Talk:Super Mario Maker

Para-wing
I saw a video of Mario Maker and you can give goomba's and koopa wings, not suprisingly but you can aslo give Hammer Bro's and Piranha Plants wings so they become Para-Hammer Bro's and Para-Piranha Plants should we create articles for a Para-Hammerbro and Para-Piranha Plant or just put it in this page? 11:40, 11 June 2014 (EDT)
 * It'd be best to wait until game release, to get the full information on them, but I assume they'd get new articles.

Enemy list
Is the extensive list of enemies really necessary? Can't we just put the four kinds and say that any of them can have wings or be put in towers or both?


 * As they are separate enemies, they will separate articles, therefore the kinds are necessary.
 * Can we at least make a chart?
 * When there are available sprites then a chart may be a good idea.

Power-Ups
Is there any confirmation that the new slim Mushrooms are called Luigi Mushrooms? --Mariofan5000 (talk) 16:13, 15 June 2014 (EDT)
 * Yes, there is a source right next to its name in the powerups section.
 * Did the developers say that or was it an untrustworthy E3 kioskperson? --Hiccup (talk) 13:00, 17 June 2014 (EDT)
 * If a source isn't credible, it shouldn't be put in the article at all. I think it's fine.

The luigi mushroom makes you skinny' and I don't know if any more power-ups will be in the game.-Joseph.

Separate articles on small enemies variations
Separate articles on small enemies variations are a bad idea, in my opinion. Are we going to have "Blue Flying Goomba with 2 Koopa Paratroopas underneath then below that an upside down waluigi poison fireflower" ? --Hiccup (talk) 13:00, 17 June 2014 (EDT)
 * Obviously what you mentioned is absurd, but with tower and flying variation enemies already existing, those kinds do deserve an article.
 * I don't know what you're getting at with that "Blue flying goomba..." thing you said. That's four separate things. But see, we already have articles for enemies like that. Like Paratroopas and Paragoombas, and especially the emotional enemies from Super Princess Peach.

Merge Goomba Tower, Koopa Troopa Tower, etc... to one article: Enemy Towers
I think its a good IdeaToadbrigade5 (talk) 22:56, 20 June 2014 (EDT)
 * Sounds reasonable, but why do you think it's a good idea? Is it the gigantic new amount of enemies that can now be put into towers? I would suggest then, that aside from Goomba Tower which already has an article anyway, we could put the information of the tower variation in the enemy's article? Like perhaps, "A tower variation of this enemy also exists as well."?
 * Why? What makes these new tower enemies less deserving of an article than a Goomba Tower? Nothing. Like a Goomba Tower or a Shy Stack they will act differently from a normal, therefore they will receive their own article.


 * I disagree:
 * 1) because we do not know how many enemies there are in the game so it is said to be a big problem to create those pages;
 * 2) From this point of view we should create a single page for all the enemies with wings or of all those enemies of Paper Mario with helmets sharp.--Sonic98 (talk) 06:14, 21 June 2014 (EDT)
 * It won't be a problem, articles are meant to be created for new things, like these tower enemies. And we do create articles for those, Paragoomba, Koopa Paratroopa (wings), Spiky Parabuzzy, Hyper Spiky Goomba (Spikes).

Thing is, that's like merging all spiked enemies together. You can create the page, but merging isn't a good idea. - 08:36, 21 June 2014 (EDT)

However, I don't think a tower enemy is anything but more enemies stacked on top of eachother. That means you can put any two enemies on top of them and call it a tower. They don't even act different


 * We already have articles on Tower enemies already, as they act different enough for us to consider them different. There is no reason why these ones should not get full articles whilst others do.
 * He has a point. Sledge Bros. are heavier Hammer Bros.. Galoombas are Goombas that are round and have more resistance. They get their own articles. Every existing enemy variation has an article. Why not towers?
 * Yes we also created pages like angry hammer bros and sad goombas and stuff. The more articles the more fun :P 13:55, 21 June 2014 (EDT)


 * Emotion enemies, Galoombas, spike variations, etc act differently. I am not saying merge exsiting Para-variations or emotion variations, but I don't think that tower is an actual variation, since they act exactly the same as the base enemy. Toadbrigade5 (talk) 17:18, 21 June 2014 (EDT)


 * Even the flying enemies are the same as those based only flying when hit and lose their wings. Do you mean that the enemy tower still do not deserve their own pages?


