Talk:Haze (video game)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Video games (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the PlayStation task force.
 
Note icon
A request for a screenshot has been made to help better illustrate the article. (VG images department)

Platform Exclucivity[edit]

http://www.jeuxfrance.org/Multi/Haze_1.wmv

From the Free Radical rep:

"Haze is scheduled for release on all three platforms at the end of the year.

Q. So no exclusive?

That is my final comment."

This has not gone exclusive —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ciaran500 (talkcontribs).

What it seems like to me is, Ubisoft (the publishers) are saying it is PS3 exclusive (at least for a period), while Free Radical (the developers) are mostly saying that it isn't. Perhaps we should wait a while before changing it to PS3 exclusive, until there is more solid word on this. --Dreaded Walrus t c 16:04, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
On top of this, the US Ubisoft site still seems to mention Xbox 360 and PC (scroll down), while the UK Ubisoft site does not. There is still too much ambiguity. --Dreaded Walrus t c 16:09, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
I referenced Gamespot who specifically say "the game will now debut solely on the PS3 this fall.". So whatever the outcome, we won't be seeing the PC or 360 versions this year. The article no longer states that it's definitely PS3, or definitely multiformat - says there's speculation it's PS3 only, as evidenced by Gamespot. Fin© 16:45, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Also, the Free Radical rep says "scheduled", not "is being". Fin© 17:03, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
"Free Radical's David Doak has told Eurogamer that Haze is being developed for multiple formats after all - "http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=76830
End of Discussion Ciaran500 08:57, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Or not. PSN download from today's update. "Haze is coming this November, exclusively on PlayStation3."~~Lazyguythewerewolf . Rawr. 21:42, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Sony confirmed today that Haze is being ported to the Xbox 360: "http://www.gamedaily.com/articles/news/ps3-celebrates-its-first-birthday-56-million-sold/18572/" Bigthecat (talk) 06:21, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Disregard above, that has no hard evidence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MantelKnight (talkcontribs) 06:37, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Weapons[edit]

Knives are throwable in this game. I've seen developer videos on YouTube showing demonstrations of it. Please don't modify the article by removing my edit. ElSpec774 13:35, 16, March 2008 (UTC)

YouTube isn't a reliable source, but I was reverting because you basically just capitalised a few words, and introduced throwing without a source. Source it, and it's fine. Fin© 17:40, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Lead Platform[edit]

Ubisoft has revealed that the PS3 is the lead development platform for Haze, should this be noted. Miseryrevived 20:49, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Input[edit]

Did the developer already talk about the way this game can be played. A PS3 does also have support for a USB mouse and keyboard. It is up to the developer to use or not use them in their games. Is anything known about it for this game? --Stef Nighthawk 14:51, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Exclusivity[edit]

Who the hell wrote that the PC and 360 versions have been cancelled? They have been indefinitely postponed, but nowhere does Ubisoft explicitly say it's not gonna happen. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.194.46.6 (talk) 15:55, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Today at E3 07, SONY announced Haze a PlayStation 3 timed exclusive, this timed exclusive ends in early 2008 acording to Ubisoft so Haze will still be on the XBOX 360 in 2008. Shadowfyre 20:52, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

An example of a timed exclusive is GRAW2 or Splinter Cell Double Agent which first came out on the XBOX 360 as a timed exclusive and then came out on the PlayStation 3 early 2008.

In the third developers dairy ,the Aug. 1st, it is said at the very end the game in fact is ONLY on Play station 3 and not on time exclusive which I believe invalidates the E3 statment.-GasSnake or Poison Oak 22:08, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

The third developers diary, the developer did not say it was only coming out on the PS3, he said it was coming out this November exclusively for the PS3. It is still partially debatable about what he means exactly as it can be read multiple ways, but considering previous reports, it should be accepted as Timed Exclusive, or remain multiplatform until the developers clearly state otherwise. KanoBlade 19:29, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

The article indicates that the 360 version is no longer being developed...? Im gonna take that out since i cant find a source for that that i can read, can someone explain what the curent reference says? Everywhere online seems to say timed-exclusive John.n-irl 12:17, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I haven't even seen an xbox 360 version confirmation yet... furthermore, the official website does not even have the xbox logo. in any event, john.n-ir, the source your looking for was a german website reporting on GC07 it says: "Wie wir soeben bei einer Präsentation des Shooters aus erster Hand erfahren haben, wird es keine Xbox-360-Version von Haze geben. Der Titel ist dieses Jahr noch PS3-exklusiv und wird voraussichtlich im November erscheinen, 2008 wird eine PC-Fassung folgen. Weitere Informationen zur Präsentation folgen heute Abend." http://www.exp.de/shownews.php?id=24424&aid=multi roughly translated "we just learned that the fps haze will no longer be on the xbox 360, it is a ps3 exclusive this November followed by a PC version, more information after tonights presentation. 207.210.20.237 01:48, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks 4 that, i wasnt disputing it because it was in german, just couldnt read it and it was the only source i could see(never thought of the logos and such). John.n-irl 15:10, 1 September 2007 (UTC)


