull's-Eye Bill page. -- FanOfYoshi 06:29, September 10, 2019 (EDT)

Except it's not an inspiration or divergence, it's the same thing with different behavior and a redesign. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 11:34, September 10, 2019 (EDT)

I think we can do it that way if it's easier to follow, though in regards to the idea of merging one but not the other, I think the case for merging both is stronger because a visible evolution would be seen in the merged article. LinkTheLefty (talk) 12:42, September 10, 2019 (EDT)

The Yoshi's Story Big Cheep Cheeps have a name, Big Blurp (or just Blurp), so I'd be wary of merging them. Boss Bass can be merged, it's just a Big Cheep Cheep that can eat you. TheDarkStar 11:41, September 10, 2019 (EDT)

"Blurp" seems to be just that the translators misread "Pukupuku" as "Bukubuku." Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 11:44, September 10, 2019 (EDT)

That doesn't change the fact that they have a name that isn't Big Cheep Cheep, in-game. I stand by my thoughts on the whole Bull's-Eye Bill fiasco: using a Japanese source before an English one to determine if an enemy is related to another, when the wiki prioritizes English sources, is ridiculous. TheDarkStar 11:47, September 10, 2019 (EDT)

It is actually a pretty common mistake even for professional translators to misread Japanese diacritics, which is how Cheep Cheep kept getting confused with Blurp for a while (it's not an issue exclusive to Yoshi's Story). Also, in response to the "ridiculousness" of using Japanese sources on an English wiki - the entire Mario franchise is, predominantly, a Japanese franchise. Yes, there are select games made by western developers, but that's the exception, not the rule. Just as we prioritize English sources from western-made games (the minority), we prioritize Japanese sources from Japanese-made games (the majority). Inconsistent translation is also the reason for most (but not all) name changes, not accounting for previous localizations, and thus strictly adhering to localization would cause needless confusion. Let others be concerned with "Englishness" of their own wikis; that's not how we handle things here. LinkTheLefty (talk) 12:42, September 10, 2019 (EDT)