@Jovian: about half the examples currently on the page are misuse. It is easy to see from those examples (and the current description) that the duo of Ken and Ryu is famous for half a dozen things other than this trope. Such as Friendly Rivals, Blue Oni Red Oni, Palette Swap, and so forth.
This is precisely why we tend to deprecate character-named tropes. Wherever there is a trope named "The Jim" which is about trait X of character Jim, then we should ask ourselves (1) are there other famous characters named Jim (e.g. Christie Time was renamed because it turns out there are multiple famous people named Christie) and (2) is Jim famous for other things than trait X? (e.g. what is going on right here).
I find most examples to be correct, but the descriptions of the examples are often highlighting the wrong things, or describing things irrelevant to the trope. Mainly being too hung up on comparing them to the actual Ryo and Ken, but also a lot about how they evolve to become different, or how they look like the trope but aren't really. Which is probably just as bad as straight misuse in terms of renaming qualifications.
I personally like Ryu and Ken s Trope Namers because if you don't know much about the plot and dynamics of Street Fighter but you have a loose graps of the characters, the salient thing about Ryu and Ken is that they play similarly and have many moves in common. That said you have to limit the context to fighting games, so real life section should be cut.
The Trope here is just in a world or game with several unique Special moves, Signature Tecniques, or Playstyles there are two characters or more characters that have most of those things in common, and may or may not be balanced differently.
If you were to rename it to get rid of Ryu and Ken, I'd call it Character Clones based off the Smash Bros term
Interesting fact: did you know that Science Ninja Team also has two major characters called Ryu and Ken, who are two parts of a Five-Man Band? And so does Ninja Gaiden (a father and son pair), and Fist of the North Star (a mentor and trainee pair). So not only do both individual names fail the One Mario Limit (big time; they're both very common names), but the pair of names fails the One Mario Limit.
We cannot expect every reader know that these names refer to Street Fighter. Even to people vaguely familiar with Street Fighter, I'd expect them to either know that they're rivals or opposites, rather than knowing that they're both Shoto Clones.
okaay, then rename to Character Clones or Moveset Clone and fix the description. I think most examples are using it right just skimming through the page, so i don't know why this trope is at issue all of a sudden. But if you want to change the name go ahead.
They're either exactly the same, or similar. Which may include smaller tweaks. The point is that you're going to be familiar with one if you've played the other, and that it's one way or another a shortcut in the production.
The point of the trope is that they play the same, not necessarily look the same, yes? So Mario and Luigi from Super Mario World are not an example, since they explicitly have different jump physics.
...In that case, I agree that Moveset Clone is a better name.
We had all these discussions on the name that we haven't really done much to resolve clarifying the definition.
I suggested that it be made video-game only to pretty much be about characters who yes, don't necessarily look similar but have similar movesets.
Now, Mario and Luigi in the later games are... tough to say, since their jump physics are different, but they still have the same moves usually, just with a different jump. But... they're the only playable characters in the game. So what's the point of comparison, there? Is that tweak in jump enough to make them not fit the trope?
My point is that the trope is more than just "characters with the same moveset", though. Another Duck is exactly right in saying that the trope is about characters that are largely similar — so that a playing used to using one would be able to play the other without much adjustment — but not identical. Whether the difference is stats, or elemental affinity, or moveset, or what, it's all the same trope. It's not at all limited to moveset, which is why I don't like the idea of naming it "moveset clone".
This might be a stupid question, but doesn't this trope require that the games also have playable characters that don't share the same abilities/moveset/stats?
Mario and Luigi sharing the same moveset doesn't count when they are the only two playable characters. (but they do count if it also possible to play with Toad, Peach or Yoshi.)
Alright, so the trope is two characters who essentially play as "tweaks" of each other, with subtle differences to them such as minor changes to moves, elements, power, but still noticeably play similarly. My definition is... admittedly terrible, but the basic spirit of the trope seems pretty clear to most of us.
What does this mean for non-video game examples? Because when Spark first brought it up, that's where the real mess was apparent to me. I mean... I really have no idea what the criteria are there.
It's a gameplay trope, so it only applies to video games (and, I suppose, board games and card games, where applicable). All other examples belong on Bash Brothers, Friendly Rivals, and so forth instead.
Alternative Titles: Ryu And Ken
12th Jun '13 6:01:02 AM
Vote up names you like, vote down names you don't. Whether or not the title will actually be changed is determined with a different kind of crowner (the Single Proposition crowner). This one just collects and ranks alternative titles.