Talk:Resident Evil 2: Difference between revisions
→Embedded lists: Response, appeal to spirit of wikipedia to stop reverting entire changes instead of just formatting concerns |
Unused000702 (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 204: | Line 204: | ||
:In conclusion, I've read both the [[WP:IINFO|indiscriminate lists]] and [[WP:GAMECRUFT|video game project's guidelines]], but I don't see how my changes contradict any of this. Formatting issues we can discuss but continual reverting of changes that are clearly allowed on other Resident Evil pages seems counterproductive to the goals of Wikipedia. [[User:Brumbek|Brumbek]] ([[User talk:Brumbek|talk]]) 18:09, 9 April 2011 (UTC) |
:In conclusion, I've read both the [[WP:IINFO|indiscriminate lists]] and [[WP:GAMECRUFT|video game project's guidelines]], but I don't see how my changes contradict any of this. Formatting issues we can discuss but continual reverting of changes that are clearly allowed on other Resident Evil pages seems counterproductive to the goals of Wikipedia. [[User:Brumbek|Brumbek]] ([[User talk:Brumbek|talk]]) 18:09, 9 April 2011 (UTC) |
||
::As explained in great detail above, there were far more than just formatting concerns to these edits – and if more regular editors were to join this discussion, they would state the same. The article currently addresses the most important added features between the individual ports without going into exhaustive and trivial details ("Infinite Ammo cheat", "Hunter cameo", FPS counts). I won't agree to repeating the same information in the article several times, or a split of the section into nine subs to separate the prose into interruptive paragraphs and short sentences. That said, most of the other ''Resident Evil'' articles are in very poor shape and are far from having experienced what is considered good editing around here. [[User:Prime Blue|Prime Blue]] ([[User talk:Prime Blue|talk]]) 18:55, 9 April 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 18:55, 9 April 2011
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Resident Evil 2 article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find video game sources: "Resident Evil 2" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk |
![]() | This article is a current featured article candidate. A featured article should exemplify Wikipedia's best work, and is therefore expected to meet the criteria. Please feel free to After one of the FAC coordinators promotes the article or archives the nomination, a bot will update the nomination page and article talk page. Do not manually update the {{Article history}} template when the FAC closes. |
![]() | Resident Evil 2 has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
|
![]() | This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
Game Engine
Someone put "Quake" as the game engine, I chagned it to custom, until such time as it's properly researched, the right answer and cited, please do not change.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.205.44.2 (talk) 21:05, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
According to moddb, the engine would be Renderware. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.140.228.210 (talk) 21:47, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Weapons As Walking Canes - Sketchy and Subjectable
The characters, when in the "Danger" state, make no such use of their weapons as canes to help themselves along. The person who initially wrote that may be confusing the fact that while holding a weapon in that state, since the character's arm is doubled across their stomach and they limp so low to the ground, that it seems like they are using the weapon as a prop even though that is not the case, since the weapons can be de-equipped at any point and the characters still move the same in that state without them.
William brikin, in the sewers
In the article it says william birkin released the t-virus, but i remember it as being the g-virus, he injected himself, then smashed it, where it then leaked into a drain. Am i right?
i agree Birkin did release the G-Virus into the sewer NOT the T-Virus. as i remember it and i also checked the game to make sure, birkin injects the g-virus into himself after hes attacked by the umbrella soldiers and the soldiers take his G-Virus.Birkin while contaminated by the G-virus goes after them and kills them leaving Hunk alive. while the soldiers were attacked the G-virus containers fell to the floor and broke and leaked out the virus, the rats then ate the virus. someone who refuses to play the game keeps vandalizing the article and keeps putting that Birkin released the T-Virus instead of the G-Virus. this same IDIOT is now adding his personal comments in the article itself. Does anyone agree with us that it was the G-Vrius that william leaked? or was it the T-Virus? please put your ideas here thank you Dick Grayson 21:19, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
- I can understand the confusion, but the narrator in the "B" scenarios and just about every official source from Capcom refers to the events of the game as "T-Virus outbreak", NOT the G-Virus outbreak. Jonny2x4 04:20, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
oh ok thanks man for the information Dick Grayson 04:49, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
I agree that Birkin put on his own body the G-virus in order to ger revenge (from Umbrella who sent soldiers to steal his work) and oufcourse in order save his life, but the MAIN outbreak was from T-VIRUS!!!
More specificily from the original diaries, from res:nemesis the T-virus released by the UMBRELLA DISPOSAL FACILITY(last chapter from nemesis), where due to extreme increase of the infected bodies who needed disposal, the silos, where full.
So those infected dead bodies just burried,or most of them thrown at the raccoon city sewage system.
