User:Omega Tyrant/Clone charts

Seeing how much the term is thrown around, I'm going to have a series of charts here comparing characters commonly accused of being clones.

In the charts, I'll be comparing each attack of every character, as well as their physics statistics. For each move, I'll give a point if I judge them to be "cloned moves", while giving half a point if they're "semi-cloned moves".

Cloned move - An attack that has an essentially identical animation from another, while having similar functions. The differences lie primarily in damage/knockback dealt, as well as minor angle alterations.

Semi-cloned move - An attack that has a similar animation of another attack, but with a different function. While it is usually this, the inverse is sometimes true and applicable (such as with Ness' and Lucas' d-tilts, which while having different animations, have identical functions).

Function - Simply, what the move actually does. Hitbox properties and placement (such as knockback angle, if the move is a single hit or multi-hitting, damage effects such as fire added) largely determines this.

In my comparisons, I won't consider grabs or pummels (due to their lack of overall variation), and I will not consider Final Smashes, as I see them as a "bonus move", since they're overblown attacks that can only be activated with the use of an item.

XX means the move is a cloned move between the characters, while a X indicates a semi-cloned move, and a - indicates the moves are different enough to not be judged as a sort of cloned move.

The Misc. score is a summary of other factors to consider for cloneship unrelated to moves, such walking/dashing/jumping animations, and the characters' physics. Up to four points may be given here, and an explanation will be given for each case.

Melee
For comparison sake to Brawl, this section will have a chart comparing the six clone pairs, as well as the commonly accused semi-clones Mario and Luigi.

Mario and Dr. Mario
Overall clone score = 22/25 = 88%

Additional notes: For the Misc. score, they have the same animations for every non attack action, as well as having identical physics and statistics. An easy full score of 4 here.

For other notes, Dr. Mario's d-tilt hits opponent behind him, while Mario's hit them vertically in front of them. Dr. Mario's f-smash lacks the fireball and deals stronger electrical damage instead, as well as lacking a sourspot hitbox, which is enough difference for me to call it a semi-cloned move. Dr. Mario's fair has a completely different function from Mario's fair, being a powerful vertical killer, rather than a weak meteor smash. Dr. Mario's nair also functions quite differently, being a sex kick that grows stronger the longer the kick is out, the complete opposite of Mario's.

As for the Megavitamins, some would call them a clone move. However, they have their own look, animations, and their own properties, which is more than enough for Megavitamins to not be a considered even a semi-cloned move. Simply being a neutral special projectile too is irrelevant to being a clone of Fireball.

Mario and Luigi
Overall clone score = 12.5/25 = 50%

Additional notes: For the miscellaneous score, they have identical animations for about everything, as well as being of the same weight. However, they have vastly different physics, which keeps the score down to 2.

For other notes, I judged their down smashes as semi-cloned moves, as Mario's produces horizontal knockback, while Luigi's produces pure vertical knockback. This function difference also applies to their neutral aerial sex kicks. Their down aerial, while having vastly different functioning, have identical animations, enough to call them semi-cloned moves. For their special moves, while some may call them cloned moves, I believe the gravity not affecting Luigi's fireballs is enough of a function difference to call it a semi-cloned move. And in the case of their Super Jump Punches, I feel they're not clone moves at all, having similar but distinct animations, and completely different functioning.

Fox and Falco
Clone score = 22.5/25 = 90%

Additional notes: For the misc. score, Fox/Falco have identical animations, and near identical physics. However, what keeps me from giving a full 4 is one significant difference they have in physical statistics, which is Fox being a much faster dasher, while Falco is a much stronger jumper.

For other notes, Falco's dair is a single strong hit, while Fox's is multiple weak hits, a clear function difference for semi-cloned moves. For Blaster, Falco's lacks rapid fires and flinches, while Fox's has the opposite traits. Again, another clear function difference. For the forward specials, I consider them semi-cloned moves, due to a large function difference when Falco's is used in the air, where it meteor smashes opponents, instead of hitting them forward weakly.

For the rest of their moves, they're identical in animation, and very similar in function. However, it should be noted that the knockback values of their attacks vary greatly.

Link and Young Link
Clone score = 22.5/25 = 90%

Additional notes: They have identical animations for non attack actions, and for their physics, they have strong similarities (such as with their falling and air speed), though there are notable differences as well (Young Link's much greater dashing speed and jumping height). This would sum up to a score of 3 here.

