Talk:Green (game)

Split

Why was she split from the Leaf page? They're basically the same character. Green's outfit still references the FRLG one, includes the same bag and does the exact same posing as she did in FRLG at the start of a battle. If we allow this, then Gold should absolutely be split from Ethan as well. --Johto (talk) 01:28, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

I don't really feel like getting back into this debate, but yeah, I agree. It seems (and has always seemed) like we're applying different rules to different pages.

If anything this whole thing speaks volumes about how Pokemon handles... things, for lack of a better term. I'm reminded of the whole Ultra Beasts/Legendaries debate. If the Pokemon Company doesn't run on common sense then it's hard for us to, as much as I desperately wish we could.

If I had the mental energy to push for the pages to be remerged I absolutely would. But I feel like it's kind of a futile effort. I highly doubt anyone will listen. In my experience it has been hard for us normal folk to make any changes happen. I'm just going to passively voice my support for a merge, and (probably) leave it at that. Apologies for the apathy. --celadonk (talk) 02:09, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

I agree they are basically the same character. As far as I know, the pages were split mainly because the name "Leaf" has now been used in Pokémon Masters. This is the first time the name "Leaf" is used in an official game. Before Masters, the name "Leaf" was just a name commonly used by fans. That name appeared in the hidden game data, but so did "Ninten" for Red in previous games, and in my experience no one seriously calls Red "Ninten". "Leaf" was also one names suggested for both FRLG players (each player had 21 name suggestions, depending on the language), and the name "Leaf" was used in a couple of official figures from 2019 that predate her appearance in Masters.

I guess if the Generation II version of Gold appear in Masters with the name "Gold", then Gold would be split from Ethan as well. The name "Gold" has never been used for the game character in any official media, as far as I know. "Gold" is still just a fan name for that game character. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 02:32, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

I also must say that this shadow split is kind of a sham move. At least Kris and Lyra both appear together in Pokémon Masters, which puts the final nail in that debate's coffin; in this case, only Leaf appears in the game while having an obvious Let's Go, Eevee! reference as her Pokémon, so if anything, the implied takeaway is that Green is indeed merely a different incarnation of the same character (as they clearly share the same root with the unused Generation I design). Mind, this could always change in the future, but there is no sign in current datamines and the article should reflect present information, which the merged version was already doing adequately. The Green/Leaf discussion is far from over, but any further splits, like Gold and Ethan, would just be pedantic. LeafyGreens (talk) 17:08, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Green is more minor than Leaf so the chances of her appearing in Masters with Leaf would be slim. Gold and Ethan's designs are too similar in comparison to the female counterparts so I see why Gold is treated as Ethan. SeanWheeler (talk) 18:11, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

The same can be said of Kris, who seemed even less likely to show up in Pokémon Masters given she hasn't appeared since 2000. The reason for the redesign is not complex: since the Let's Go games are based on Generation I (specifically Yellow), Blue and Red make nostalgic appearances based on their original Generation I and II design instead of designs from Generation III or later. The female character's established design would therefore be inconsistent with them, and her common (initially placeholder) name is a reference to LeafGreen, which Let's Go isn't trying to remake, necessitating a revamp. The hatless, black outfit design is a deliberate callback to the well-known hypothetical Generation I design, better matching the oldschool look of the other two characters, while her name as an NPC is a homage to her Special/Adventures manga counterpart, which broadly popularized her existence as a character and was among the first media to use color-themed naming for the main characters. For all intents and purposes, they are the same character as of now, the difference being they fulfill separate roles due to Let's Go having new playable avatars. LeafyGreens (talk) 20:31, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

I wouldn't say Kris would have been less likely to show up than Green because she was extremely popular and her differences from Lyra are more drastic than the changes between Gold and Ethan or even Leaf and Green. I would have liked Green to be Leaf but she is what she is. And besides the split was done. And I don't want to go back to that awkward page that inconsistently called the subject Leaf and Green. SeanWheeler (talk) 20:44, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Kris was supplanted by Lyra in HeartGold/SoulSilver, so the chance of them appearing together certainly seemed very unlikely, whereas Let's Go Green has a modern appearance and would be more representative of Eevee. As I understand it, Lyra was also designed from scratch, which is why her design differs so much from Kris (except, vaguely, the hair shape); in contrast, FireRed/LeafGreen Leaf draws inspiration from the hypothetical Generation I girl, and Let's Go Green references both. The point is that the article split was premature and shouldn't have happened, at least not yet, much less without community consensus at this juncture. Again, I admit this is subject to change and we could see Leaf and Green in the same product, but in the event that doesn't happen by the time Pokémon Masters support ends, there should be a demand to merge the page back. LeafyGreens (talk) 22:30, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