 * Tower enemies take more hits than the standard enemy.
 * I think they should have a page, don't get me wrong, but I think they should have the same page. Toadbrigade5 (talk) 17:40, 21 June 2014 (EDT)

Well, tower enemies can be different... A Goomba Tower can be tall enough that Mario would have to find a bigger surface to jump on them. The Shy Stack from Paper Mario cannot be jumped on until whittled down. Plus, because this is, as you point out, a huge collection of enemies, we'll see a lot about their individual function. What happens when you stomp on the top Koopa of a Koopa Tower? What's the best way to get rid of a Hammer Bro. Tower when they're constantly filling the screen with hammers? We already have articles for stacks of enemies like this. Why suddenly change it to a whole page for each and every one?

Is this going to be a download or disc?
I really need to know if this is going to be a Wii U disc or if it has to be downloaded. Hopefully it will be a disc. Because I don't download anything on my Wii U or 3DS unless it's free --Splouge (talk) 17:45, 26 June 2014 (EDT)
 * We don't know yet. 18:41, 26 June 2014 (EDT)

Enemy Tower Article?
I obviously don't think the tower articles should be merged, but, seeing as to how multiple enemy species can be stacked on top of each other, not just the same one, should we still have a page under that name?
 * I don't think the tower articles should be merged, but I don't think we should make more either. Enemy Tower sounds professional and I think it is a good idea. (This was sent by Toadbrigade5, but I forgot to login)
 * That's terrible logic, we either have all or none.
 * What I meant was, still have the articles for Goomba Tower, Piranha Plant Tower etc., but still have an Enemy Tower page since a Tower can also be made with multiple enemy types. I was not at all suggesting that we don't make other articles.
 * Stacking enemies on top of each other does NOT create a "new" type of enemy. This is obviously a design convenience for people who are using this custom tool to make levels. I'd strongly advocate for the deletion of such articles, ESPECIALLY the stacked articles. If they were their own category of enemy (say you click and drag them and it instantly creates a stack), I MIGHT reconsider but it's not the case here. 22:09, 8 December 2014 (EST)

Too many enemies
That is fact. We've only seen Goomba, Koopa, Buzzy, Spiny, Lakitu, Piranha Plant, Hammer bro, and Blooper, and each one has eight variants we are making pages on. And not to mention that Bullet Bill Blaster can be loaded with anything, so are each of those a new enemy? I honestly think we're in for trouble if we make a page for about 50 time 8 enemies all in this game. I mean, thats ridiculous.Toadbrigade5 (talk) 00:53, 6 December 2014 (EST)
 * Responses?Toadbrigade5 (talk) 14:42, 6 December 2014 (EST)
 * Are all our pages on Goombas ridiculous? It may be a lot, but there's no reason not to.
 * Oh boy, are we going to have to do alot. The way we're going I'm honestly predicting that we might have to make 200 pages at bare minimum for the enemies alone...Toadbrigade5 (talk) 15:27, 6 December 2014 (EST)
 * Because this is a custom maker thing, I really DO question the validity of creating articles for every single damn modified enemy in the game.
 * Finally someone speaks sense. Baby Luigi, do you think we should start a proposal? This is really dimming my opinion on the game. Sigh... we may be looking at 1000 new pages. Just wait till someone suggest we make pages for individual combinations, like Buzzy Beetle under Goomba under Spiny. I suggest we take out the Tower Variants. That seems the most valid for deletion to me.Toadbrigade5 (talk) 23:24, 8 December 2014 (EST)
 * So people who don't share your opinion are senseless? Good to know. The way I see it, they are separate enemies from their parent articles, we already have various pages on Para and Tower enemies and if we exclude these ones, then why not exclude the rest? And again Toadbrigade5 "too much work" boo bloody hoo, did you see anyone complaining about the amount of work required when Smash came out? No. Just because it's "too much work" is not a valid excuse, otherwise huge overhauls would never be completed. Something I can see working is merging the Para and the Huge towers into the normal tower articles.
 * My apologies Yoshi876, that was an unintended implication. My complaint isn't due to the massive workload, I'm just unsure the massive quantities of enemies deserve a page. You see, an abundance of pages on one game will A) Create lots of stubs. I mean, we can't say more about Hammer Bro. Tower than Hammer Bros act exactly the same throwing hammers. Unique enmies like para-spinies that shoot spikes in cardinal directions would be great, but this many pages just seems like overkill coverage of the game. B) This game is going to make everything else look undercovered. And I have to go. But sorry for the offense Yoshi876, really sorry, I don't mean to hurt feelings.Toadbrigade5 (talk) 16:00, 9 December 2014 (EST)
 * That is alright, just some poor wording on your part, you can work on that for the future :P. Now, it won't create any stubs, stubs are articles that lack content, and those articles, whilst being small, would not be lacking articles. I don't see how it'd cause things to look undercovered. I'm sure many enemy variants do that. However, there was been a discussion on the forum, and the majority are opposed to the decision for them all to get full articles.
 * I agree with you. There's no need to create lots of small articles about stuff that is essentially the same. I hate the " Tower" pages since they are nothing more than stacked enemies (also, players will be able to stack different enemies, will we have to create a page for every single combination, or to create an equally ridiculous "Different enemies Tower" page?). Also, "Giant/Grand/Big/Colossal/Gargantuan Whatever" will behave almost exactly like regular enemies, the few differences could be easily listed right on this page, as well as "Para" versions and "Para Big" versions. Most of these pages will have a conjectural name, which is bad too. KoopaTroopa!.png MegaKoopa   Talk  16:23, 9 December 2014 (EST)

