• 57 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by Hailinel (23685 posts) -

Is it really necessary to have separate entries for bosses and boss fights? The two go hand-in-hand.

#2 Posted by BeachThunder (11645 posts) -

Yeah, I've never really got the separation of those two concepts =|

Inherently a boss fight must include a boss; also, if a boss cannot be fought, is it actually a boss?

#3 Edited by Doctorchimp (4067 posts) -

@Hailinel: You can have two bosses in a boss fight dude....

And a boss fight without a boss...

Think about it

#4 Posted by Hailinel (23685 posts) -

@Doctorchimp said:

@Hailinel: You can have two bosses in a boss fight dude....

There's a separate concept for that.

#5 Posted by Trav (241 posts) -

I would think bosses would be considered characters, potentially those not fought in one part of a franchise but still present, and a boss fight would be considered a pure concept. But I can see how they would be combined.

Also, what about mini-bosses?

#6 Edited by Doctorchimp (4067 posts) -

@Hailinel said:

@Doctorchimp said:

@Hailinel: You can have two bosses in a boss fight dude....

There's a separate concept for that.

Multiple Enemy Boss Fight is still a boss fight.

Bosses are the actual creature. Boss Fight is the encounter. How would you classify all the times you see the boss creature without actually fighting? If anything maybe get rid of boss fight.

Actually yeah, boss fight is redundant as hell, I actually agree with you now. We don't have a pokemon battle page, just a pokemon concept. Pokemon fight we get it.

#7 Edited by Doctorchimp (4067 posts) -

@Trav said:

I would think bosses would be considered characters, potentially those not fought in one part of a franchise but still present, and a boss fight would be considered a pure concept. But I can see how they would be combined.

Also, what about mini-bosses?

From what I understand characters are specific NPCs with names. Character classes are always concepts, because it's not tangible.

Bowser is the character, he's a boss character class as a concept.

#8 Posted by Freshbandito (642 posts) -

yeah seems a boss is a character concept and a boss fight is a gameplay concept that features boss characters. I can see both existing perfectly fine.

#9 Posted by LordAndrew (14417 posts) -

@Trav: If a boss character is not a boss in a particular game (and there are no other bosses), don't add the boss concept to that game. Simple. The one Boss concept works fine for both games and characters.

#10 Posted by Doctorchimp (4067 posts) -

@Freshbandito said:

yeah seems a boss is a character concept and a boss fight is a gameplay concept that features boss characters. I can see both existing perfectly fine.

But the fight is inherent to the description of a boss.

If bowser fights nobody in a game, he isn't a boss in that game.

#11 Posted by Freshbandito (642 posts) -

@Doctorchimp said:

@Freshbandito said:

yeah seems a boss is a character concept and a boss fight is a gameplay concept that features boss characters. I can see both existing perfectly fine.

But the fight is inherent to the description of a boss.

If bowser fights nobody in a game, he isn't a boss in that game.

A sport can't play out without a sportsman, doesn't mean they both need to become the same concept.

#12 Posted by Video_Game_King (35834 posts) -

You've been on a roll with all these wiki deletions, recently. Will Open World and Sandbox fall prey next (along with Full Reactive Eyes Entertainment, because it sounds like pretty much the same thing)?

Although yea, combine the fuck out of these. It's hard to think of any instances where you face a boss, but don't fight them. Yet even then, maybe a page for "bosses you don't fight" might be needed?

#13 Posted by Guided_By_Tigers (8060 posts) -

This has been brought up a couple of times in the past, here is a thread from 4 years ago discussing this

The pages were decided to be kept separate and here was GMan's (a staff member) reasoning behind keeping them seperate:

@GMan said:

Hmmm...I think it could be argued that they could each have their own page. My opinion would be to keep them separate. You could talk about the individual bosses (and how big of douches they can be) and the Boss Fights can talk about the zaniness that usually goes on during. I'll grab the opinion of one of the other guys later today.

As far as Bosses and not fighting them, I'm thinking back to the original Super Mario Bros. It was possible to jump over Bowser and not have to actually fight him. Sure reaching the area behind him caused him to fall into the lava but jumping over a dude doesn't really seem like a fight.

His explanation seems pretty flimsy though, because they pretty much go hand in hand.....I agree that they should be combined.

#14 Posted by The_Nubster (2037 posts) -

They should be kept separate.

A boss is a kind of character. A boss fight is an encounter with that character.

For example, in Deus Ex: Human Revolution, you see all of the bosses at the beginning of the game, but their boss fight isn't until later. There's another example of bosses and boss fights being separate in that game, but I can't say for spoilers and it doesn't matter much.