Due to this some workers appeared the first symptoms of T-VIRUS infection.
Here i have some facts from Original Diaries:
-After canceling their previous game due to illness, the Umbrella SEWAGE PLANT worker, Thomas, easily beats the R.P.D. night watchman at a game of chess. The watchman observes that Thomas does not look well, and that the Umbrella worker never ceases talking about food.
Also the outbreak didnt start from dr.Birkin, cause when he is mutated to an enormous infected beast, the city was already started to be 'on fire'.
Part of the Outbreak may have been caused by the Factory but the virus was also stated to have been spread by infected rats (some of the smashed vials after Birkin attakced clearly contained the T-Virus and we see some rats uhm "drinking" it i suppose you could say)who attacked civillians.--NobleServent2 20:59, 6 August 2006 (UTC)NobleServent2
- There was more than one Outbreak. The outbreak caused by Marcus had reached Raccoon, evident by the Raccoon General hospital files and the P-12A Incinerator Facility burning infected corpses. Birkins destruction of a t-virus capsule and the spread into the local drinking water supply merely made the citizens inevitable deaths a lot sooner.-- OsirisV (talk) 20:59, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Bravo team was sent in to investigate some grisly murders in the Arklay Mountains region outside of Raccoon City. These grisly murders were all because of T-Virus and the events were even before Ecliptic Express attack of Marcus and arrival of Hunk's team. As Albert Wesker mentioned in his first report "The freak murder incidents had occurred in the forest near the mansion started
it all. The mansion was Umbrella's secret BOW laboratory and it was clear that
the in development T-Virus was the cause of the murder." So we can say that there was something going on before the major events. As a result the mansion and the labratory have been destroyed by STARS long before the assasination of William Birkin and there was no outbreak yet. The suitcase you are talking about was including both G-Virus And T-Virus samples. Two different colours of tubes can be seen around the rats. G Sample's tube was purple for sure as we know from the game.
This is explaining what green tubes are. T-Virus Samples. Sure thing the major event which triggers the outbreak is the underground facility attack and carrier rats.[1] SinanDC (talk) 04:30, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Official Sites
I've noticed that every "official" site in the External Links division leads to a foreign language alternative. Might I suggest leaving that to Wikipedia's Japanese alternatives and producing some outlets for our English readers? - AWF
- We could just warn people what language it is before clicking on it.-- OsirisV (talk) 20:59, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
Game.com Version
I was going to write something on this version, but I'm unsure if anyone is keeping it off of this site or not. It's pretty extensive otherwise. Thaddius 00:57, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
- I made the entry. --Thaddius 14:30, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
added details to the "Nintendo 64 version" section
I added a few details to the "Nintendo 64 version" section. I added the info inside the ###:
"Ported by Angel Studios and released in 1999, the Nintendo 64 version was produced primarily as a forerunner for the unreleased N64 version of Resident Evil 0. The N64 version was based on the original Resident Evil 2 and thus, does not contain the Extreme Battle mode. However, it does contain force feedback via the N64 Rumble Pak, ### a high-resolution graphics mode via the N64 Expansion Pak, full surround sound via Factor 5's MusyX (previously known as MOsys FX) sound drivers, ### and several exclusive additions not found in any of the later versions (including the Nintendo GameCube version):
First Person Controls...
Since the N64 uses cartridges instead of optical discs, several compression techniques had to be used in order to fit all of the game's voice acting and FMV sequences into a 64MB (512-Mbit) cartridge (for more details see September 2000 issue of Game Developer magazine). Because of this, there is a noticeable drop in quality in scenes and dialogue compared to the original PlayStation version and certain "duplicate" FMV scenes were also removed, resulting in continuity errors such as Leon and Claire getting off on the wrong side of the police car in the 2nd Scenario and Ada speaking to Annette in Claire's voice. ### Still, this was quite a feat for Angel Studios and the Nintendo 64. ### "
Popular community April fools joke
There was a popular april fools joke that circulated on the internet saying that if you beat the game with just using a handgun with one clip and a knife,you would unlock a secret character.I think the character's name was Akira.He was a giant sausage who would say "Sausage" whenever he shot. The Diablo article has a similar section about a fake secret.