Sony confirmed today that Haze is being ported to the Xbox 360: "http://www.gamedaily.com/articles/news/ps3-celebrates-its-first-birthday-56-million-sold/18572/" Bigthecat (talk) 06:21, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm confused. That's not an official source. There's still no official source that says the game is still in development for 360. What you've given is a link to some interview that's full of blurbs. That part of the interview is unsourced. It just says "Sony" but that could have come from months ago when it was still in development for 360. So I'm axing that part until you have some official confirmation from a credited source, which is the Wikipedia standard. Billywhack (talk) 10:00, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Engine[edit]

based on a bit-tech interview iv taken the engine name out, for now ill put 'untitled - inhouse'. Anyone think of something better? Its definetly not Haze Engine(although i like mega-engine..ha) John.n-irl 09:48, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

360 and PC[edit]

Would anyone object to a rewording of the first paragraph, to remove the 360 and PC references and keep them in the development section? It would seem like the best idea since there is no versions in development and it would stop the constant rewording of the paragraph? It also seems a little odd to have in the opening John.n-irl 09:39, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Grammar Notes[edit]

Mantel and Nectar aren't in all capitals. Nectar isn't an abbreviation of nova-keta-thyrazine —Preceding unsigned comment added by MantelKnight (talkcontribs) 06:35, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Also there are a lot of grammars and speeling mistakes period. Someone should look through it. Yes, I know I spelled and wrote that wrong...--24.39.181.253 (talk) 07:08, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Useful articles to reference[edit]

Couple of recent interviews on Gamasutra, which at some point it might be useful to reference somewhere in the article.

--Nick RTalk 17:31, 7 November 2007 (UTC)


Release date[edit]

the game is coming out December 4th. this is my proof: http://www.us.playstation.com/PS3/Games. maybe someone should change it? or should it just be left as is? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.65.48.142 (talk) 00:46, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

No, that website says nothing more specific than "2008". --Nick RTalk 11:49, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Any Info on the release date? Jan 15 is solid? comment added by MantelKnight —Preceding comment was added at 14:38, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Wii version[edit]

Why does the article say that there is going to be a Wii version? I am going to remove this until someone gives us proof that the Wii version is in development.(Myscrnnm (talk) 02:38, 13 December 2007 (UTC))

Take a look at the history...someone has a point to prove or something John.n-irl (talk) 03:17, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
How about this: http://www.gamestop.com/product.asp?product%5Fid=647087 Gamestop has a shipping date on the Wii version of Haze... and this is the most up-to-date information I can find. The Ubisoft website does not specifically say that there will not be a Wii version. I'm going to edit the page to say there will be a Wii version and cite the Gamestop website if nothing else. (Saintxhazard (talk) 08:56, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
http://hazegame.us.ubi.com/index.php Scroll down, read bottom of page. And a retailer is not really a reliable source, they have other motives (i.e. sell games, some sites will let you pre-order games that are not confirmed for a console). And the listing wouldn't exactly be "up to date", Haze was multiplatform, so they mite not have pulled the page. The most up to date news story i can find is of ps3-only development. And on another note, Gamespot has Haze for Ps3 and Wii, not 360. I'm not saying it wont come out, or isn't in development, just that that's not a good enough source. John.n-irl (talk) 18:40, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Agreed. If I had a dollar for every time Gamestop or whatever posted bogus release info...
On the other hand, "exclusive" means jack shit in this business...--Threedots dead (talk) 11:32, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

No HD![edit]

Haze will run not under 720p. It´s resolution will be 576 p!

This should be mentioned in the article --Deficiency (talk) 07:04, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

What? Isn´t there a rule that all games need to run at atleast 720p on the PS3? And why would they need to run an ugly ass game like Haze at a lower resolution anyways?--Threedots dead (talk) 11:26, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Don´t know why, but it´s true. And there is no rule for 720p --> Look GTA IV it has native resolution of 640p and will be scaled up to 720p! And yes it´s an ugly ass game :-) --Deficiency (talk) 13:58, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Reception[edit]

Isn't this game more known for it's poor score than good score in Famitsu? Why the good scores first? 86.148.237.7 (talk) 10:57, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

It's under initial reviews, which it's true. However, it's critically panned. Not 'mixed' reviews as some editors try to cover it. It could be critically panned or negative. Take your pick. --HeaveTheClay (talk) 01:58, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Intial reviews still say "mixed" even though the article only cites 1 good review and the rest is clearly negative. Someone please fix this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.97.106.15 (talk) 11:51, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Including FHM score?[edit]

FHM gives all shooters high scores, they are a horrible review site and not included in Meta Critic nor Gameranking meta scoring because they are not reputable.

