Talk:Boss (video games)/Archive 2

History/Development of the "Boss"
While I don't have a lot of info to offer up, I'd love to see some history on the development of the "boss." Boss characters were an integral part of the shift from retro games to modern level and story based games. Obviously, Bowser came fairly early in the concept--but Bowser was almost the same every time. Yet, between the time of SMBI and SMBII (american), mini-bosses came into their own and bosses started having character. I would guess that the original MegaMan was also very influential in creating bosses with character and theme, especially in relating that to the level in which they were found. The Legend of Zelda also must have been influential; to the best of my recollection it introduced boss "recycling" where an earlier boss became a mini-boss in later levels. Both Zelda and MegaMan had boss "weak points" or vulnerabilities. Hmmm, actually, reviewing the timelines, MegaMan looks like it came out in 87, and so benefited from the earlier development. Also, Kung-Fu came out in 1984 and had distinct boss characters with unique attacks/strategies. Compare Kung-Fu with other early titles like Ice Climber, Excite Bike, Dunk Hunt, Elevator Action, etc, and I see a distinction. Commando was a very early game too, in 1986, but I don't remember what kinds of bosses (if any) it had. So all in all, I'd love to see a treatise on the development of the boss character from say 1983 to 1988. Seems like it went from being a non-existant technique to being established and ubiquitous in that time frame. Any thoughts?

LoveMe2Times 07:44, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * I'd say you like Nintendo too much. ;)


 * It's a good idea, now I think about it. I've been trying to think back to when bosses became popular (a mite difficult seeing as I would have been about five years old), and it seems that the flash point is in 1985.


 * However, I am quite heavily biased toward scrolling shooters, so I'm probably missing something important. Bosses are, on the other hand, probably more important in scrolling shooters than any other genre, because they have to break up the linearity of the game.


 * Anyway. In 1985, you've that Mario game thingy, and Gradius, which is the first time I can recall having to fight a huge boss character. Then in 1986 you've got Darius, which is the earliest game I know of that had different bosses for every level. I think it had minibosses too.


 * And then it really gets going. In 1987, I can name R-Type, Raiden, and Rainbow Islands as having distinct bosses, and by this point it was all pretty standard. But I'm just namedropping (and article-dropping too, seeing as I wrote most of those articles ;) ). The point is that there seems to be a dark age of bosses before 1985, so it would probably be interesting to unravel that.


 * The very earliest enemy-that-could-conceivably-be-thought-of-as-a-boss that I can think of (not including that Dungeons and Dragons thing mentioned in the article, which I know nothing about) is the Flag Ship from Gorf, an arcade game released in 1981, in the prime of the Space Invaders Era. Gorf was like five games in one, and when the player completed a level, they would move onto a level in the next game.


 * The fifth level was a battle with the Flag Ship. It has all the hallmarks of a boss: It's much bigger than the player's ship, much better armed, has its own forcefield, and is only minorly damaged by the player's weapon. The only way to destroy it is to hit it in its weak spot - a reactor situated deep within the ship.


 * Now I think about it, I don't know why I didn't mention this before. The thing is, I always thought of the Flag Ship as a 'level' rather than a boss. There wasn't really any concept of a boss at that point in history. Still, it's a start. Spottedowl 12:56, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * It's not that I like Nintendo so much, it's just that's what I had and therefore remember ;) Problem is, it's difficult to pin down dates on these games.  Wikipedia has a really nice list of NES games, and the first hundred or so all have the release dates specified.  But I haven't looked at other consoles or arcade games etc.  Getting all of that data fleshed out seems like a great task for WikiPedia.  Anyway, I played all of my side scrolling shooters on my TurboGrafx and Duo, so I tend to think of them as having been later.  But you're right, the arcade originals came a good bit earlier.  You're right that everything was well established by 87; I suggested examining 83-88 for a nice 5 year window, but 84-87 might cover all of the advances.


