User talk:DrippingYellow: Difference between revisions

User talk:DrippingYellow (edit)

Revision as of 01:42, April 27, 2024

1,261 bytes added , 1 month ago

→‎Relatives proposal

DrippingYellow

433

edits

@@ Line 26: / Line 26: @@
 On the subject of the DKC enemies, I want to point out the non-Krem enemy counterparts that are hardly related to each other, but were definitely inspired by each other behaviorally, such as Gnawty->Neek->Sneek and Necky->Hogwash the Flying Pig->Flitter. [[User:Doc von Schmeltwick|Doc von Schmeltwick]] ([[User talk:Doc von Schmeltwick|talk]]) 00:52, April 27, 2024 (EDT)
+:I'm aware, though by the time you sent that message I had already removed most specific examples from my proposal draft, including the DKC enemy mentions. Even if the proposal passes, I don't really see the counterparts that are obviously different animals being lumped in as relatives. The Neeks and Sneeks are probably the exception in that regard, though (I might even go as far as to call Sneeks a variation of Neeks, with how similar both enemies are in appearance and behavior).
+:While we're on the topic of these enemies, though, I'm not really a fan of how "subject origin" is used as a shorthand for "serves as a replacement for in terms of its role". It makes it sound like the developers at Rare had a certain type of vultures on their mind when creating the dragonfly enemy. The most egregious instance of this is [[Knik-Knak]], who has ''three'' enemies as its subject origin (even removing Necky, who was already succeeded by Flitter before then, that's still two disparate origins). I feel like we shouldn't just be assuming that Knik-Knak was specifically designed by the developers as a Click-Clack and Flitter specifically fused together. [[User:DrippingYellow|DrippingYellow]] ([[User talk:DrippingYellow|talk]]) 01:42, April 27, 2024 (EDT)