More Palettes?
"and it has been stated that others will also be available in the final game[2]." Source [2] was created at the time of E3 2014, before we knew about the Mario 3/World themes. Thus, it's possible that Mario 3 and World were the only ones remaining, so I believe this statement should be removed.

Koji Kondo
Since I can't edit the trivia section, I was going to add: "Mario Maker is Koji Kondo's first lead score since Super Mario Sunshine and his first solo score since The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time". After all, his music for both series is iconic.

Extra space
Hi!

There's an extra space which should be removed, in section "Differences from base-games". (Also Lakitu clouds can still be ridden. Wall jumping and pound the grounding is made possible.)

Greetings, Wizdeck (talk) 17:43, 12 January 2015 (EST)
 * Thanks, the minor change has been made. 18:26, 12 January 2015 (EST)

Mario Maker is available as retail and digital download

 * I think that mario maker is available as retail and digital download as both gamestop and amazon and game have the game available as pre-order both gamestop and amazon have the same box art thought game has different box art and its too expensive to be an code in a box as it cost around 50.00 to 40.00 also wikipedia says its available as retail and digital download. 178.167.254.156 17:03, 22 January 2015 (EST)

Not release date
The date is a placeholder date You should change it. I know this because Nintendo and wikipedia this still say "early 2015" or "ww2015"

You have a good point there. I'm not sure I shold change it. MarioKart7player (talk) 08:20, 18 February 2015 (EST)

For clarification
No, this is NOT a fan project - it's an official product from Nintendo, which means no, you can't request what stuff should be added.

In regards to the amount of anonymous editors who apparently haven't gotten that memo, Laikue raises something of a valid point - should this talk page be protected as well? 18:47, 2 February 2015 (EST)


 * Looking at the edit history, all the anonymous editors that are adding the requests have their IP number starting with 46.130. I think it is the same guy switching computers or with a dynamic IP. This makes IP blocking difficult, so semi-protecting the talk page is a good idea. Jazama (talk) 16:30, 3 February 2015 (EST)
 * He just struck again, I'd say an IP block would do good. Laikue (talk | contribs) 22:02, 19 February 2015 (EST)

When exactly will this be released?
When is it? It doesn't say.