In DK64, you see King K.Rool in cutscenes, and he's the final boss. The boss fight, however, isn't until the end of the game.

A boss is a type of character, whereas a boss fight is when you beat the ever-loving fuck out of that character. A class of NPC and a fight aren't the same.

#15 Posted by Hailinel (23685 posts) -

@The_Nubster said:

They should be kept separate.

A boss is a kind of character. A boss fight is an encounter with that character.

For example, in Deus Ex: Human Revolution, you see all of the bosses at the beginning of the game, but their boss fight isn't until later. There's another example of bosses and boss fights being separate in that game, but I can't say for spoilers and it doesn't matter much.

In DK64, you see King K.Rool in cutscenes, and he's the final boss. The boss fight, however, isn't until the end of the game.

A boss is a type of character, whereas a boss fight is when you beat the ever-loving fuck out of that character. A class of NPC and a fight aren't the same.

But a boss fight is intrinsic to the presence of a boss. A character isn't actually a proper boss unless there is also a boss fight with said character.

#16 Posted by The_Nubster (2037 posts) -

@Hailinel said:

@The_Nubster said:

They should be kept separate.

A boss is a kind of character. A boss fight is an encounter with that character.

For example, in Deus Ex: Human Revolution, you see all of the bosses at the beginning of the game, but their boss fight isn't until later. There's another example of bosses and boss fights being separate in that game, but I can't say for spoilers and it doesn't matter much.

In DK64, you see King K.Rool in cutscenes, and he's the final boss. The boss fight, however, isn't until the end of the game.

A boss is a type of character, whereas a boss fight is when you beat the ever-loving fuck out of that character. A class of NPC and a fight aren't the same.

But a boss fight is intrinsic to the presence of a boss. A character isn't actually a proper boss unless there is also a boss fight with said character.

And there are boss fights, but not until later. Each of those characters have boss fights, but a boss fight doesn't need to happen every time the boss is present, or shown. A boss can have a boss fight at each appearance, or a boss can simply foreshadow the later fights. Either way, a fight still happens. It doesn't have to be every time, though.

#17 Posted by Hailinel (23685 posts) -

@The_Nubster said:

@Hailinel said:

@The_Nubster said:

They should be kept separate.

A boss is a kind of character. A boss fight is an encounter with that character.

For example, in Deus Ex: Human Revolution, you see all of the bosses at the beginning of the game, but their boss fight isn't until later. There's another example of bosses and boss fights being separate in that game, but I can't say for spoilers and it doesn't matter much.

In DK64, you see King K.Rool in cutscenes, and he's the final boss. The boss fight, however, isn't until the end of the game.

A boss is a type of character, whereas a boss fight is when you beat the ever-loving fuck out of that character. A class of NPC and a fight aren't the same.

But a boss fight is intrinsic to the presence of a boss. A character isn't actually a proper boss unless there is also a boss fight with said character.

And there are boss fights, but not until later. Each of those characters have boss fights, but a boss fight doesn't need to happen every time the boss is present, or shown. A boss can have a boss fight at each appearance, or a boss can simply foreshadow the later fights. Either way, a fight still happens. It doesn't have to be every time, though.

Concepts are specific from game to game. Bowser may be a boss in a lot of games, but he isn't a boss in every game that he appears in. If a player engages in a boss fight with Bowser even once at any point in the game, no matter how many times he appears in the game prior to that fight, then he is a boss. If he appears, but there is no boss fight with him at all over the course of the entire game, then he is not a boss. It's as simple as that.

#18 Posted by The_Nubster (2037 posts) -

@Hailinel said:

@The_Nubster said:

@Hailinel said:

@The_Nubster said:

They should be kept separate.

A boss is a kind of character. A boss fight is an encounter with that character.

For example, in Deus Ex: Human Revolution, you see all of the bosses at the beginning of the game, but their boss fight isn't until later. There's another example of bosses and boss fights being separate in that game, but I can't say for spoilers and it doesn't matter much.

In DK64, you see King K.Rool in cutscenes, and he's the final boss. The boss fight, however, isn't until the end of the game.

A boss is a type of character, whereas a boss fight is when you beat the ever-loving fuck out of that character. A class of NPC and a fight aren't the same.

But a boss fight is intrinsic to the presence of a boss. A character isn't actually a proper boss unless there is also a boss fight with said character.