 * I'm not familiar with Gorf or the D&D example the article mentions. I'm trying to remember arcade games from before I got my NES, but I can only remember PacMan, Asteroids, Space Invaders, Defender, Donkey Kong, Qbert (I think this was before my NES), Elevator Action, and Kung-Fu.  Kung-Fu clearly had well-formed bosses--even more so than Bowser.  They had life meters (where "normal" enemies didn't), unique appearences, unique attack patterns, did extra damage, and came at the end of the level.  I suppose an extensive review of ATARI 2600 games would be in order.  I'm willing to ignore the other early consoles for the moment.


 * Hmm, what about computer games, though? Did early text adventures ever have bosses?  I never really played Zork or Adventure or anything.  However, King's Quest first came out in 1983, although I don't know if you'd consider KQ to have bosses or levels--it had sections I guess.  Rogue was out in like 81 or something, but I've only played Nethack (Hack came out around 85, Nethack shortly thereafter?).  Nethack has bosses of sorts, but I just don't know about Rogue.  This might refresh your memories about early PC games.  All in all, I get the feeling that bosses are pretty much a console phenomenon.
 * LoveMe2Times 22:48, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * To be honest, I don't make a distinction between computer games, console games, video games and arcade games. They're all the same thing to me. This argument has been had several times on Wikipedia already, and I don't think it's going to be settled any time soon. :)


 * But in any case, bosses are certainly not a console phenomenon, any more than, say, parallax scrolling is. Bosses are a fundamental gameplay concept. In fact, I've heard a complaint made before that bosses in arcade games are just a sneaky way of killing off the player to make him put more money into the machine. (Although I don't agree with this.)


 * I'm not terribly familiar with early text adventures, but I doubt they have things that we would call bosses. Text adventures are more about adventure than fighting.


 * Another thought has occurred to me: how old is the walk-along-and-hit-people genre? (The only game I can think of as an example is Golden Axe, but I know there are loads more.) I'm pretty sure that kind of game naturally lent itself to having bosses. Spottedowl 01:31, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * That'd be the side-crolling beat 'em up genre; Kung Fu has already been cited there. -Sean Curtin 02:29, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * Ok, I found a great site to research this a little: Arcade History. Looking through some entries, it seems as though 1982 was a real banner year at the arcade: Dig-Dug, Q-Bert, Pole Position, Moon Patrol, Joust, and Burger Time are all famous.  Significantly, Xevious was also released in 82, and it definitely had an episodic level structure, although I don't remember whether it has bosses.  Also, sounds like it was already innovating:


 * "Xevious was among the first games to use pre-rendered graphics and was the first vertically scrolling shooter to allow you to target both land-based and airborne enemies."


 * 1983 saw Dragon's Lair come out--did it have bosses? It was obviously revolutionary in other ways.  For point of reference, 1983 also saw the original Mario Bros, Sinistar, Spy Hunter, and Star Wars.


 * 1984 looks like things might be coming together. 1942 came out, and I'm almost positive it had bosses.  Kung-Fu comes out, pretty much inventing the beat-em-up genre.  Interesting side note I never knew: apparently it's based on a Jackie Chan movie, "Wheels on Meals"!  Legend of Kage is also 1984 (wow, I thought it must have been later since it had much nicer graphics).  Punch Out!!! had bosses, of sorts, at least in the NES Mike Tyson version where Mike himself was a "boss."  The arcade version was 1984.


 * By 1985 the idea is used several places: Gradius, Gun Smoke, Ghosts'n'Goblins, Space Harrier and surely others in the arcades (did Rush'n'Attack have bosses?), and Super Mario Bros on the NES.


 * As a note on the beat-em-up genre, Double Dragon in 1987 extended the ideas from Kung-Fu substantially and established the genre as we still know it today. Bad Dudes came out in 88 (man, the NES version ruined that game! but the arcade was great :), Golden Axe didn't come along unil 89, and I think Final Fight in 90.


