Talk:Punch-Out!! (Wii)

Merging Suggestion

I added a merge suggestion in the Audio section but I don't know enough to properly merge an article into another. --TiriPon (talk) 16:53, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Character List

Why would this be removed? That's completely ridiculous. Having a list of the characters that appear in the game wouldn't make it a "guide." If you look at the articles for the other Punch-Out!! games, they all contain a list of characters that appear in them. Yashouzoid (talk) 12:50, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

They're released games. - A Link to the Past (talk) 16:50, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

That's a ridiculous rationale. We KNOW that these characters are going to be in the game. Just about every Wikipedia page for an upcoming video game has a separate section devoted to the game's characters. And why shouldn't they? By removing the section you're minimalizing their relevancy to the game. Yashouzoid (talk) 21:23, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

We don't need a list of bosses here. It's covered at the series article. - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:56, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

19 characters

"The only new opponent in the ring is Disco Kid. There will also be 19 characters from previous games, including Glass Joe, Von Kaiser, Piston Honda, Don Flamanco, King Hippo, Bald Bull, and Bear Hugger."

Should it be mentioned anywhere that Piston Honda is now Piston Hondo? I know both names are listed on the series article, but I mean should it be mentioned that his name was changed?--24.208.66.38 (talk) 20:21, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

I read in Game Informer that there will only be 13 characters... In the main career mode. Can I get some verification on this statement of 19 characters in the game? - Smashman202 (talk) 04:11, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I read that there was 13 characters in another magazine today. --YOWUZA Talk 2 me! 19:01, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

The Donkey Kong reference is a horrible spoiler - I chanced upon it and it was really anoying. I just wanted to read about Miyamoto's involvement! i haven't removed it, but I think it should be taken out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.104.52.249 (talk) 19:14, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

There are no spoilers in Wikipedia.Richiekim (talk) 20:56, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Spam

Could someone remove the 'Go Cavs!' spam please. I don't know how to revert a page.78.22.129.230 (talk) 19:18, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Voice Cast

I've beaten the game, and I have the voice cast right here.

Mac - Matt Hardy
Doc Louis - Riley Inge
Glass Joe - Christian Bernard
Von Kaiser - Horst Laxton
Disco Kid - Donny Lucas
King Hippo - Scott McFadyen
Piston Hondo - Kenji Takahashi
Bear Hugger - Richard Newman
Great Tiger - Sumit Seru
Don Flamenco - Juan Amador Pulido
Aran Ryan - Stephen Webster
Soda Popinski - Ihor Mota
Bald Bull - Erse Yagan
Super Macho Man - Mike Inglehart
Mr. Sandman - Riley Inge
DK - Takashi Nagasoto
--63.3.7.1 (talk) 19:02, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

You can fight against Doc Louis...

Nintendo just announced their Club Nintendo awards, and Platinum members can download (I assume it's a WiiWare thing) called "Doc Louis' Punch Out" which is just a one-on-one bout between Little Mac and Doc Louis. (www.nintendo.com)

In truth I'm not sure how to source this. It's technically not part of Punch-Out Wii, but a separate title even though it builds off the Punch Out engine. But, how to add it to the chart. If we add Doc Louis we'd have to a)distinguish the games hes a fighter and he's not, and b) distinguish "punch-out wii" and "doc louis' punch out".24.190.34.219 (talk) 15:32, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Why don't you just put down, "Punch-Out WiiWare Game" and note it being as not really much of a wiiware game, but a sort of "extra" to the Punch Out!! game. Or, seeing how it is not actually part of the "Punch-Out!!" game, leave it out completely. Or... Just add in that Doc-Louis can be fought against in a wii-ware game in the Characters section of the Punch Out series.(Guardaviewer (talk) 11:58, 15 July 2009 (UTC))

Shouldn't Doc Louis's Punch-Out!! rather be merged with this? It's effectively the same gameplay and the same engine with a different opponent, who is the only one in the whole small game. Even much more notable remakes of games are often merged with the original versions, so I don't see why the WiiWare game needs an article. --Grandy02 (talk) 14:30, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

It's its own separate game. It's a WiiWare title. Combo Pwner (talk) 03:47, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I looked at your discussion with New Age Retro Hippie. A different title or name is no reason for a separate article. About the rating, remakes and games for Virtual Console are also rated again, and sometimes the ratings even differ. It can also be played by people who don't own Punch-Out!! - one can also play Super Mario Advance on GBA even if they don't own Super Mario Bros. 2 or Mario Bros. for the NES, yet it is merged with the former game's article. Sorry, I don't want to raise a quarrel, that's just how I think about it. --Grandy02 (talk) 10:46, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I considered that today, actually, before I read this, as Kirby Super Star Ultra is merged with Kirby Super Star, and Super Mario Advance is merged with Super Mario Bros. 2. However, this is a separate game, not a remake, and does not associate with Punch-Out!! Wii in any way. Combo Pwner (talk) 03:50, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Development elimination

The "Development" topic from the article basically talked about the three ways we would be able to play Punch Out!! Wii (since at the time the topic was made, the game wasn't yet released), but those are already included in the sections above it, so I was wondering if there were any reasons to keep it there yet. (Lostenheart (talk) 00:30, 13 August 2009 (UTC))

Genre needs changing

This certainly isn't a boxing game, rather, an arcade action title. --Olifromsolly (talk) 17:10, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Merge Doc Louis' Punch-Out!!.

While Combo Pwner did a good job trying to improve it, it's just not there enough. It's hugely based on this engine, and with so many similarities between the two titles, it would be better to supplement this article rather than to be its own very-short article. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 10:27, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. It's a DLC title that's 100% based on this game. And as you said, there just isn't enough content to support it. --Teancum (talk) 21:57, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the discussion. However, I want a compromise. Since the game is really a separate game but is very similar to Punch-Out Wii, how about we do this: We summarize the game in a paragraph on the Doc Louis section in the Punch-Out!! Wii paragraph. Then, we add the "Main Article: Doc Louis's Punch-Out!!" link above the paragraph. That way it will have its own article, but it will also have a solid summary in this article. How does that sound? I will do it right now and please give feedback.Combo Pwner (talk) 22:12, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

While I appreciate your involvement in the article, that's just not an acceptable compromise; an article needs to have individual notability from this game. It's just too similar to warrant being separate without said notability. Take Oracle of Ages and Oracle of Seasons for example - two Zelda games with two plots and two world designs, as well as unique items. However, the gameplay engine was the same between them, as was the development and reception (with a handful of differences). In the end, the combination aided in making one Featured article instead of two articles with redundant content to each other and, as such, couldn't make GA. And while "scattered petals" are beautiful when each petal is good enough, a beautiful flower with all its petals intact is preferred to wilted petals. This article just cannot grow big enough to warrant being separate. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 05:37, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Matt Hardy

Is Matt Hardy who voices Little Mac the Matt Hardy who used to be in the WWE and TNA? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.47.140.30 (talk) 15:56, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Release dates

Release dates for the different regions are inconsistent between the article body and the right-side info box. I'm not sure if one set is wrong, or if the writing merely leaves important qualifiers as vague/ambiguous, but it seems to contradict itself.