And there are boss fights, but not until later. Each of those characters have boss fights, but a boss fight doesn't need to happen every time the boss is present, or shown. A boss can have a boss fight at each appearance, or a boss can simply foreshadow the later fights. Either way, a fight still happens. It doesn't have to be every time, though.

Concepts are specific from game to game. Bowser may be a boss in a lot of games, but he isn't a boss in every game that he appears in. If a player engages in a boss fight with Bowser even once at any point in the game, no matter how many times he appears in the game prior to that fight, then he is a boss. If he appears, but there is no boss fight with him at all over the course of the entire game, then he is not a boss. It's as simple as that.

Precisely.

So he can be a boss character in Super Mario 3D Land, because he's the final fight, but in Mario Kart [x], he isn't because there is no final opponent. Which brings it back around to my point: a boss fight is an encounter with a boss character, and a boss is the classification of a character. You can't combine a fight with a class, because they're two different things. They should stay separate because of this, even though they're so closely intertwined.

#19 Posted by LordAndrew (14417 posts) -

A boss is a boss because there's a boss fight. If there's no boss fight, the character is not considered a boss for that game. The concept separation doesn't clarify anything, because a game doesn't inherit concepts from characters.

#20 Posted by Hailinel (23685 posts) -

@The_Nubster said:

@Hailinel said:

@The_Nubster said:

@Hailinel said:

@The_Nubster said:

They should be kept separate.

A boss is a kind of character. A boss fight is an encounter with that character.

For example, in Deus Ex: Human Revolution, you see all of the bosses at the beginning of the game, but their boss fight isn't until later. There's another example of bosses and boss fights being separate in that game, but I can't say for spoilers and it doesn't matter much.

In DK64, you see King K.Rool in cutscenes, and he's the final boss. The boss fight, however, isn't until the end of the game.

A boss is a type of character, whereas a boss fight is when you beat the ever-loving fuck out of that character. A class of NPC and a fight aren't the same.

But a boss fight is intrinsic to the presence of a boss. A character isn't actually a proper boss unless there is also a boss fight with said character.

And there are boss fights, but not until later. Each of those characters have boss fights, but a boss fight doesn't need to happen every time the boss is present, or shown. A boss can have a boss fight at each appearance, or a boss can simply foreshadow the later fights. Either way, a fight still happens. It doesn't have to be every time, though.

Concepts are specific from game to game. Bowser may be a boss in a lot of games, but he isn't a boss in every game that he appears in. If a player engages in a boss fight with Bowser even once at any point in the game, no matter how many times he appears in the game prior to that fight, then he is a boss. If he appears, but there is no boss fight with him at all over the course of the entire game, then he is not a boss. It's as simple as that.

Precisely.

So he can be a boss character in Super Mario 3D Land, because he's the final fight, but in Mario Kart [x], he isn't because there is no final opponent. Which brings it back around to my point: a boss fight is an encounter with a boss character, and a boss is the classification of a character. You can't combine a fight with a class, because they're two different things. They should stay separate because of this, even though they're so closely intertwined.

Uh, no.

In the games in which he appears as a boss (in which case, those games should be tagged with the Bosses concept), there will naturally be a boss fight with him.

Concept pages can refer to more than one other page category. Just because individual characters act as bosses does not mean that games that feature them can't also be tagged with the same concept. Because as I've said before, you can't have a boss fight without a boss, and you can't have a boss without a boss fight.

#21 Posted by Freshbandito (642 posts) -

@Hailinel: This is starting to get into the philosophical debate on what you think the word 'Boss' means. A boss character and a boss encounter are different things and are approached differently from a design stand point, many people will recall a boss for being a memorable character and many people will remember a boss fight for having memorable mechanics but they will recognise those as being two distinctly seperate things.

#22 Posted by Hailinel (23685 posts) -

@Freshbandito said:

@Hailinel: This is starting to get into the philosophical debate on what you think the word 'Boss' means. A boss character and a boss encounter are different things and are approached differently from a design stand point, many people will recall a boss for being a memorable character and many people will remember a boss fight for having memorable mechanics but they will recognise those as being two distinctly seperate things.

This isn't philosophy. it's logic.

  1. To have A, B must also be present.
  2. To have B, A must also be present.
  3. Therefore, to have A or B, both must be present.
#23 Posted by The_Nubster (2037 posts) -

@Hailinel said:

@The_Nubster said:

@Hailinel said:

@The_Nubster said:

@Hailinel said:

@The_Nubster said:

They should be kept separate.

A boss is a kind of character. A boss fight is an encounter with that character.