- Is this in any way related to the Tofu character? I've unlocked that guy in the N64 version. --Thaddius 15:36, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
It's actually called a magazine, not a clip. I just wanted to clear this up in case someone decided that this warranted inclusion in the article at some point in time. Bald Chihuahua
- I'll put up a screenshot if I can to prove it if it is the tofu chracter. --Thaddius 16:57, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
- Here they are. I used an emulator and cheats to take these (hence the clock being stuck at '16' and the way Tofu stands out) but if you enter the GS code 800E10EF 0049 it will give you the 'Tofu Survivor' mode mentioned on the main page. [1] [2] [3] [4] He does say something like 'sausage' when attacked, but it's unclear. Hope this helps at all. --Thaddius 17:12, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
Possible Instances of Spoiler Content
Hello, I just registered moments ago. I have never personally altered any wiki content, and would prefer not to do so with my rather sloppy style I have been reading wiki articles for educational gain for nearly two years. I have played this game dozens of times, and know it backwords and forwards. However, as I was reading this article I found that in certain sections, such as the the character bios contain information that seems to be relevant enough to the plot to be spoilers. A prime example is in Ada Wongs description it directly indicates she is a spy, and gives her exact motives. Also the Hunk profile, also gives aways the entire FMV scene in which he is relevant. Which I can tell from experience from my play throught of the game plays a significant role in alluding to the plot at that point in the game.
I hope this is a valid discussion as it is my first, Thank You all for your hard work.
Regarding changes of RE 1.5 --> 2
The section mentioning the substitution of Elza Walker for Claire Redfield states that it made more sense. Yet, with the article's admission of retention of basic characteristics, plus Claire's relation to Chris making absolutely no difference in the story until Code: Veronica, I don't understand how this is the case. If anything, the change during development was done merely for the sake of doing it.
Reply: The reason for changing Elza to Claire was to give the game a further connection to the first one since no characters from the first game (save an unlockable Brad) actually appear in the game. Van Redd 17:20, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
- Additionally, Claire being Chris' brother is the reason she comes to Raccoon City in the first place. He has gone 'missing' and she is looking for him. She even finds his diary in the RPD and realises that some time after the events of RE1 he left the city to begin an investigation into Umbrella. At the end of Resident Evil 2 she declares that she still intends to look for him. Paper Butterfly (talk) 09:56, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Movie contest
Anyone remember back when RE2 was first released, int he back of the booklet they had a contest where the winner was given a walk-on, non-speaking role in the RE film? The entry form is included in the back of the Playstation, original RE2 instruction book. Does anyone have any information on what happened with the contest? Should this information be included in the article? --Jazz Remington 19:43, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- I remember there being a similar contest in Nintendo Power for The Mask 2, which didn't realy happen until recently in the case of Son of the Mask, but there was also a cartoon series in between that. The point is, I think after all that time they either did not announce a winner, compensated the winner in some way, or simply sent them a letter saying they weren't going to be in the movie. It doesn't seem possible that they would sting along some kid for so many years... --Thaddius 04:15, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
- Speaking of Son of the Mask: "The sequel, originally planned shortly after the first movie, even featured a contest in Nintendo Power magazine to win a small part in the film (it is unlikely this prize was honored so many years later)." This was pulled from that article. It seems the author came to the same conclusion I did. --Thaddius 04:18, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Ada and Sherry Removed? Why?
I put Ada and Sherry back in the "playable characters" section, because they are infact playable and should be there.
-October 25, 2006 -MidnightClub
- They're not playable in the traditional sense, in which you get to choose them like you do with Leon and Claire, but are only playable during key portions of the game. You could make an argument that Ada is unlockable in Extreme Battle, but still. Jonny2x4 17:05, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
Plot
Normally, plot sections are too long. This one is waaaay too short. Somebody able to fix that (I have never played the game, so it won't be me). Ingolfson 21:50, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
- I wrote a quite detailed(not too detailed) summary of the two scenarios sets quite a while back but someone deleted it.Why?The summary present was and is woefully inadaquate.Playboyoreo (talk) 23:23, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
RPD INFO
RPD Page gone? What happened to the page that listed a bunch of the RPD officers and thier current status, along with the unit's history, vehicles and weapons? Could someone tell me what happened to it?
- It got deleted. Geoff B (talk) 08:46, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Would it still be in the history because I want to see it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Roger02147 (talk • contribs) 14:47, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
How far is it back in the History, I just want to see it, you don't have to put the section back-up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.204.7.49 (talk) 10:48, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
- It's not in the history of this article, it was a separate article. Geoff B (talk) 12:04, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
- There is this, though. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.T.A.R.S._Members_%28Resident_Evil%29 Geoff B (talk) 13:06, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
thanks man, but there was a page linked in this one telling about all known RPD officers and the department.