 * So overall, if somebody can confirm or deny that the arcade version of Xevious had bosses, that would give us a good start. To be really academic about it, somebody should still check through all those less popular games that none of us remember.  Thanks for the input everybody-
 * LoveMe2Times 07:48, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * Wow, I never even knew what Xevious was before. That throws my entire 'history of the scrolling shooter' out of whack. :)


 * Xevious apparently did have bosses. I'm not sure if it had different bosses or whether the same one kept recurring, as in Gradius. The boss I've seen is a large, disc-shaped mothership. Nonetheless, the boss concept is definitely there. Spottedowl 18:20, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * Yeah, Xevious is pretty cool, and I had no idea it came out so early, cause the console ports came out much later (and it was sufficiently ahead of it's time that it didn't look old 3 years later!). This is a great place to find out more information about NES games.  Checking there, I found that 1942 did have bosses (I trust porting to the NES didn't change this aspect), although I think they're all the same, and they're not every level.


 * I guess my next question is: Have there been any significant innovations in bosses since 1988? Or has the boss formula been set in stone for 15 years?!  I guess street fighter type fighting games changed it a little: bosses come only at the end of the game, since there are no "levels" exactly.


 * Finally, I'm not sure I'm confident enough yet to update the article, but I'm seeing the basic timeline as follows:


 * 1982: Xevious ==> 1984: 1942, Kung-Fu ==> 1985: Gradius, Gun Smoke, SMB, and others ==> 1986: bosses everywhere ==> 1987: Double Dragon, MegaMan, Legend of Zelda demonstrate mini-bosses, bosses with specific weaknesses/vulnerabilities. Note, too, that I'm referring to arcade version dates where applicable (as most of these were ported to NES and other consoles).
 * LoveMe2Times 08:05, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * I've heard of a boss in a Mega Man game that you are not supposed to be able to beat. You are required to fail to make the game continue and the story unfold. If you beat him (which I've heard is posible, thogh very hard) the game bugs out completely. Sounds quite innovative. Can anyone confirm this?
 * --62.181.79.151 10:59, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * Mega Man X's first boss. Let it beat you, and Zero will come and defeat it... NeoDoubleGames 16:59, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

If anyone is interested, here is how the Boss was created.

There were other Dungeons and Dragons type games on Plato. A player started on the outside of the dungeon and went in was attacked by monsters. If you got out of the dungeon, you kept the gold you had accumulated. Your player was saved from one day to the next, from one week to the next. If you died, then you lost everything. The dungeons had a finite size, and people would play the game for hours (which suprised us) and sooner or later would go into every corner of the dungeon. The character got stronger by gathering magic swords, etc. At some point, the character would be so strong that he could kill everything, at which point the player would lose interest in the game and quit.

We noticed that people created characters and spent time naming them and getting "attached" to them, and kind of treated them like a person. So, we asked something like, "Suppose that the character is real. Why would a real person keep going into the same dungeon over and over again?" And, then the answer was simple: To bring out something really spectacular.

So, then we said, "Hey, what if the player had to 'bring out an orb'?" And then we said, "Yeah, but if the orb is worth anything, then something really neat has to defend it." So, we put the orb into a "treasure room" and decided to stack a bunch of smaller monsters on top of a really big monster in the treasure room directly in front of "the orb". The character had to defeat 30 smaller monsters before confronting the "Golden Dragon"--a monster with probably 1,000,000 hit points. If he defeated the Golden Dragon, then he got the orb. He would then have to fight his way out of the dungeon.

In retrospect, what we did was create a video game that was a story. It had a beginning (the character initially enters the dungeon and builds up strenght), a middle (the character explores the dungeon), a climax (he finds the orb and battles the monsters, before confronting the Golden Dragon), a denoument (the character, weakened by the battle, staggers back through the dungeon, avoiding monsters and finally to safety), and an end (the charcter after leaving the dungeon with the orb is enshrined in a hall of fame). We did this in 1974-1975.

Plato was way ahead of its time. The first video games (consoles or arcade) in the late 1970s did not have a boss. To challenge the player, the game simply did either "more" (put more of the same enemy on the screen) or made the enemy move "faster". The first boss in a console/arcade game was either in Battlezone! (a 'supertank') or Tempest.