For other notes, Young Link's dash attack produces horizontal knockback, while Link's produces vertical. For their f-smash, the first hit of Young Link's is a weak set knockback attack, that functions as a lead in hit for the second blow, while both slashes of Link's function as individually strong blows. Then for Spin Attack, Link's grounded version functions as a strong single hit, while Young Link's functions as a weak multi-hitting attack.

Pikachu and Pichu
Clone score = 22/25 = 88%

Additional notes: For misc., they have identical animations, and near identical physics. An easy 4 here.

For other notes, Pichu's f-smash is a multi-hitting smash, while Pikachu's is a single strong blow. Pichu's d-smash hits once, while Pikachu's is a multi-hitting smash. Pichu's d-smash also hits horizontally instead of vertically, and lacks electrical hitboxes. For Thunder, Pichu's is multi-hitting with little knockback, while Pikachu is a single strike with moderately powerful knockback.

For Skull Bash, while Pichu's can be charged longer for greater power, there is no animation difference, and the function is still identical with no additional effects. For their up specials, it was a bit difficult for me to decide, but with Pikachu's having damaging hitboxes, and Pichu not having any sort of hitboxes, I've decided it was enough of a function difference to consider them semi-cloned moves.

Marth and Roy
Clone score = 21/25 = 84%

Additional notes: For misc., they have identical animations, and while their physics are similar, they do have differences (such as Roy falling faster while having a shorter jump, and Marth having less traction), enough for me to give them a 3 here.

For other notes, Roy's jab hits once, while Marth's hits twice, which is enough for me to call them semi-cloned moves despite both of Marth's hits functionally similarly. Roy's down tilt produces vertical knockback, while Marth's semi-spikes opponents. Roy's u-smash functions considerably different, being a multi-hitting attack that produces fire damage and lacks a defined sweet spot (while Marth's hits once with a defined sweet and sour spot). It also has a spike hitbox in it as well.

For their neutral specials, while they have identical animations with near similar functions, Marth's dealing shield damage, while Roy's charging longer with fire damage, as well as also being able to produce an explosion that damages Roy, is enough for me to consider them a semi-cloned move. For their up specials, Roy's is a multi-hitting fire attack with set knockback, while Marth's is single strike with no special effects; i.e. different functions. For their down special, Roy's counter has a slightly different animation, as well as dealing fire damage and scaling to the countered attack, instead of being set knockback like Marth's. However, their core function being near identical keeps me from considering non cloned moves.

Captain Falcon and Ganondorf
Clone score = 17/25 = 68%

Additional notes: While having identical animations, their physics differ greatly (Captain Falcon having space animal physics that Ganondorf was not given). This results in a score of 2 from me.

For other notes, I consider Ganondorf's u-tilt a non cloned move. As while it may be a split kick like Falcon's, it has a "smoke effect" added, and the kick is played out for much longer. With this animation difference, combined with the vastly different functioning, you can't consider these attacks to be "cloned". I also consider the dash attack to be a semi-cloned move, considering its diagonal/vertical trajectory behind Ganondorf, while Falcon sends opponents horizontally.

For the smashes, Ganondorf's f-smash produces dark, vertical knockback, compared to Falcon's fire, horizontal knockback. Both kicks in Ganondorf's u-smash are individually powerful, rather than the first kick being designed to lead into the second. And for their down smashes, both of Falcon's kicks produce powerful horizontal knockback, while the first kick of Ganondorf's is designed to send the opponent into the second kick, which produces powerful vertical knockback.

For the neutral aerial, similar to their up smashes, both kicks of Ganondorf's are individually strong and not designed to lead into each, while the first kick of Falcon's is weak and leads into the second kick. For the back aerials, I think Ganondorf's functioning as a single strong hit while Falcon's having sex kick properties is enough of a function difference to consider them semi-cloned moves.

Brawl
This section contains charts comparing two characters in Brawl commonly accused of cloneship.

Mario and Luigi
Overall clone score = 9/25 = 36%

Additional notes: In the Misc. department, Mario and Luigi still have near, if not, identical animations for walking, dashing, and jumping. However, they do have distinct helpless animations, and their physics are completely different (Luigi's has his notoriously poor traction, poor air speed, floaty falling speed). So overall, I gave them a point here.