For example, in Deus Ex: Human Revolution, you see all of the bosses at the beginning of the game, but their boss fight isn't until later. There's another example of bosses and boss fights being separate in that game, but I can't say for spoilers and it doesn't matter much.

In DK64, you see King K.Rool in cutscenes, and he's the final boss. The boss fight, however, isn't until the end of the game.

A boss is a type of character, whereas a boss fight is when you beat the ever-loving fuck out of that character. A class of NPC and a fight aren't the same.

But a boss fight is intrinsic to the presence of a boss. A character isn't actually a proper boss unless there is also a boss fight with said character.

And there are boss fights, but not until later. Each of those characters have boss fights, but a boss fight doesn't need to happen every time the boss is present, or shown. A boss can have a boss fight at each appearance, or a boss can simply foreshadow the later fights. Either way, a fight still happens. It doesn't have to be every time, though.

Concepts are specific from game to game. Bowser may be a boss in a lot of games, but he isn't a boss in every game that he appears in. If a player engages in a boss fight with Bowser even once at any point in the game, no matter how many times he appears in the game prior to that fight, then he is a boss. If he appears, but there is no boss fight with him at all over the course of the entire game, then he is not a boss. It's as simple as that.

Precisely.

So he can be a boss character in Super Mario 3D Land, because he's the final fight, but in Mario Kart [x], he isn't because there is no final opponent. Which brings it back around to my point: a boss fight is an encounter with a boss character, and a boss is the classification of a character. You can't combine a fight with a class, because they're two different things. They should stay separate because of this, even though they're so closely intertwined.

Uh, no.

In the games in which he appears as a boss (in which case, those games should be tagged with the Bosses concept), there will naturally be a boss fight with him.

Concept pages can refer to more than one other page category. Just because individual characters act as bosses does not mean that games that feature them can't also be tagged with the same concept. Because as I've said before, you can't have a boss fight without a boss, and you can't have a boss without a boss fight.

Alright, I'll yield. You definitely know more about the Wiki than I do, so your side of this holds up better.

#24 Posted by LordAndrew (14417 posts) -

Memorable mechanics - attached to game

Memorable character - attached to character

Simple.

#25 Posted by Freshbandito (642 posts) -

@Hailinel said:

@Freshbandito said:

@Hailinel: This is starting to get into the philosophical debate on what you think the word 'Boss' means. A boss character and a boss encounter are different things and are approached differently from a design stand point, many people will recall a boss for being a memorable character and many people will remember a boss fight for having memorable mechanics but they will recognise those as being two distinctly seperate things.

This isn't philosophy. it's logic.

  1. To have A, B must also be present.
  2. To have B, A must also be present.
  3. Therefore, to have A or B, both must be present.

To have a Son there must be Father and Mother, does this make them one and the same? A boss character can be described without ever mentioning the encounter/fight involving them (whether there is one or not) to me it seems perfectly logical to have a page about boss characters and a page about boss fights as both can be discussed completely seperately.

#26 Posted by BeachThunder (11645 posts) -

@Freshbandito said:

@Hailinel: This is starting to get into the philosophical debate on what you think the word 'Boss' means. A boss character and a boss encounter are different things and are approached differently from a design stand point, many people will recall a boss for being a memorable character and many people will remember a boss fight for having memorable mechanics but they will recognise those as being two distinctly seperate things.

You are misunderstanding; they are separate things. However, they are two things that are so strongly entwined that you may as well be referring to two subheadings of the same concept.

The problem comes when attaching stuff to the wiki; the fact that both of these pages exist means there's going to be a bunch of redundancy (and confusion). Both lists would likely contain the exact list of games; in reality though, they don't. The differences between the two concepts (bosses - the actual enemies involved; and boss fights - the fight itself) probably should be summed up all on one page. One heading would talk about how bosses are usually bigger/stronger/etc... the other part would talk about how boss encounters are often much more complicated and involved than regular fights.

We don't need to pretend that they're the same, but we should recognise that they go hand in hand and can easily take the space of a single article.

#27 Posted by Freshbandito (642 posts) -

@BeachThunder: I'll concede the point, your wording has convinced me that one page talking about both bosses and boss fights seperately but under one linkable concept is for the better.

#28 Edited by Video_Game_King (35834 posts) -

@Freshbandito:

Actually, I tested his argument with some truth tables, and it's perfectly valid. You can't have a boss without a boss fight, and you can't have a boss fight without a boss.