Text games (Zork, Collosal Cave) did not have a boss. They were simply a collection of word games.

Yosef A (talk) 12:01, 1 December 2016 (UTC) I'm definitely late to this party, but I recently became interested in this topic for personal reasons. A friend and I were using the term "level Boss" in a D&D dungeon we designed and ran together as early as the fall of 1974 when D&D was a very new game. I cannot say we invented the term, because in discussing it this past summer neither of us were able to say where we got the idea (personally I think it was his idea). There were some major differences between these bosses and the ones who appeared in various video games not too long after. The biggest difference was that you could not beat one of our bosses. There were not there to be fought with. There job was to keep the adventures within reasonable parameters. For example, we built into our dungeon some rather fabulous features, such as a large, solid gold door. The value of the door was more than enough to allow an adventurer to retire for life and we did not want to have the reputation for running a so-called "Monty Hall" dungeon., so we placed a small sign next to such features telling players not to take the fixtures. Incidentally, one party did try, and I'll admit I might have allowed it, but they got greedy and even with a gold door that must have weighed a couple tons, they went for the hinges as well. So out came the local boss who eventually forced them to put the door back. Any other treasure was, of course, fair game and they were allowed to take it... well, the survivors were. Anyway, some of our circle of gamers did attend Gen Con and word of our bosses (and also our orc janitors who cleaned up between adventures and occasionally wandered through with a mop and bucket) did spread a little, but as I said above I don't know for a certainty that the bosses were our invention nor do I have proof that the video game bosses came from or were inspired by our dungeon's bosses since it's just as likely or more so that the videogame designers came up with bosses on their own and this is just coincidence.

Etymology of the word "Boss"
As far as I know, the first game to explicitly list an end-level, stronger opponent as "Boss" is the arcade game "Renegade" (which was ported to several other platforms) in 1985. In Japan, the gangs depicted in the game were called "Bousouzoku". So, a bit of japgrish translation did the magic. -- Tincho
 * "Japgrish"?!? WTF.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.180.154.130 (talk) 21:40, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I've always heard it called "Jappernese", kinda like the opposite of Engrish. ForestAngel (talk) 09:09, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I have a related question that isn't addressed in the History. Where did the title "Boss" come from (as applied to video games)? How did video game Bosses come to be called "Bosses"? I can only guess that there may have been some popular video game in which the end boss was explicitly identified as being the "Boss" of the henchman. An alternative theory I've heard is that "Boss" was somehow imported from Kung Fu movies tradition-- the lyrics to the 1974 song "Kung Fu Fighting" contains a reference to fighting a Boss:
 * There was funky Billie Jim and little Sammy Chong
 * He said,"Here comes the big boss, let's get it on!" 
 * I had always assumed this came from the 1971 Bruce Lee film The Big Boss. Do we have Bruce Lee to thank for video game bosses?

A related question is, when did the video game term "Boss" enter common usage? I seem to remember using it aroud '85 or so, but that could be false memory. -Alecmconroy 10:34, 2 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I always thought "BOSS" had its roots in Kung fu movie genre, but I never could find anything to substantiate it. Infact I would even go as far as to say that the word "Boss" in videogames is directly related to a Bruce Lee movie, The Big Boss (1971). It was the actors 1st major film and led to him becoming an international star. But thats just my theory anyway :) --nocturnal omnivorous canine 23:13, 14 February 2007 (UTC)


 * When I had an Amstrad CPC back in the 80s/ early 90s, the term "End of level guardian" seemed to be the main one in use, at least in the Amstrad Action magazine. --Wardog

I would like to add to the part of the article discussing "Unbeatable" bosses. You list Yggdrasil from Tales of Symphonia as a truly unbeatable boss. However, he belongs to the article of "insanely difficult bosses you are supposed to lose to". As proof, here is a page with of video of him being beaten. Just search for "Yggdrasil" http://www.holystar.ch.vu/

