User:Toomai/Official Clone Differentiation

This page is a draft, but it is not open for communal edits. Please go to the talk page instead.

The nature of whether a character is a clone is many players' favourite thing to argue about. Concurrently, it's an easy thing to engage in edit wars about, mostly over nitpicking whether a character (or one of their moves) is a clone (and to what degree). Therefore, we have this policy: one of official clone differentiation.

Meaning of "clone"

The fundamental purpose of a clone is to be a character that requires less developer resources to create via re-using assets from another character (or multiple characters). We know this to be the case because of which characters the devs have told us they consider as clones:

• SSB - Luigi is a clone. The other three unlockable characters (Captain Falcon, Jigglypuff, Ness) are not clones, but they were selected for inclusion partially because of being able to re-use animations.
• SSBM - Dr. Mario, Falco, Ganondorf, Pichu, Roy, and Young Link are clones.
• SSBB - There are no clones.
• SSB4 - Dark Pit, Dr. Mario, and Lucina are clones. The status of DLC characters (Lucas and Roy) is unconfirmed.
• SSBU - Chrom, Daisy, Dark Pit, Dark Samus, Ken, Lucina, and Richter are clones. It was stated that DLC characters would not be clones, but this leaves open the nature of Pyra and Mythra with respect to each other.

From this evidence, we can gather the following conclusions:

• A character can be a clone even if they have no lore relation to their parent. (SSBM Ganondorf)
• A character can be a clone even if they have a couple unique moves. (SSBM Pichu)
• A character can be a clone even if their entire moveset has different hitboxes and timing. (SSBM Roy)
• A character can be a clone even if their size, attributes, and physics are different. (SSBM Young Link)
• A character can be a clone even if they re-use assets from multiple different parents. (SSB4 Dark Pit)
• A character can be a clone even if they were in the previous game. (SSBU Lucina)
• A character that isn't a clone can still have a lot of cloned moves and properties. (SSBB Lucas)
• Even the cloniest of clones has unique models, textures, taunts, UI elements, and victory poses. They may additionally have their own GFX, SFX, and voice, and may even have different special move animations and minor properties, even if said moves are otherwise identical in mechanics and operation. (SSBU Dark Samus)

The last point is arguably the most important, since it tells us what does not make a clone. We can therefore negate it to tell us what does make a clone: re-using animations and special move mechanics/operation. In terms of "the purpose of a clone is to take up less dev effort", this makes sense:

• In terms of assets, animations are the most expensive part of 3D game development to create. Not only does it take a lot of effort to create each of many animations, they are the only asset that has a direct impact on gameplay (due to how the Super Smash Bros. series does hitboxes and hurtboxes).
• In terms of non-assets, special moves are the most time-consuming and error-prone part of character development. Not only is the design process more complex than a standard attack, so is the implementation.

Now that we've determined what makes a clone, we can write it down:

A clone is a character that re-uses many (if not all) animations and special move mechanics/operation from another character. Differentiation is done primarily by changing hitboxes, animation speed, physics, and attributes. There may also be changes to non-combat animations, or to special move animations which don't affect the move's mechanics or operation, and may possess a few unique attacks.

While this is a good starting point, there are other nuances to consider.

• If a character has an ability removed compared to their parent, that's zero effort, so it doesn't make them less of a clone.
• If a character has a new ability compared to their parent, that can make them less of a clone, but not always. For example, SSBB Luigi can crawl while SSBB Mario cannot, which makes Luigi less of a clone because this requires adding crawling animations. On the other hand, SSBM Young Link being able to wall jump does not make him less of a clone than SSBM Link, because all characters already have a wall jump animation (used for wall tech jumps).
• While differentiation via moveset and attribute changes is cheap compared to animation and special move changes, it is not free.
• Many characters that are trivially "not clones" still share attacks with various other characters. If someone is borrowing from five others, it's difficult to justify saying they're a clone of any of them.

Methodology

The intent with this policy is to define a set of rules and regulations for which the clone status of a character's moveset, and thus the character overall, is done as objectively as possible. The ruleset is as follows.

In this list, "parent" refers to the original character, "clone" refers to the potentially derived character, and "pibling" refers to a different character that the clone also potentially derives from (usually on a single-move basis).

