Jump to content

Talk:Soulcalibur III

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Unknownwarrior33 (talk | contribs) at 16:13, 16 April 2006. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconVideo games Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Iaito

In order to prevent an edit war over Setsuka's weapon, I have decided to explain the situation of the term "iaito" with regards to her sword. It is not unheard of for Namco to release basic biographical information that is needlessly ambiguous, mysterious or even misleading. Many of these instances, however, can easily be overcome with basic detective work. BUT, Setsuka's iaito is NOT one such example of this type of ambiguity. Had her sword been labeled a generic katana, there would be reason to believe that her blade is, in fact, a shikomizue, as such a sword was often concealed inside walking canes. But Namco specifically labels her sword as an iaito, a fact that is hard to get around. And since they use the word "iaito", it is understood that they mean she has an iaito, not a shikomizue. Besides, "shikomizue," as far as anyone can tell, specifically refers to swords hidden in walking canes, not umbrellas; which would thus disprove the chance of it being a shikomizue even further. It is appreciated that people have studied up on weaponry and know that such a weapon exists--as it's not exactly common knowledge--but her sword is not a shikomizue and cannot be labeled as such. Namco calls it an iaito and that's what it will be. If you see it incorrectly labeled, it is kindly asked that you restore it to its correct state. Thank you for your understanding. NOTE: any sword used for the study of iaido can be labelled as an iaito (see second sentence in brackets http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iaito)

New spellings for Korean characters

Namco has decided to follow the Revised Romanization of Korean with respect to the names of Korean characters. According to information found on the Project Soul Official Site and on Namco Channel, Seung Mi Na's name is now spelled Seong Mi-na, Yun Sung's name is now Hong Yun-seong, Seung Han Myong is now written Seong Han-myeong, and Hwang Sung Kyung's name is now Hwang Seong-Gyeong. The new spellings for Seung Mi Na and Yun Sung exist in the North American version of the game.

Character Creation

I just got the game today and haven't played it yet (no thanks to Wikipedia). I'm just wondering what all of the unlockable stuff for character creation mode is. Anointed Blade 04:27, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That's what GameFAQS is for :p

character galleries

why were the picture galleries on the character pages removed? am I missing something? --Phil 21:37, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

new template

I have created a new template for use on soul character's pages. Template:Soul Character. it is, as of this post employed on Tira (Soul Calibur). it looks exactly the same as the current biography tables on the character pages except it will be a standard. also it lists the eng/jp voice actors inside the template so we can get rid of those ambiguous "western/eastern" voice actor posts.. --Phil 09:05, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Recent file corruption add?

I'm only a moderate SC 3 player, but can someone fact check the additions that 70.170.85.16 is making with the "file corruption error" adds? If anything, it needs cleanup.Thanks for any info that could help. NorseOdin 10:44, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Difficulty Citing

I was the one who added the "difficulty" section. I know wikipedia hates (I forgot what they are called) when people use words like "most people", "many think",etc. However, I came to this conclusion after reading several different reviews and based upon my own experience with this game first hand. Here's an insert from IGNPS2's review,

"It seems Namco took primitive criticisms to heart and created a computer opponent so challenging it takes steel nerves and flashing hands to best. In one match I eventually succumbed to Mitsurugi, who after a seven hit string of back and forth counters (like an intense tennis volley), finally landed a devastating upward swipe that raked me low to high and sent my character skyward, where I was promptly juggled before being kicked off a precipice. It takes real speed to hit the counters, but even seven of them didn't save me. Several of our own supposed SC pros also took turns trying to best one particularly hard version of Siegfried on "You're an idiot for playing at this difficulty level." It was over an hour before Jason Allen eventually scored a win."

http://ps2.ign.com/articles/661/661222p1.html

I hope this is a verifiable source. If needed I can cite other reviews. Thanks to all who helped contribute to that section of the article.

-Mag

Variable Cancel Technique?

Did anyone add information for this yet, yunno, G225. That is one thing that is currently causing alot of strain among players right now.

Just added something on it.