When I was younger, I remember bosses also being referred to as "big bosses". Might there be some connection between this and Big Boss from Metal Gear 1 (1987)? It may have at least helped spread the use of the word boss. Savager (talk) 12:35, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Personally, I think the term was derived from the idea that the regular enemies the player fights in the game were henchmen being sent to fight you by their "boss". Ian Fairchild (talk) 07:32, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

boss backlash?? wha??
If you can't find anything about a supposed "boss backlash" using a search engine, it probably isn't important enough to list on wikipedia. Johnny fog  20:27, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

WP:VG Assessment
This post is in response to a request at the videogames project for reassessment. I've left the the article rating as is. Here's some suggestions:
 * Please find better sources than other wikis - if it's user submitted and not explicitly marked as edited by a known quantity (an expert/pro) then it's unreliable.
 * Overview should go before history.
 * There's a tight history which drops off before discussing boss evolution and an overview which is all over the place - editors need to nail down exactly what needs to be covered in the article and set up a framework for expansion. For instance, the first paragraph of overview flows from a basic description right into Shadow of the Colossus. That game certainly needs mentioning somewhere, but not right at the beginning of the overview.
 * Does boss rush need a section to itself? It's a single element of boss-focused play, for instance having access to timed boss fights from the main menu. Games can repeat some bosses, but not necessarily all of them and not necessarily all at once. At most it seems like a footnote within another section.

Hope that's of some help, it's a tricky subject to try and build an article from but your work is appreciated. Someoneanother 15:41, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Bosses in nearly every genre?
The overview section states "Bosses have appeared in some shape or form within nearly every genre of video games, with the exceptions of sports and simulation games." I would strongly disagree with this statement, as it is misleading at best. The video game genres article defines these basic genres: Action, Action-adventure, Adventure, Construction and management simulation, Life simulation, Vehicle simulation, Role-playing, and Strategy. Of these categories, Bosses would appear almost exclusively in RPGs or action oriented games (including the hybrid action-adventure). The next closest thing would be antagonists in straight adventure games and strategy games, which would not qualify as a "Boss" in this context.

I suggest it should be removed - it doesn't add anything substantive to the article and it's incorrect as-is. RayBarker (talk) 00:26, 29 June 2008 (UTC)


 * nevermind. [looking at the article history, User:Johnnyfog seems to be involved in some sort of slow-moving edit-war regarding two very different versions of this article. I presume good faith on his part, but no-one involved is using the talk page to achieve consensus, so I'm not gonna get involved. RayBarker (talk) 02:25, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I can't think of very many genres that lack them, if any (besides the two mentioned). - A Link to the Past (talk) 08:02, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Notoriety?
This article might benefit from a short list of notable bosses, possibly sorted by generation-of-video-gaming. I mean, Bowser (Nintendo) has his own article, and a lot of traditional bosses are modeled after him. NickRinger (talk) 12:54, 11 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Good idea, but last time a Notable Boss list was added (I believe it was called something similar) the whole thing snowballed and people started adding really obscure examples. And what qualifies as notable? Bowser is one of the earliest, so he might belong under "History". The first Sega game was (I think) Altered Beast, so maybe add examples of bosses from that, and so on. My main focus here is to get as many legit references as possible, otherwise it turns into a free-for-all. Johnnyfog (talk) 13:21, 11 September 2008 (UTC)


 * You can probably find a bunch of "Greatest Bosses" lists all over the net. FYI, though, they have a habit of becoming dead links. And the no.1 rated boss is always, always, always Sephiroth, for some reason. :/ Johnnyfog (talk) 13:26, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

History of terms
I've been trying to track down early usages of terms like "Boss" and "Miniboss". I added one such reference to the article, but it was just removed by someone who claimed I could have edited the image. For the record, I didn't, the image isn't hosted on my website, I have no control over it. It is theoretically possible that the person who posted the scan of the newletter could have forged it, but I think that's highly, highly, highly unlikely.