For other notes, Luigi's u-smash has a distinct sweet and sour spot, while Mario's has the same hitbox throughout. The trajectory they send opponents is also slightly different. For the down smashes, Luigi's produces diagonal/vertical knockback instead of horizontal like Mario's, and while the trajectory changes, the strength of Luigi's d-smash does not fluctuate during the move like Mario's does. For their nairs, Luigi's has a slight animation difference, which considering the different functions of the Bros.' nairs, and the fact you can't expect sex kicks to be that different in general, I consider them non cloned moves. For uair, Luigi's produces vertical knockback, while Mario's produces horizontal knockback. Then for Fireball and Super Jump Punch, my reasoning for why I consider them a semi-cloned move and non cloned move in Melee, still applies in Brawl.

Fox and Falco
Overall clone score = 10/25 = 40%

Additional notes: Falco now has his own animations (except for his helpless animation). For physics, Falco was differentiated a bit. While not near identical, they are still similar. So I'll give a score of 1 here.

For other notes, Falco's down tilt has a sweetspot and produces vertical knockback, while Fox's produces weak horizontal knockback. The blaster shots in Falco's back and up throw produce hitstun, while the blaster shots in Fox's do not. Their down aerials remain nearly unchanged from Melee's, except Falco's now has a sourspot that produces horizontal knockback.

The Blasters remain mostly unchanged, except for Falco's shooting blue lasers and Fox's traveling less distance. Forward specials remain mostly unchanged in animation and function, though Falco's travels equal distance to Fox's. For the up specials, Falco's is now a multi-hitting attack with horizontal knockback, contrasting the single vertical hit of Fox's, which causes me to consider this a semi-cloned move now. For their down specials, while the name remains the same, Falco's was changed considerably, having a completely different animation when used, and its functioning being changed drastically. They're non cloned moves, and having the same name and being a reflector is far from enough to be considered a cloned move.

Captain Falcon and Ganondorf
Overall clone score = 8.5/25 = 34%

Additional notes: Ganondorf has his own animations now (outside his helpless animation), and with their physics being so different, I gave a score of 0 for here.

For other notes, Ganondorf's neutral aerial has a different animation now (even if it still involves two midair kicks), and the functioning is still different from Falcon's (the first kick of Ganondorf's produces moderate knockback while the second kick is weak, the inverse applies to Falcon's). For the down aerial, Ganondorf's has a slightly different animation, and Falcon's was given a horizontal knockback dealing hitbox. Considering Ganondorf's also deals electrical damage, I say this is enough to call them semi-cloned moves.

For their neutral specials, Warlock Punch has its own animation now, though the functioning is still nearly identical to Falcon Punch. Ganondorf has a new forward special, that while it involves lunging at the opponent like Falcon's, it involves a completely different form of attack, with its own animation and vastly differing function. For their up specials, Dark Dive has its own diving animation now, and was given an "uppercut" hitbox at the end of the move. However, the grab and release portion remains identical to Falcon Dive in animations and function, resulting in a semi-cloned move.

Link and Toon Link
Overall clone score = 11/25 = 44%

Additional notes: For misc., Toon Link has his own animations, and his physics are vastly different from Link's. As such, I gave a score of 0 for here.

For other notes, Toon Link's d-tilt produces horizontal knockback, instead of vertical/meteor smash knockback like Link's does. The differences in the dash attack and f-smash are identical to the differences between Young Link's and Link's in Melee. Toon Link's d-smash, while identical in animation, acts as a multi-hitting smash, with the first hit being a weak hit leading to the second, in contrast to Link's d-smash having both slashes being individually strong. For the forward throws, while they're different in animation, they have near identical function, where it's even consider a leg attack for Toon Link (despite it being a shoulder tackle).

For their neutral specials, Toon Link's arrows have a different animation/appearance, and the function differs a bit too, as Toon Link's travel slowly and in a more pronounced arc, while Link's travel fast and mostly straight. With this much difference, I consider them semi-cloned moves. For their forward specials, I consider these non cloned moves, as their appearance is vastly different, as well as their functioning (Toon Link's hits opponents and returns while traveling slowly, Link's drags opponents in while traveling faster). For their Spin Attacks, I consider them semi-cloned moves on the basis of why Link's and Young Link's were in Melee.