I think this should be pointed out: the Japanese name of Leaf’s trainer move, 「みんなでいくよ！」, is not a direct reference to the Let’s Go games, Oak’s trainer move is rather named Let’s Go! , 「レッツ ゴー!」, in Japanese, this being a reference to his final sentence in the introduction of the Generation I games.—Mister Wu (talk) 21:09, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Just here to mention Kris and Lyra have long since been confirmed to be separate characters and have no reason to be compared in this situation. There is no final nail or excuse of popularity drummed up by Masters. It's just a decade-old fact that Masters is capitalizing on. Kai * the Arc Toraph 22:39, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

So what? Do you want the page to be merged back to an article titled "Green (game)" but calls the subject Leaf for two thirds of it? Whether or not the decision to split is premature, it's better than the inconsistent naming in the article. SeanWheeler (talk) 22:58, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

@Arc Toraphim: I'm aware of that, hence why I brought up that Lyra was not designed with Kris in mind. I forgot where I read it exactly, so thanks for that. However, the situation is still comparable since they are female characters added to re-releases/remakes that have been replaced by a new design in a subsequent reimagining, just that one set of character designs have shown to coexist while the other has, so far, not.

@SeanWheeler: If the article is merged back, the title would ideally be whichever is most common of the two, which right now would be Leaf. No matter what, there is baggage with either name, as Leaf originated as placeholder text and Green regionally flips with Blue. We can cross that bridge if and when we get there, since Pokémon Masters will be actively supported for a while. LeafyGreens (talk) 23:25, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

I know I'm late to this party, but I agree the page should be merged back together. It seems like to me that Green/Blue's design was probably an homage to the unnamed female character to reference how she was originally considered for Gen 1 in that design. It's no different to how Red's or other characters (like Misty) outfit differs overtime. Also, her name change being Green/Blue in Let's Go was probably made to reference to the first three games by having Red, Blue and Green appear as a little Easter egg I'm guessing.-- --Handmaiden 101 (tAlk) 07:04, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

(Resetting the conversation indent) While I do think that Leaf and Green should be merged or at list mentioned on the same page. I do think that when they are remerged, I think Red, Green and Blue should have a more detailed section under their Let's Go section, complete with another character info box. While they're the same character, they're different interpretations of the character, following similar roles to previous games. If they aren't merged and Leaf and Green are still considered different characters, I think there should really be a Red (Let's Go) and Blue (Let's Go) page since again, they're different interpretations of the characters. The anime equivalent to this would be the main anime series interpretation and the I Choose You! movie interpretation of Ash, they're the exact same character but are different in the sense of purpose. TrainerSplash (talk) 07:52, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Green can clearly be classified as a couterpart of Leaf and should be hadded in the leaf page as a counterpart, or at least be mentioned as a couterpart with a link for this page

Their clearly diferent universe versions of the same character and just cause they changed her name over time shouldn't be a motif to separate them as completely diferent entitys, yes both characters have diferent goals, just like Red From let's Go has diferent goals from the Original Red of the other games, one becames champion and the other dont cares about that or even carde about defeting team rocket. Ash as diferente name from Red and even Ash is mention in Red page as his couterpart, and they look more diferent than leaf and Green. Leaf and Green both have same hair, same face same pose and their outfits are very similar wiht the let'sgo version of the outfit beeing a fusion of the leafgreen and Orogonal green manga outifts. And more, in the recen animation we can see Green wiht a pokmdex talking wiht porfessor oak reporting her catches jusy like the leaf from the FireRed LeafGreen, and at then end its made a paralel between her and both Red and Blue who apear at the end, this new animation made even more clear that their goals are even more similar and clearly a adaption of the original protagonist as a npc. We shoudl use the same parameters to classify all the characters, if ash and red are mentioned in both pages as couterparts, Green shoult at least apear like that in Leafs page and even with only a redirection link. - unsigned comment from Obrigada Jim (talk • contribs)

Move

The current title "Green (game)" appears to be about the game named Pokémon Green.

Maybe we can move this to "Green (video game character)" instead? --Daniel Carrero (talk) 20:23, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

I agree, it's an ambiguous dabtag. "(video game character)" is a little lengthier than I think it needs to be, though; couldn't it just be "Green (game character)"? As far as I know, there aren't any other Greens in games, video or not (at least in the English-speaking realm). Storm Aurora (talk) 01:29, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

If it helps to give this thread more attention to make a move happen faster, know that I misguessed Green's tag twice before using "game". first using "character". I too assume that a Green distinguished by "(game)" is probably the video game. Salmancer (talk) 17:44, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Related discussion: Bulbapedia talk:Editor's Hub#About the page titles like Red (game), Blue (game), etc. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 02:21, 18 February 2024 (UTC)