Hmmm weird, I am at World 8 in New Super Mario Bros. and I don't remember facing these guys. Koopa K (talk)
Please leave this kind of talk to the forums. --Super Yoshi Bros Your life is written in pen, not pencil. You can't erase your mistakes, but you can put a line through them and move on. 15:12, 25 August 2012 (EDT)
Bully relationEdit
Should these really be listed as a related species to Bullies just because of the internal filename? Neither of its actual names suggest a relation, nor does its appearance. Seems to me like they were simply planning to have a Bully appear before replacing it with an original creature instead, kind of like how Yoshi was originally a type of Koopa - it doesn't mean the actual species are related. SuperDragonRosalina (talk) 07:58, 11 November 2018 (EST)
- I think how it is, just a fun trivia point that it shares its name with Bully suggesting some pre-development ideas that were altered before release, is fine. What's released is released, and I see no reason to rope comparisons based on scrapped ideas.
It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 17:07, 11 November 2018 (EST)
- By the same token though, several other enemies are listed as being derived or related due to the same situation. Admittedly, with most of these, the physical resemblance is greater; however, our definition of "derived" includes "based upon conceptually," which these doubtlessly are. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 14:31, 12 November 2018 (EST)
- But surely it should at least be based on the finished product. If we start basing things on filenames we might as well list Stretch Plants as a type of mushroom, for example. It's true that these things are fought in a similar way to Bullies, but with that in mind it's even possible the filename is just a coincidence - that name is derived from the way you fight them so maybe they were going to call it that before remembering they already had a "Donketu" enemy? Now don't get me wrong, I definitely think we should keep the trivia note, just saying we might need a little more to go on before actually calling them a related species. SuperDragonRosalina (talk) 16:42, 12 November 2018 (EST)
- They reused the coding for a lot of things in this game from 64DS. The most likely thing is that they used the Bully file as a template, and gave the thing a spike on the front so people would know it wouldn't be safe to ram against the front of, due to Mario's punching being removed by the final product. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 16:48, 12 November 2018 (EST)
- I agree, just saying I don't think there's enough evidence to call it derived for sure. SuperDragonRosalina (talk) 17:11, 12 November 2018 (EST)
- If the coding was copied from it or was intended to be one in an early version before being changed, it should be noted in some manner, and it technically derives from it. That's one reason why the site no longer uses that "sub-species" parameter. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 17:40, 12 November 2018 (EST)
- Eh, I disagree. Obviously any relation to the actual Bully species got scrapped, since there's no resemblance outside of the method of defeating them, and they do have their own unique Japanese name. --
Too Bad! Waluigi Time! 17:46, 12 November 2018 (EST)
- I think that "conceptual" derivatives can be mentioned in the related perimeter, which is looser than the parent and derived species perimeters. Galoombas have technically been stated to be a different species from Goombas yet we still keep Goombas as their parent species, and they have less behavioral similarities than Bully and Snailicorn whose only practical difference is their design. That is closer than what some enemies get across 2D and 3D platformers. The object name should just be proof that they are definitely related on a conceptual level rather than a coincidental one. LinkTheLefty (talk) 05:23, 13 November 2018 (EST)
- I think it's reasonable to disregard the development context in this case. Galoombas are certainly related to Goombas from appearance, name, and behavior (after all they still walk around, have para variants, and are treated as weak enemies), and Goombas are more familiar and came first hence their parent species are Goombas. We agree that they are a different, separate species from Goombas. In fact, I believe we treat all derivatives as their own species for the sake of wiki organization and whatnot, repeating what Doc von Schmeltwick said about subspecies. But it's not unreasonable to categorize them as a Goomba-like enemy or even a type of Goomba. Appearance-wise, Snailicorn has nothing to do with Bully and I find the reason to associate them together based purely on development context is a bit of a reach. I don't really see why we should take funny development trivia and use it as a serious point to associate otherwise two very different species. It's me, Mario! (Talk / Stalk) 20:06, 14 November 2018 (EST)
- I think it's reasonable to disregard the development context in this case. Galoombas are certainly related to Goombas from appearance, name, and behavior (after all they still walk around, have para variants, and are treated as weak enemies), and Goombas are more familiar and came first hence their parent species are Goombas. We agree that they are a different, separate species from Goombas. In fact, I believe we treat all derivatives as their own species for the sake of wiki organization and whatnot, repeating what Doc von Schmeltwick said about subspecies. But it's not unreasonable to categorize them as a Goomba-like enemy or even a type of Goomba. Appearance-wise, Snailicorn has nothing to do with Bully and I find the reason to associate them together based purely on development context is a bit of a reach. I don't really see why we should take funny development trivia and use it as a serious point to associate otherwise two very different species.