Here are the references:


 * The term "Mini-Boss" was in use at least as early as 1988. "Tips and Tricks",April/May 1988, Nintendo Fun Club News Vol.1, Issue 6

--Alecmconroy (talk) 18:04, 17 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Surprisingly, here's a 1983 usage of the word "Boss" to refer to a special enemy. Joystik Magazine, December 1983 p. 6   .   Quote:  "Take a wild shot in Galaga-- you might fire (at) the Boss", "GET BACK AT THE BOSS",  "the Boss Galaga (the one you have to shoot twice)".   This predates the previous "earliest known usage" we had by three years.   --Alecmconroy (talk) 18:45, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * You think it's highly unlikely, but that does not change the fact that it is easily feasible. A random Geocities site is not a reliable source of text, so the same applies for images. Haipa Doragon • (contributions) 19:27, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I think the evidence Alecmconory has provided is fine. Before you start mindlessly applying the rules, remember to use common sense and remember that this is a computer game term. It is never going to have the same level of sources that some topics will. However, as has been said before, the fact that it isn't printed in 5 different encyclopedias backed up by peer review doesn't mean it doesn't exist. There are countless sites out there that use the term, and for something like this, I think they count as valid sources. After all, WP:IAR lets us bend the rules if it benefits the quality of the encyclopedia. Yes, I know that the IAR policy needs justification and it is not a trump card, but for a term like this, I'd be prepared to say that we can alter the standards of sources (which are, let's face it, designed primarily for topics that your average punter wouldn't know everything about at a glance) in the interests of improving wikipedia.

Yes, I know that Alec or myself could have edited that image, just as we could have created scores of random geocities sites in a bizzare conspiracy to disrupt the wikipedia article on boss fights, but you know what? Most vandals simply don't have that kind of time. Actually, as was pointed out, half the sources on this site could be faked- I could knock up a plausible looking fake scinece site with false info if I wanted to, but I think you'd probably be a little paranoid to really believe I did that. Remember to assume good faith, use common sense, and don't mindlessly follow the rules without thinking about what you are doing.

Of course, if you still think we should remove it; that's cool with me- this is just my two cents. I have on intentions of starting an argument or winding up in wp:lamest edit wars over something like this.211.30.172.67 (talk) 23:24, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Boss phases
Many of the video game bosses, especially endbosses, have different phases where, when boss suffers from certain amount of damage, switches its attacks, becomes more aggressive or just changes. How to add that information to Wikipedia? --Artman40 (talk) 23:14, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * You are correct, but can you find a source saying that anywhere? Otherwise it will be considered original research, even though we all know it.  So the first thing you can do to add it is start hunting for some reliable sources to back it up.  Another thing you can do is work on generating a list of bosses in notable games that are like that&mdash;we won't list all of them in the article, but if we have a list here then it'll be easy to choose one or two good examples.  Off the top of my head, I can think of the final boss of Final Fantasy VIII as a good example.... a lot of other game bosses have one or two levels of difficulty (such as the final boss of Super Mario 64), but that one has at least 4, which makes it a better exemplar. &mdash;Politizer talk / contribs 23:21, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Another good examples with bosses with multiple phases would be Wily Machines (2 phases) from Mega Man series and Exotech Larva on Serious Sam - The Second Encounter. --Artman40 (talk) 00:05, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The Kalphite Queen boss in RuneScape has two forms, and it says this in the game guide. Therefore, that is both a reliable source and another example of a multi-level boss. http://www.runescape.com/c=8nSYBqu9Czo/kbase/guid/kalphite_lair_members#The_Kalphite_Empire UNIT A4B1 (talk) 20:10, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

well maybye not actually since the second form isn't stronger, it just requeres different combat techniques to defeat it: the first form has protect from magic and ranged (it can only be attacked by melee) and the second form flies so it can only be attacked by ranged or magic. UNIT A4B1 (talk) 21:47, 7 February 2010 (UTC) Well if all else fails we could try using WP:AIR UNIT A4B1 (talk) 21:48, 7 February 2010 (UTC) Oops wrong page I meant WP:IAR, not the aircraft project. UNIT A4B1 (talk) 21:51, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Recent move
What is the reason behind this? "Gaming" is just more ambiguous and less in-line with other video game articles. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 07:54, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

merge?
This article is short, hard to define, and (let's face it) a very tiny niche topic. Maybe it should be merged with video games. Johnnyfog (talk) 19:24, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I disagree, I think it's an extremely important topic for video games. r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 02:20, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Puzzle/cinematic characteristics
Not only are bosses traditionally tougher opponents, but there are traditionally puzzle-like aspects that distinguish them from other game opponents. If a citation could be found for these trends, they could add more depth to the article.