#29 Posted by Freshbandito (642 posts) -

@Video_Game_King: Well I'm not one for arguing with tables or any other common furniture for that matter. But can they answer the questions of a man's heart, the deep down questions that we can only feel? like whether you can have a hoe-down without a hootanany?

#30 Posted by StarFoxA (5137 posts) -

@Trav said:

Also, what about mini-bosses?

There's a concept for that.

#31 Posted by MEATBALL (3017 posts) -

We should definitely make it more difficult for people to find something specific.

#32 Posted by mosespippy (3983 posts) -

@Hailinel said:

@Freshbandito said:

@Hailinel: This is starting to get into the philosophical debate on what you think the word 'Boss' means. A boss character and a boss encounter are different things and are approached differently from a design stand point, many people will recall a boss for being a memorable character and many people will remember a boss fight for having memorable mechanics but they will recognise those as being two distinctly seperate things.

This isn't philosophy. it's logic.

  1. To have A, B must also be present.
  2. To have B, A must also be present.
  3. Therefore, to have A or B, both must be present.

A does not equal B and B does not equal A. They need each other to exist but they are not the same thing. From a site navigation stand point it makes sense to merge the pages into one clear page. From a data perspective they are different things and should be kept as different pages. I can see this going either way and I don't have any option on which is better.

#33 Posted by Yummylee (21208 posts) -

''Boss'' has now lost all meaning for me after reading through this thread.

#34 Posted by MrKlorox (11198 posts) -

So when you see Death at the beginning of Symphony of the Night and he takes all your items, he's not considered a boss at that time since you don't fight him yet? The line of reasoning in this thread isn't very strong.
 
I say they both deserve a page.

#35 Posted by Hailinel (23685 posts) -
@MrKlorox
So when you see Death at the beginning of Symphony of the Night and he takes all your items, he's not considered a boss at that time since you don't fight him yet? The line of reasoning in this thread isn't very strong.
 
I say they both deserve a page.
Do you fight Death at any point in Symphony of the Night? If yes, he's a boss with a boss fight. If not, then no.
#36 Posted by LordAndrew (14417 posts) -

It doesn't even matter if he's a boss at that point, because Giant Bomb's software doesn't allow association of concepts to only a portion of the game. He's a boss elsewhere in the game, and therefore a boss within the context of the game.

#37 Posted by MrKlorox (11198 posts) -
@Hailinel said:
@MrKlorox
So when you see Death at the beginning of Symphony of the Night and he takes all your items, he's not considered a boss at that time since you don't fight him yet? The line of reasoning in this thread isn't very strong.
 
I say they both deserve a page.
Do you fight Death at any point in Symphony of the Night? If yes, he's a boss with a boss fight. If not, then no.
You can finish one path of that game without ever fighting him. So there's a boss encounter without a boss fight.
#38 Posted by LordAndrew (14417 posts) -

But you'd still add the Boss Fight concept, right? Since he can be fought.

#39 Posted by Hailinel (23685 posts) -
@MrKlorox
@Hailinel said:
@MrKlorox
So when you see Death at the beginning of Symphony of the Night and he takes all your items, he's not considered a boss at that time since you don't fight him yet? The line of reasoning in this thread isn't very strong.
 
I say they both deserve a page.
Do you fight Death at any point in Symphony of the Night? If yes, he's a boss with a boss fight. If not, then no.
You can finish one path of that game without ever fighting him. So there's a boss encounter without a boss fight.
Regardless of that, if he can be fought in a path, not all paths, but a path, then he is a boss that can be fought. It doesn't require multiple concepts.
#40 Posted by believer258 (11564 posts) -

@Hailinel said:

@Freshbandito said:

@Hailinel: This is starting to get into the philosophical debate on what you think the word 'Boss' means. A boss character and a boss encounter are different things and are approached differently from a design stand point, many people will recall a boss for being a memorable character and many people will remember a boss fight for having memorable mechanics but they will recognise those as being two distinctly seperate things.

This isn't philosophy. it's logic.

  1. To have A, B must also be present.
  2. To have B, A must also be present.
  3. Therefore, to have A or B, both must be present.

I'm pretty sure there's at least one other thing in this world where two things cannot exist without each other, but are different concepts. The fact that you can separate them as A and B means that they are, in fact, two separate things.

The boss is the character, the boss fight is the battle against said character.

Just my two cents.

#41 Posted by Hailinel (23685 posts) -
@believer258

@Hailinel said:

@Freshbandito said:

@Hailinel: This is starting to get into the philosophical debate on what you think the word 'Boss' means. A boss character and a boss encounter are different things and are approached differently from a design stand point, many people will recall a boss for being a memorable character and many people will remember a boss fight for having memorable mechanics but they will recognise those as being two distinctly seperate things.