Their score is ridiculous and far out of band for the game, it should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.178.97.83 (talk) 19:33, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

FHM could offer a different perspective on Haze to a different target audience, rather than the usual "gaming press" JayKeaton (talk) 16:00, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
I belive they(or possibly maxim, apols if I am wrong), are on record(somewhere) as saying they reviewed a game without seeing or playing it. John.n-IRL 11:42, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
FHM is not a respected review in this industry like Gamespot, Gametrailers etc. Therefore, they should not be included. Moccamonster Talk 16:13, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

correct resolution 576p or 720p[edit]

the net says the game is 576p, how did it really work on your hdtv? it works in 720p on mine! mine doesn't upscale ps3 games to full hd when they are 720p. here is a picture of how it works on my tv. can you do the same with 576p please? what a pixel counter says on a forum is not the holy bible. we need facts. by the way 576p (EDTV PAL) cannot be outputted on a 480p tv (EDTV NTSC), so this is bullshit, the game is in 720p. Cliché Online (talk) 10:01, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Eurogamer had an interview with the creative lead, stating it was 576p. Thanks! Fin© 10:15, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
i don't care about eurogamer nor the interview since the game is not in 576p but in 720p (i've posted a picture of my tv) as the creative lead says: the ps3 outputs 720p. why don't you correct the Ninja Gaiden 2 and Halo 3 articles but this one? Will you "correct" these articles too please? if you don't i'll correct your false info added in this article to the actual 720p. by the way can anyone posqt a picture of haze running in 576p on his hdtv please? i'd like to see that. Cliché Online (talk) 11:11, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
haze runs in 720p. thanks. by the way if haze was in 576p how could it run on 480p tvs? it couldn't? that's why it is running at 720p on hdtvs. thanks. Cliché Online (talk) 11:30, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
An interview with a lead from the game trumps a source from a forum. Ah, it's completely illogical to say if it's 576p, how could it run on 480p tvs. Look at just about any current-gen game. They all run on SD tvs, despite their native resolution being 720p. Thanks! Fin© 11:35, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
the fact is this is not a forum it is a news site just like the link you have used. you can have the actual source here which is an official developer's Q&A not a random forum and so is a reliable source, therefore i'll use this one. not about SD. all the haze shit came from a pixel counter in europe, his ps3 is 576p so he claims the game is 576p and everyone believes him like he was god. the thing is 576 is not available on ntsc ps3s that means haze cannot run in 576p/i in ntsc territories but 480i/p. now about your saying no all current gen games are not 720p, some are and others are 1080p like virtua tennis and gran turismo 5 prologue. 720p games are displayed on 576i/p on SD/ED tvs in pal territories but are displayed in 480i/p on SD/ED tvs in ntsc territories. know what your talking about before editing an article please. on top of it you have admitted you don't have haze! i did the test myself and the game is 720p as confirmed by the developper on his Q&A not a random forum. Cliché Online (talk) 11:49, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Apologies, I misread that it was a forum. Eurogamer is a very well respected website, the quote came from the creative lead not "a pixel counter in europe". You misunderstand the concept of scaling (the original resolution could be 800x600, but Haze could upscale to 720p, it doesn't mean it has to display in 800x600), and yet again, please go read the article on verifiable sources. Thanks! Fin© 12:32, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Don't bother arguing with Cliché Online, he's a delusional and hypocritical fanboy (see two of his previous edits here and here for examples). The fact is, the native resolution of Haze is 576p and was confirmed by the project lead on the game. SeanMooney (talk) 12:56, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
looks like a personal attack is it? hey seems sockpuppetry at work, a guy editing pretty much the same thing, the very same way (the haze history make it pretty clear!), the same article at the same moment funny isn'it? User:Falcon9x5 (Fin) and User:SeanMooney two guys with an xbox coming here to edit an article about a game they don't have on a rival console? hey hopefully is not a hypcrotical fanboy, why? because look at his userboxes: "This user doesn't care what console a game is for as long as it's fun." and "This user is a member of WikiProject Xbox". you are funny guy(s)!! :) Cliché Online (talk) 13:19, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
What is your point? We've reverted false information from you - in case you're unaware, you have been changing the native resolution to 720p when that was proven incorrect. The games native resolution is 576p and it's upscaled to 720p. You came here running your mouth how this article was "bullshit", a reference from the project lead was added, and you're still arguing. Furthermore you are adding resolution details to games that aren't even released (such as Afrika (video game) and Resident Evil 5 - please see WP:Crystal Ball). If you're going to complain about sources, at least be consistent. And for your information, I own (and edit articles for) all three consoles - don't assume things. Thanks. SeanMooney (talk) 14:03, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
my point is to tell the truth when you (SeanMooney+Falcon9x5) are editing false informations. correct resolution is 720p not 576p, too bad you don't have the game to test it but the rival xbox. about resident evil 5 and afrika, you don't know it with your xbox but HD videos have been released on the PS Stores and they are 720p not 1080p, the fact is such promo videos have been released by the past and the actual games output were the same as these videos. ps3 upscale anbd xbox upscale is different, 720p games remain 720p on the ps3 they don't cheat to upscale 640p to 1080p if you know what i mean. you don't know about the ps3 so take your big mouth and your friend Sin with you and go edit xbox articles. you know there is this criticism section lacking in halo because of fanboys like you. oh and by the way metacritic's 56% is "average" not "mediocre" so you and Falcon9x5 should be better stop replacing one word by another. this is really strange how much your edits are alike. looks like sockpuppets. Cliché Online (talk) 14:12, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
I've reverted again, and brought this up on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games‎. I'm sick of arguing with you though. Thanks! Fin© 15:57, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Cliche, your edits are quite uncivil and are stepping over the line with respect to tendentious editing. You are advised to cool down and make sure you don't attack other editors when you participate in talk discussions. Also, please make sure to adhere to the neutral point of view while editing - it is pretty clear that you have a strong bias toward the PS3 and consider the Xbox 360 to be an inferior platform. Your opinion, however founded or unfounded it may be, should not be what motivates your discussion, but rather to keep things accurate and verifiable. It's okay to be pro-PS3 and/or anti-360, but that does not mean you get to put down other editors who may feel differently (not to mention there's nothing to indicate that these other editors have any particular bias whatsoever).