As an example, many bosses are difficult or even impossible to defeat without understanding. Straightforward tactics may not be viable, forcing one to learn their patterns and be alert for openings instead. This often lends itself to a specific sequence of actions that are required to obtain victory.

Additionally, in games where the player is normally on the offensive, this may force them to focus on defense, adding greater impact to the encounter than a simple "like everything else, but bigger" kind of enemy. 70.130.228.219 (talk) 02:11, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * That may be true in some games (especially action games), but not all. In a lot of RPGs, bosses really are just regular enemies that take a long time to beat and are more likely to kill you a few times. r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 02:19, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

super/optional boss fights
they are no mention about super boss fights  and optional boss fights no  where in this article and it seems like it could do with more information. user--Stephendwan (talk) 21:36, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

boss fights are not always found in the  last   area of  a dungeon
I have encountered in some games  where   they is a   boss   right at the start of a dungeon for example Demons wall final fantasy XII and Aps  final fantasy 7,  not even  in a dungeon twilit bloat  the legend of zelda  twilight princess. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.70.111.250 (talk) 11:26, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Mother Brain
"Some well known final bosses are Bowser (Mario series), Doctor Eggman (Sonic the Hedgehog), King DeDeDe (Kirby), Dr. Wily (Mega Man series), and Ganon (Legend of Zelda)." Isn't Mother Brain (Metroid series) a well known final boss?76.243.187.104 (talk) 16:15, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, but if you were to just start listing common bosses, you'd be here forever. I think the examples up now are some of the most well known. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.77.251.147 (talk) 06:54, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

The term "boss" - Yura87 (talk) 10:00, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
It may be an analogy with crime bosses. And in some games (Pokemon and GTA) some of them ARE crime bosses. Also, a good example of a boss becoming a common enemy is Unpainted Axem in Super Mario: LO7S. Also, the FF boss there (found in Monstro) is an example of a Superboss.