This isn't philosophy. it's logic.

  1. To have A, B must also be present.
  2. To have B, A must also be present.
  3. Therefore, to have A or B, both must be present.

I'm pretty sure there's at least one other thing in this world where two things cannot exist without each other, but are different concepts. The fact that you can separate them as A and B means that they are, in fact, two separate things.

The boss is the character, the boss fight is the battle against said character.

Just my two cents.

A character is only a boss if he/she/it is fought as one.
#42 Posted by MrKlorox (11198 posts) -

Fine let's go down that road. Does that qualify every NPC in Dark Souls as an enemy then? I mean like you said, there's a path you can take to where you fight/kill them. And since you can choose to fight/kill them there's no need for any other concept, right?
 
As a compromise, 'Boss Encounters That Are Not Fights' and 'Boss Fights' is much more reasonable than lumping everything boss-related together.

#43 Posted by Hailinel (23685 posts) -
@MrKlorox
Fine let's go down that road. Does that qualify every NPC in Dark Souls as an enemy then? I mean like you said, there's a path you can take to where you fight/kill them. And since you can choose to fight/kill them there's no need for any other concept, right?
 
As a compromise, 'Boss Encounters That Are Not Fights' and 'Boss Fights' is much more reasonable than lumping everything boss-related together.
I'm not sure why this is a hard thing to understand. Concepts assigned to games cover the games as a whole, not in part. If Death is fought as a boss in one path, but not in others, that path and encounter is still in the game, where he is a boss to fight. A concept isn't invalid if you don't personally take the path that would lead to a boss encounter.

That being said, SOTN has more than one boss. Even if you don't fight Death, there are others you do fight.
#44 Posted by Demoskinos (14520 posts) -

Hailinel is the grim reaper for Wiki pages. =p

#45 Posted by believer258 (11564 posts) -

@Hailinel said:

@believer258

@Hailinel said:

@Freshbandito said:

@Hailinel: This is starting to get into the philosophical debate on what you think the word 'Boss' means. A boss character and a boss encounter are different things and are approached differently from a design stand point, many people will recall a boss for being a memorable character and many people will remember a boss fight for having memorable mechanics but they will recognise those as being two distinctly seperate things.

This isn't philosophy. it's logic.

  1. To have A, B must also be present.
  2. To have B, A must also be present.
  3. Therefore, to have A or B, both must be present.

I'm pretty sure there's at least one other thing in this world where two things cannot exist without each other, but are different concepts. The fact that you can separate them as A and B means that they are, in fact, two separate things.

The boss is the character, the boss fight is the battle against said character.

Just my two cents.

A character is only a boss if he/she/it is fought as one.

Spectacularly missing the point. I'm pretty sure I quite clearly said that while the two cannot exist without each other, they are still separate entities. Your A and B proof does not dismiss my point. said the same thing.

#46 Posted by Hailinel (23685 posts) -
@believer258 Let me put it more simply. Any game with the Bosses concept would also need to be tagged with the Boss Fight concept as well. I cannot think of a single game that included bosses that did not include at least one boss fight. The relationship they share is intrinsic to the point that having separate pages is a redundancy.
#47 Edited by believer258 (11564 posts) -

@Hailinel said:

@believer258 Let me put it more simply. Any game with the Bosses concept would also need to be tagged with the Boss Fight concept as well. I cannot think of a single game that included bosses that did not include at least one boss fight. The relationship they share is intrinsic to the point that having separate pages is a redundancy.

I disagree on the grounds that one is a type of character and one is a type of gameplay mechanic. Yes, the relationship is intrinsic, but would you say that the seat of a chair and the legs of a chair should be the same concept because you can't have a proper chair without both? One is where you place your bum, one is what keeps the structure upright. You also can't have a proper boss without a boss character and a boss fight.

#48 Posted by LordAndrew (14417 posts) -

It just complicates things to have one for games and one for characters, with no significant benefit. One concept can do the job of two, without being so damn confusing.

#49 Posted by Video_Game_King (35834 posts) -

@Freshbandito:

What I did does not answer questions; it merely tests the validity of arguments. I tested his argument, and the form was valid.

#50 Posted by MikeGosot (3227 posts) -

Well, they ARE separate things. One is A and the other is B. However, one wiki page can hold information about bosses and their fights, and Boss FIght can be an alias, so yeah, combine them.