1. Determine whether each standard attack is cloned.
   1. For both the clone and the parent/pibling, take a snapshot of the attack's windup, prime extension, and endlag. Some attacks may need more, e.g. they cover a wide arc or they're composed of multiple strikes. Some attacks can get away with less, e.g. a frame 1 neutral attack has no startup. The intent is to compare the most key animation frames that do not transition with the character's idle pose.
   2. If all pairs of snapshots match - the two are in the same pose, or close enough given proportions and differing animation speeds - the attack is worth +1 point.
   3. If none of the pairs of snapshots match, the attack is worth +0 points.
   4. For anything in between, the attack is worth +x points, where "x" is linear such that it's equal to 1 at "all match" and 0.5 at "only 1 match".
   5. Mirroring is not a difference in pose/animation. (Mirroring is a cheap operation.)
   6. For attacks of multiple parts (e.g. most neutral attacks):
      1. Each part is considered individually and then divided by the part count. For example, each part of a three-part neutral attack will contribute at most +1/3 points. A neutral infinite and its finisher count as the same part.
      2. If the clone has an additional part that the parent/pibling does not have, that part is worth -1 point before being divided by part count.
      3. If the clone lacks a part that the parent/pibling has, that part is omitted entirely. For example, if the parent's move has 3 parts but the clone's has only 1, only the 1 part is compared.
   7. If the clone can angle an attack that the parent/pibling cannot, that is worth ×0.5 for the move as a whole. Otherwise, the ability to angle is not taken into account. Only one angle's animation needs to be compared.
   8. Landing hits of aerial attacks are separate hits, but not separate parts (same as neutral infinites with their finishers).
   9. Getup attacks (both floor and edge) and item swings are worth ×0.25, as such attacks are considered less important and have less design space available. Most other item uses (e.g. shooting) are omitted.
   10. If the clone has an attack that the parent does not, see the "requires adding a new animation" section below.
2. Determine whether each special move is cloned.
   1. If the parent's/pibling's special move can be transformed into the clone's without changing its mechanics or operation, the move is worth +1 point. Otherwise, it is +0 points.
      1. Unlike with standard attacks, animation is not considered.
      2. The move can have completely different hitbox data, speed, physics, and aesthetics.
      3. It can omit or simplify a portion, but not add or complexify one. As a result, this check is not necessarily reflexive. If the clone's can be turned into the parent's, that has no bearing.
      4. (For SSB4 specifically) Custom special moves are not considered. All custom specials can be "reduced" down to the default special by this same rule, so including custom specials does not create any new vector of comparison. This also removes the bias of DLC characters not having custom specials.
   2. If a special move has no effect but to switch between the clone and the parent, the move is omitted entirely.
3. For each difference that requires adding a new animation (or closely related set of animations), -1 point for attacks, and -0.5 points otherwise. For example, crawling and grab aerials require new animations, while wall jumping and wall clinging do not.
4. There may be extenuating circumstances that warrant further points.
   1. If the clone and parent share an unusual quirk that no other character does (e.g. both are unable to jump out of shield), that is worth +1 point if the quirk is animation-based, and +0.25 points otherwise.
   2. If the clone has a mechanic/gimmick/quirk/etc that is unique to them, and it's not simply "has more attacks", that is worth -1 point.
   3. If the clone has animations that are clearly incorrect for them, but correct for their parent, that is +1 point. For example, maybe a clone has a unique standing animation, but uses their parent's when holding an item.
5. If the clone has more than two piblings, the score for everything involving said piblings has another ×0.5 applied if they are positive.
6. If at least 33% of the clone's moveset has any sort of change to its hitboxes, timing, or other gameplay-relevant properties, their total score is multiplied by ×0.9. This represents the effort made to differentiate a clone, versus the lack of effort of creating a clone with minimal or no practical differences.
   1. Simply repositioning/resizing hitboxes to match the clone's proportions does not count as a change (the "Kirby rule").
7. The total number of points is divided by the max possible score (not counting extenuating circumstances) to obtain a percentage. It is possible for the final percentage to be outside the range of 0%-100%; this is okay.