Ganondorf?
Is there a reason Ganondorf is listed alongside Bowser as an example of a boss? I'm assuming these are listed because they are iconic bosses that paved the way and defined the terminology on consoles, but Ganondorf wasn't a boss until Ocarina of Time, which is extremely odd that he'd be up there. Ganon is the iconic boss from Legend of Zelda. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.51.186.129 (talk) 23:22, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * There are too many iconic examples of bosses, and there's no reason to include them all. Enough are listed. Ganon isn't there not because he's not iconic but because there are already enough examples.  TheStickMan  [✆Talk] 00:08, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Then why isn't any iconic boss thrown up there without rhyme or reason like Ganondorf? Why don't we throw up Kefka? At least Ganon fits the theme of iconic Nintendo console villains as bosses, the console where narrative took off and these villains became important. Dr. Wily and Bowser are up there and Ganondorf is just flat out anachronistic with that group and comes out of left field. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.51.186.129 (talk) 00:27, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Nevermind that this sends the wrong message about the Zelda series. It was Ganon who was iconic baddie and boss of the series up until Link's Awakening, he was there at the start and has been there since, Ganondorf is only a justification of Ganon that wasn't so much as namedropped until ALttP — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.51.186.129 (talk) 00:36, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh wait, I misread your first comment. Whoops. Ignore what I initially said.
 * So why is Ganondorf listed? Honestly, the best two reasons I can give is that 1. He is iconic, despite having technically less history than Ganon (which shouldn't really matter) and 2. He just is, because whoever first wrote that section decided to include Ganondorf as one of his/her examples, and since it was good-enough example it was left there. It's not necessarily a statement that Ganondorf is more iconic than Ganon (which is an argument that can easily go either way). It's just how the article was written, and there were no real problems with it.
 * I suppose you can change it if you must, I personally don't think it makes much of a difference either way.  TheStickMan  [✆Talk] 01:17, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Reptile in Mortal Kombat
Reptile does not take the place of Shang Tsung as the Final boss of the original Mortal Kombat, he appears as an extra fight after beating the opponent flawlessly in each round on the stage The Pit and performing a fatality. An extra requirement is that objects must be flying by the moon before the special fight is triggered (I believe that this is random on that stage). See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wj2orsoYDv8 for "citation" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.38.254.42 (talk) 18:32, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 one external links on Boss (video gaming). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080508192019/http://www.wired.com:80/gaming/gamingreviews/commentary/games/2006/05/70832? to http://www.wired.com/gaming/gamingreviews/commentary/games/2006/05/70832
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130527222849/http://www.armory.com:80/ to http://www.armory.com
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.gamepro.com/gamepro/domestic/games/features/166668.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:01, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Boss (video gaming). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100107131657/http://www.armory.com/~dlp/dnd1.html to http://www.armory.com/~dlp/dnd1.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.armory.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:38, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Lede image
I removed the current lede image (introduced by User:Zxcvbnm in this edit as a violation of WP:NFCC. I noticed that the lede image was previously changed from File:Supertux boss.png to File:Broforce_boss_destructing.png by User:McGeddon, who said that the latter image was a "better lede image".  What are your thoughts as to what this article's lede image should be?  RJaguar3 &#124; u &#124; t 03:50, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * It didn't to me give the impression of fighting, or something posing a threat to the player. It could easily be confused for a regular enemy in a level. The Guacamelee one is a lot more indicative of a "boss" so maybe that one could be moved up to the top if the other image is not allowed on copyright grounds.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 06:03, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree with, the Guacamelee one shows a small player character against a considerable larger foe as well as the specific gameplay element of keeping ahead of the boss character. The Supertux one doesn't really show anything out of the ordinary. The Broforce image, with its four player characters, is very busy, and it looks like the boss character (a truck?) is already finished. soetermans . ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 10:46, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * The Gucamelee one works fine (plus, freely licensed!) . A huge boss against a relatively tiny main character. If there are any other options, we should try to keep those as freely licensed works too. We also have (in a quick search) File:Freedom_Planet_Running_Boss.PNG, but that's a bit more busy than Guac's image. The other ones can all be included/scattered in the body as free image. --M ASEM  (t) 23:51, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Vandalism by IP user
has repeatedly vandalized the article by removing cited content. Protection requested. Ylee (talk) 16:35, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Looking at the edits, it's pretty clear user Ylee is propagating an obscure quote outside of guidelines and is using a bot to revert any attempts to fix it. Just thought I'd do something to bring it to anyone's attention who wishes to do something about it. 73.37.29.63 (talk) 16:48, 25 September 2018 (UTC)


 * That "obscure quote" has two citations from reliable sources, including one of the most prominent video game reviewers for the first 15 years of the industry. Ylee (talk) 20:00, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Even if it's slang you personally enjoy and was used by a journalist you like, I'm not sure that's enough to warrant putting it in a Wikipedia article above countless other, more commonly used phrases like "end boss" or "last boss" - especially not in a way that clashes with the rest of the article. Not to mention, looking at said sources it seems "foozle" was specifically coined by one individual to mock the idea of final bosses, and wasn't meant to be a term for one itself. This suggests it's not a popular or often-used term, and is quoted by the second source only to draw attention to the same idea. But this is hardly a hill worth dying on, so if you want to go to such lengths to keep that edit, go right ahead. 73.37.29.63 (talk) 20:38, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I am with the IP on this one. I see no evidence that this is a widely used term. Indrian (talk) 22:47, 26 September 2018 (UTC)