Now, let me take a crack at this:

7th-gen systems regularly render their graphics internally at a certain "native" resolution and then scale the rendered image either up or down to the "display" resolution if the display res doesn't match the native res. This is all done internally before anything goes out to the TV. So theoretically (although not always) a game should be able to run at whatever resolution the system has selected, but the quality of the output may vary depending on the amount of scaling and which direction it's going (upscaling may make images look fuzzy and/or blocky, while downscaling may cause anti-aliasing where it otherwise would not have occurred, but could also hide details). If you have a reliable source that states that the PS3 does not ever do this - that in fact games always render at the same resolution in which they are displayed - then please show us this source, and we can address how it contradicts the source that states that this particular game renders at 576p instead of 720p. Thank you. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 22:02, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

BTW, following up on an earlier statement by Cliche in this article: Halo 3 states in its infobox that it renders at "640p" (which is technically not a resolution), and the source tied to that states that the rendered image is scaled up to the display resolution of the 360 (whatever that happens to be - all the way up to 1080p). So technically, you can claim that it runs at 1080p, or 720p, or 1280x1024 (using a VGA adapter), etc., but the native resolution is locked to their esoteric (and unusual) internal resolution, and is simply scaled in hardware.
In other words, the information has been "corrected" in at least that article. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 23:42, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
He mentioned this on his talk page, I was the one who corrected it =) Thanks! Fin© 00:00, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Ah, okay. Thanks for clarifying. :) — KieferSkunk (talk) — 00:27, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
you are a joke as well. i thought this was uncivial personal attack against me: "Don't bother arguing with Cliché Online, he's a delusional and hypocritical fanboy". so why are you posting on my talk page instead of his. i think you're an idiot just like them. Cliché Online (talk) 07:16, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Because of your attitude. That comment just earned you a stronger warning. Falcon will get a warning if his uncivil comments continue, but it's clear that you struck first and have been POV-pushing to the point that he's getting exasperated with you. Falcon has been attempting to discuss this issue civilly with you, and I don't see the same good-faith effort coming from you. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 15:36, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
now about haze i think that using "native resolution" in the infobox is irrelevant because we only know this so called native resolution for few mediatic SD games such as Halo 3, COD4, Haze and Ninja Gaiden 2. we only have two confirmed (developer speech source) resolution, one is halo 3 the other is haze. great!! we can't use the native resolution for all games until that pixel counter stir up the shit out of his forum. so i suggest to replace the useless "native resolution" with "video output" which is more user friendly. no one will display native resolution on his tv set but will see what his console's outputting. and the ps3 outputs different hd resolutions unlike the xbox. Cliché Online (talk) 07:27, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Again, you're missing the point. If there's a reliable source available for the native resolution being less that 720p, then we use that. Thanks! Fin© 08:50, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Also, keep in mind that it is impractical to list all of the possible, supported display resolutions for the console in the infobox for every game. On the 360, you can literally display at any of something like 14 different resolutions (480i, 480p, 720p, 1080i and 1080p, plus a whole bunch of VGA resolutions), and all games automatically "support" all resolutions because of the upscale/downscale thing - it's just a matter of whether the game properly supports wide-screen formats or not, and what the internal render resolution is. I don't know for absolute certain, but I believe much the same is supposed to be true of the PS3 - doesn't it also upscale its games to 1080p if a game is designed to run at 720p but you've selected 1080p as your primary display resolution?