-Mag

This article does not seem neutral

the vast majority of the article seems to be critisism. if the majority decides that the game is that bad, fine, but that article seems to be one-sided. the article has a section for critisim, but none for praise. this should be fixed. Saganatsu 22:37, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I guess its hard to be anything but critisism when the game really has nothing to praise over its predecessors. SCIII is the undisputed worst game in the series and everyone knows it. --Jaxel 17:15, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • That kind of criticism is what makes the article lopsided. Yes, it has cheap AI and a few glitches, but it does have the Character Creator which is a nice addition along with different modes. And I'll tell you, Jaxel, that not everyone thinks that this is the worst game in the series. I find it a lot better than Soul Calibur II which I grew bored of a week from getting the game and mastering it. Not to try and make it seem like it is a direct flame towards you, but I am trying to show that arguments like that really could affect the article in question. I'll see if I can try to neutralize the article. Right now I am thinking about putting a Pros section and changing Criticism to Cons. If anyone wants me to do that, please let me know.--Cpubasic13 04:03, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Go for it... but character creator, depending on who you talk to, could possibly be a negative to the series. There was so reason for Namco to change the core fighting styles of most characters; and there was no reason for Namco to believe that the characters would be balanced without testing after changing almost everybody's core fighting styles. Many people wish that Namco had spent time to test the character changes instead of putting in half-assed create a character modes and 17 additional bonus characters who dont even have complete movesets. --Jaxel 17:31, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • Many people also enjoy the Create a character to a great extent. As for unbalanced characters, learn how to play them good and you'll find yourself crushing your opponents. --Anonymous 0:16, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
          • Character creation in no way makes up for the huge flaws that plague SC3, more than just "hard AI" and a "few" glitches. The game is grossly inbalanced and 4 months later, it is extremely boring. If you take SC2 for example, I doubt that you truly "mastered" it, because SC2 was far more balanced where the characters were predominantly mid tier. The characters themselves actually had depth. SC3 just through balance out the window, and the characters have absolutely no depth really. I was considered crazy for liking SC2 Cass better than SC3 Cass. The fact of the matter is that Namco really screwed around with her game, kind of like what they did to Talim, except made her top tier. In SC2, you were forced to actually think with Cass to force mixups etc. In SC3, she gets so much combo damage that they totally outweigh her nerfs...yes, she did have quite a few nerfs. By taking away lockdown tools and just giving huge damage potential, I am quite sure that I am much closer to "mastering" SC3 than i ever was with SC2, because quite frankly, in SC3, Cass doesn't need lockdown. Sidestep CH and the fact that the other characters are just crap compared to her pretty much lockdown the characters for you. I'm just of the opinion that it's not fun when you don't have to think about the game at all, and I'm quite sure that's its equally not fun on the receiving side. Pifactor 06:29, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • One member's opinion is not enough to justify a biased article. -Unknownwarrior33 02:16, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think, with Eliashc's updates (which were way more effective than mine), the article is now balanced. Anyone else think we can take off the neutrality warning on the article? -Unknownwarrior33 16:13, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Crooked Jester Tournament Match Videos

So it was getting hard for me to update all these pages once a week with links to the new match videos; so I eventually stopped updating. None the less, I had a ton of referrers from wikipedia on Crooked Jester and lots of visitors sent me messages asking that I keep wikipedia updated on match videos. It was getting tedious and I didnt really want to do it. Not to mention, certain characters like Cassandra, Mitsurugi and Kilik started getting bloated in the match video list. We offer more then 20 vids for those characters and there was no reason to have the match videos section of their pages take up over 50% of the page. So what I decided to do something else instead; instead of adding each match individually, I rewrote the search engine script on Crooked Jester. I then added links that will query my server for a list of match videos featuring that character. This list is automatically reparsed every time someone clicks on the link here at wikipedia and it will add any new videos it discovers to the list! This makes it easier for myself and other wikipedia users in getting match videos. --Jaxel 02:46, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS. In case you were wondering as well... The village pump decided months back, links that required external logins were acceptable on wikipedia articles as long as those links explicitly declaired themselves to require external logins. In this case, I made sure to labeled them (external login required).

This article is indeed one-sided. I haven't yet played Soul Calibur 3, but the webmaster on fightersgeneration.com considers it to be the best fighting game ever made. Dessydes 02:58, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh please!

>x<ino 04:05, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What's with the sarcasm. Go to the website, and you'll see what I mean. And I was watching Cybernet today, and they didn't have anything wrong to say about the game. And anyway, a NPOV violation is an NPOV violation, regardless. Dessydes 20:16, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

the way it's not meant to be done

  This template employs some extremely complicated and esoteric features of template syntax.
  Please do not attempt to alter it unless you are certain that you understand the setup (…)
  • No need for praise (at least not this way).
    • No need to mention features that are already mentioned (e.g. the character creation)
    • GameSpot already praised SC3, even a link is provided… (quote from the article)
  GameSpot awarded Soul Calibur III its "Best in Show for Fighting Games" award at E3 2005.[1]
    • If the game makes use of the most recent graphics features (or else), say so. But not "the graphics are beautiful". That would be biased.
      • Quote from GameSpot:
  (…) improves on its predecessor with a higher level of character and background detail.
Right, and the rest of the article isn't biased at all. 24.15.49.150
It's a bad idea to have a whole section for criticism and it's too much criticism anyway - that makes it biased, but it's not about praising the game as much as criticising it but about providing facts instead of opinions. I'm not saying the article were good as it is but it's not going to get any better through praise. elias.hc 05:14, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The first quote doesn't relate; the "Criticism" section isn't part of that template, and the addition of a Praise section doesn't harm the rest of the page. -24.15.49.150 16:08, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Soulcalibur_III&oldid=48714405"