 * That's because an official release date is not announced by the time of this writing. 20:01, 20 February 2015 (EST)

Proposal: what to do about all those sub-enemies?
Let's nip this in the bud, shall we? With all the variety of enemy modifications, the question of whether or not we should give articles for all of these combinations has come up. On one hand, there have been many, many enemy subspecies over the years that basically constitute as "this enemy +1 height" or "this enemy but with a tail", and we're no stranger to giving them individual articles. On the other hand, none of these enemies are officially named or even recognized (there's no "Para-Spiny", "Para-Buzzy", "Para-Blooper", etc., but rather the ability to add wings to various enemies). I'm personally for having individual articles (though I do have a bit of trepidation about the "Giant Para-X Tower" and whatnot that will seemingly just retread all the other info) (the opposition has very good points, but I want to see how the suggested compromises pan out), but regardless, there's already been a few arguments about it, and I think it's best to decide what to do before the game comes out.

Proposer: Deadline: March 8, 2015 23:59 GMT

Do Not Create the Articles

 * 1) Per myself and Glowsquid, and what I said earlier here, "Stacking enemies on top of each other does NOT create a "new" type of enemy. This is obviously a design convenience for people who are using this custom tool to make levels. I'd strongly advocate for the deletion of such articles, ESPECIALLY the stacked articles. If they were their own category of enemy (say you click and drag them and it instantly creates a stack), I MIGHT reconsider but it's not the case here."
 * 2)  - What I said. This is like making an article on the pre-built assets of WarioWare D.I.Y. I can't wait for our green blade of grass, blue blade of grass, and red blade of grass overlords.
 * 3) - There would be an awful lot of articles to create here if every single variation of enemy got its own page, and I don't think these articles would convey much information beyond the obvious to the reader.
 * 4) Per Glowsquid in the comments. Revisit this post-release.
 * 5) - Per Vommack and Baby Luigi (and by extension, per Glowsquid as well).
 * 6) Per Baby Luigi
 * 7) This game isn't even out yet. We should at least wait until we decide. For now, I say no articles.

Compromise #1: Articles for each enemy category

 * 1) I feel like this would work best, without flooding the entire wiki with countless new articles.
 * 2) Per Laikue.
 * 3) I feel this is the best course of action overall.
 * 4) Per Laikue.

Compromise #2: Articles for unique enemies

 * 1) Per my self in the comments below and Yoshi876 in the comments..

Comments
Is it possible for a kind of compromise here? Because I think what Sifi says is probably the best course of action. I think this stuff should be covered, just not with individual enemy pages, so instead of Para-Hammer Bro (and so forth), Big Hammer Bro (and so forth) and Hammer Bro Tower (and so forth), we have Winged (Mario Maker), Tower (Mario Maker), Big (Mario Maker) etc.

I would like to propose a compromise. First off, I believe Wings and Size will constitute a new article DEPENDING on how it acts.

Para Spinies shoot spikes in all directions, this is different from a normal Spiny, so it should have an article. Big Goombas split into small goombas, which is different than if it was just a large Goomba. Big Koopas yield Giant Shells which have different properties.

But something that just has a larger hit box and does nothing different doesn't count.

Second, Stacking Enemies should be acknowledged, but not made articles for. I'd say we move Goomba Tower to Enemy Tower, and incorporate all Tower info. I mean, Buzzies, Hammer Bros, Fire Bros, Items, and Bubbles are already a part of the Towers, so just calling it Goomba seems unfair.

I'd say Big Winged and etc... which are combinations that yield no new properties should also not recieve pages. THis is because each property is already covered for the enemy.

In short terms, create articles as if enemy properties, and not combinations of properties. Properties that are common between enemies should share a page. This won't effect any exsisting pages, will keep consistant, and reduce the massive ammount of new pages. Time Turner, if you agree with me, can you incoorporate some of this as an option in the proposal? Toad   and his brigade!  17:17, 22 February 2015 (EST)

@Baby Luigi: I knew there was something that I found off. I've eliminated my vote and, following Yoshi876 and Toadbrigade's suggestions, I've added in two new options based on their compromises.

Better yet, wait for Mario Maker's release and see how the enemy modifier function is implemented before suggesting compromises that could end up not being applicable. --Glowsquid (talk) 20:35, 22 February 2015 (EST)