Ness and Lucas
Overall clone score = 6.5/25 = 26%

Additional notes: For the misc. score, while Ness and Lucas do have their own animations, their physics are nearly identical, to where I'll give a score of 3 here.

For other notes, their d-tilts have different animations, but are identical in function. For their f-smashes, Lucas uses a different weapon, and has different hitbox properties, but the function of both is near identical, so I'll consider it a semi-cloned move.

For the specials, PK Freeze is a non cloned move. Yes it operates similarly to PK Flash, but its animation/appearance, and functioning are considerably different. For PK Fire, I consider it a non cloned move. Yes it has the same name, and involves them shooting fire. But the animation of how Lucas fires it, and how it reacts when it hits the opponent, differ from Ness' PK Fire. Plus, the functioning is considerably different between the two. For PK Thunder, simply, Lucas' thunder can go through opponents, Ness' does not, and Lucas' PK Thunder 2 is a multi-hitting attack, while Ness' hits once. Different functions to be semi-cloned moves.

Fox and Wolf
Overall clone score = 0.5/25 = 2%

Additional notes: For the misc. score, Wolf has his own animations, and considerably different physics from Fox. A 0 is what is appropriate here.

For other notes, I really don't see why people would see these two as semi-clones, much less clones. Wolf's neutral and up specials, while they have identical names, their animation/appearance/functioning are vastly different from Fox's equivalent. Wolf's Blaster shoots one large laser that is not similar looking to Fox's, while Wolf's blaster can not shoot rapidly, and it produces a melee hitbox at the blaster itself. Fire Wolf, while similar in operation, has a different animation that involves no Fire, Wolf using a Jet Pack to get to his location, no charge up time, and is a kick instead of charge. For Wolf Flash, it is similar in operation, but when you get down to it, its animation/appearance differs, and it's functions considerably different from Fox Illusion (travels diagonally instead of horizontally, has a distinct sour spot in the initial attack, and a distinct sweet spot meteor smash at the end of the attack, and it can clip through stages as well).

Marth and Ike
Overall clone score = 0.5/25 = 2%

Additional notes: For the misc. score, no shared animations nor similar physics. A score of 0 here.

For other notes, their Counters, while having different animations, have near identical functions, enough for me to consider them semi-cloned moves. Outside that however, the only similarity in their movesets is they wield swords. If someone call these two semi-clones, you have to question if they realise a clone is not two similar looking characters from the same series, and/or they have highly unrealistic expectations on how different two similar looking characters must be to not be considered some sort of clone.

Conclusion
The six pair of clone characters in Melee were indeed clones. Mario and Luigi were indeed semi-clones in Melee as well.

For Brawl, Mario and Luigi still have enough to be considered semi-clones, though they continue to differentiate from each other. Fox/Falco and Captain Falcon/Ganondorf have been successfully decloned to semi-cloned characters. Toon Link is indeed no more than a semi-clone of Link, as the similarities between them are well below those of the bonafide clones in Melee (the two also scored lower than Melee Mario/Luigi did). Ness/Lucas just have enough where it's not inappropriate to consider them semi-clones. However, if they didn't have near identical physics, they would not have enough shared to be appropriately called semi-clones.

For Fox and Wolf, it's just plain ignorant to call them semi-clones. Wolf has one cloned move, that fits him, and that's it. It's insulting to deride Wolf as some sort of clone and ignore just how different he is just for one move and a final smash. For Marth/Ike, while clone claims for them were mostly a thing of the past, calling them clones/semi-clones stretches the definition of a clone so far, where it entirely loses meaning.

For a concluding statement, fans should be less phobic towards clones in general. Potential characters for a new Smash game get rejected on the basis that "they'll just be a clone of X", even though there is no way to know how a character will be designed. Characters get called to be removed for perceived "cloneness", oblivious to the fact that characters become more unique with each game. Similar looking characters get derided as being clones, seemingly for the sake of it. And some fans just seem to have impossibly high standards on how different two characters must be, where just one similarity, the developers were lazy on that character, regardless of how unique the character actually is in the rest of their moveset, and how much the move fits the character they perceive as a "clone". With so many characters who have so many moves, you're bound to get moves that are similar. Instead of deriding Nintendo for not being able to complete the impossible task of making every character 100% different from each other, embrace how different and unique the characters actually are, and appreciate the fact they were able to create that many unique characters with so many attacks in a single game.