- I think that "conceptual" derivatives can be mentioned in the related perimeter, which is looser than the parent and derived species perimeters. Galoombas have technically been stated to be a different species from Goombas yet we still keep Goombas as their parent species, and they have less behavioral similarities than Bully and Snailicorn whose only practical difference is their design. That is closer than what some enemies get across 2D and 3D platformers. The object name should just be proof that they are definitely related on a conceptual level rather than a coincidental one. LinkTheLefty (talk) 05:23, 13 November 2018 (EST)
- Eh, I disagree. Obviously any relation to the actual Bully species got scrapped, since there's no resemblance outside of the method of defeating them, and they do have their own unique Japanese name. --
- If the coding was copied from it or was intended to be one in an early version before being changed, it should be noted in some manner, and it technically derives from it. That's one reason why the site no longer uses that "sub-species" parameter. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 17:40, 12 November 2018 (EST)
- I agree, just saying I don't think there's enough evidence to call it derived for sure. SuperDragonRosalina (talk) 17:11, 12 November 2018 (EST)
- They reused the coding for a lot of things in this game from 64DS. The most likely thing is that they used the Bully file as a template, and gave the thing a spike on the front so people would know it wouldn't be safe to ram against the front of, due to Mario's punching being removed by the final product. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 16:48, 12 November 2018 (EST)
- As Schmeltwick told to me once, he doesn't like internal filenames. Yeah, the relation between Galoombas and Goombas are more than the Snailicorn and Bully, hence both english and Japanese name, appearance and behavior, but Galoombas get flipped upside down when stomped. --
FanOfYoshi 02:47, 15 November 2018 (EST)
- I don't like internal filenames being used to say that something is another thing, not related to. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 16:10, 15 November 2018 (EST)
- Besides the behavior and internal filenames, i really don't see any relation between them. @Doc von Schmeltwick, i support Mega Mole and Morty Mole, and Swooper and Bat being split, and i feel that Snailicorn is a similar case to these ones, but the two don't even look similar. Possibly early developpement idea, or just because of the behavior. -- FanOfYoshi 11:03, 3 January 2019 (EST)
- Obviously, the reason is that that's where the coding came from, like so many other things in the game. They gave it a different appearance (one that would justify being hurt by touching its front) and otherwise didn't really change the SM64DS Bully behavior. That is the reason, there are no alternatives here. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 04:35, 16 January 2019 (EST)
- Besides the behavior and internal filenames, i really don't see any relation between them. @Doc von Schmeltwick, i support Mega Mole and Morty Mole, and Swooper and Bat being split, and i feel that Snailicorn is a similar case to these ones, but the two don't even look similar. Possibly early developpement idea, or just because of the behavior. --
- I don't like internal filenames being used to say that something is another thing, not related to. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 16:10, 15 November 2018 (EST)
- But surely it should at least be based on the finished product. If we start basing things on filenames we might as well list Stretch Plants as a type of mushroom, for example. It's true that these things are fought in a similar way to Bullies, but with that in mind it's even possible the filename is just a coincidence - that name is derived from the way you fight them so maybe they were going to call it that before remembering they already had a "Donketu" enemy? Now don't get me wrong, I definitely think we should keep the trivia note, just saying we might need a little more to go on before actually calling them a related species. SuperDragonRosalina (talk) 16:42, 12 November 2018 (EST)
- By the same token though, several other enemies are listed as being derived or related due to the same situation. Admittedly, with most of these, the physical resemblance is greater; however, our definition of "derived" includes "based upon conceptually," which these doubtlessly are. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 14:31, 12 November 2018 (EST)