If that's the case, then we'd have to list every possible resolution for every game, which is not only unhelpful, but redundant against the article about the console's capabilities. If it's not the case, then we should be listing the advertised resolution, as well as the native rendering resolution if it's notable. There is evidence that it's notable for Halo 3 - I'm wondering if it's particularly notable for Haze.
The key here is notability - why is the distinction between 576p and 720p so important in the first place for this specific game? Is it because it's coming to light that PS3 developers are "cheating" just as much as 360 developers are? (Or are starting to?) Is this having a significant impact on Sony, or on the marketplace? Where is this being covered? These are the kinds of questions you guys need to answer.
From experience, I would say that if Halo 3 and Haze are so far the only games where a developer has come out and said "Yes, we're rendering at a lower resolution and upscaling it", then notability is established by the developer's message, and more so because these games stand out specifically for that reason. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 15:36, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

BTW, it's worth noting that it would be very difficult to find reliable screenshots that show the game's true rendering resolution, since virtually all screenshots given to game review sites and promotional sites are sent as high-res captures (often at double or even quadruple resolution to make them look better), so it's unlikely to be possible to truly verify if the rendering resolution is actually different from the display resolution. You'd need access to the PS3's internal frame buffer to really see that.

All things being equal, then, I'd say that if you have a developer at the company that originally created the game saying that they render at a lower resolution and rely on the PS3 to upscale it to 720p, that's as good a source as you're likely to get. The thing is that, reliable as they are, sites like Gamespot, IGN, etc., often do not have (or care about) the technical details of how a game is programmed - they care about the game's public-facing features, its performance, and how it looks on the screen (and of course, how fun it is to play). So statements from a developer saying "We render at 576p and upscale to 720p" are almost always more reliable than a review site saying "The game runs at / displays at / supports 720p/1080p/etc.".

One more thing I'd like to address from the start of this discussion: There seems to be some terminology confusion (rightly so) with the use of the term "576p", since 576p is the EDTV standard in the PAL region. That is an actual, recognized display resolution, whereas using the term to refer to the internal rendering resolution of a game within memory is technically incorrect. What it basically means is that the game is rendered with a vertical resolution of 576 pixels, and you can argue that it is a progressive image in that it's not interlaced in memory, but both 'progressive' and 'interlaced' refer to the signal sent to the TV, and have very little to do with the source image. Because the console hardware can upscale (and downscale) the 576-pixel image to whatever resolution is being sent to the TV, the size of the original image is immaterial except in that its quality may be affected during the scaling process. So, if it really is being rendered at "576p", this does not really mean that it's a PAL image, nor does it restrict the machine's ability to display it at 480i/480p - it's most likely an unfortunate coincidence of naming. This is less of an issue with Halo 3's rendering at "640p", where the term doesn't coincide with any display resolution name. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 20:19, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Are the weapons notable?[edit]

Noticing a revert war starting regarding the Weapons section, so both editors involved should ask themselves (and each other) this question: Are the weapons notable? (See WP:VG/GL for the established consensus on this issue.)

My take on it is that there isn't anything particularly notable about the weapons in this game, such that they need to be listed in their own section. Also, gaming blogs are generally not considered reliable sources. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 20:16, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Yup, I came to the same conclusion once I read over the section, it was basically "there's a pistol. and a rifle. and a minigun." - I said as much on Skywalker's talk page. Fin© 20:27, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Help improve our long-awaited Wikiproject![edit]

Please join our project to upgrade this article to featured status.

box art[edit]

is it just me or does the box art's eye's size and position not make any sense? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TMV943 (talkcontribs) 04:48, 25 February 2013 (UTC)