- Just look it up at the Resident Evil Wiki. They have 3000 Biohazard-related articles. They have a page for EVERY character.OsirisV (talk) 12:57, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
BH2 for Wii?
on Evilresource.com I saw a "news update" saying there was to be a wii-ported version of BioHazard 2. the "evidence" is linked here.OsirisV (talk) 12:57, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
References via Wayback Machine
Haven't got a clue if this is allowed or not but I've done it for some of the reviews. E.g. http://psx.ign.com/reviews/504.html takes you to a 404, whereas http://web.archive.org/web/19990429091320/http://psx.ign.com/reviews/504.html takes you to the review. Thought this was better than just providing a non-working link and then having it and the content it sources removed. Advice?Mr T (Based) (talk) 17:00, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
- I have done this several times, as the alternative is to remove the source, as I see it. It isn't ideal... but the world is what it is, rather than what we want it to be. sinneed (talk) 20:52, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
- Just as long as it's okay.Mr T (Based) (talk) 21:01, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
New and VERY LONG plot
This new section is not very well written and seems much too long. I am going to flag it for improvement. Or kill it. sinneed (talk) 20:54, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
- Not insulting the editor who wrote it, but it's poor. Far too long, it doesn't really summarise events but presents them in step-by-step fashion making it difficult to render down to a summary, and spelling, grammar and tone ("Just when things could not get worse", "not knowing that another battle was about to begin."etc) are lacking. I dunno what was wrong with the previous summary, apart from the fact that it didn't mention the ending.Mr T (Based) (talk) 21:01, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
- I attacked it with my editorial pruning shears, and Mr T corrected some of the errors introduced (mine or other editors... thank you Mr T). I have left it flagged for possible clean-up, and it could use some more sourcing. Any improvements are, of course, welcome. sinneed (talk) 23:35, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for pruning it, what needs sourcing, the various plot events? Is the game not the source for those?Mr T (Based) (talk) 00:42, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
- I attacked it with my editorial pruning shears, and Mr T corrected some of the errors introduced (mine or other editors... thank you Mr T). I have left it flagged for possible clean-up, and it could use some more sourcing. Any improvements are, of course, welcome. sinneed (talk) 23:35, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
IGN a reliable source.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Video_games/Sources#List. Geoff B (talk) 15:50, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Should there be more detailed information on Resident Evil 1.5?
Technically, it WAS Resident Evil 2 before being scrapped, and I think it is imperative we at least include a separate section for it if there won't be an article about it anytime soon. I think people would appreciate more information on it as I can assume that it is searched for often within Wikipedia, however, there is little information on it. Last Best Hope of Humanity (talk) 04:54, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
There's actually a whole lot of information about this game in many websites including "BioFlames" and "The Horror Is Alive". Hopefully, I'll get around to making an extensive page about the game some time in the future. It could definitely use some acknowledgment here on Wiki. Keiji Dragon (talk) 04:17, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Oh, I know. I meant within the Wiki. Although I definitely agree that it deserves acknowledgment on Wikipedia of all places. I was surprised that there wasn't even a section within this article talking about it. Last Best Hope of Humanity (talk) 10:34, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- The main problem has been the lack of reliable sources discussing it. Geoff B (talk) 12:39, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
" For example, Ohishi based Leon on his bloodhound"
lolwut? --Asperchu (talk) 13:53, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
- If you have a problem with the sourced information in the article, please try pointing it out here, instead of just trying to remove it. Geoff B (talk) 15:31, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
- NOT A DOG. --Asperchu (talk) 16:36, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
- The statement does not say Leon is a dog. Read it again, and pay a little more attention. Geoff B (talk) 17:29, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
- How can one "base" a human character "on" a dog. Tell me. (In during mistranslation of a Japanese text.) --Asperchu (talk) 17:32, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
- Hair colour, eye colour, mannerisms, facial expressions, etc etc. Why not work it out for yourself instead of having other editors do it for you? Geoff B (talk) 17:51, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
- Leon has facial expressions of a dog. That's interesting, tell me more. --Asperchu (talk) 18:13, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
- Basing human characters on pets or other animals is a common practice; cut back on the snarkiness. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 21:07, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
- Seems like WP:JUSTDONTLIKEIT to me. I'm not going to tell you any more, Asperchu, I think you should work it out for yourself and stop being flippant. Geoff B (talk) 00:11, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
- Basing human characters on pets or other animals is a common practice; cut back on the snarkiness. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 21:07, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
- Leon has facial expressions of a dog. That's interesting, tell me more. --Asperchu (talk) 18:13, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
- Hair colour, eye colour, mannerisms, facial expressions, etc etc. Why not work it out for yourself instead of having other editors do it for you? Geoff B (talk) 17:51, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
- How can one "base" a human character "on" a dog. Tell me. (In during mistranslation of a Japanese text.) --Asperchu (talk) 17:32, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
- The statement does not say Leon is a dog. Read it again, and pay a little more attention. Geoff B (talk) 17:29, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
- NOT A DOG. --Asperchu (talk) 16:36, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Reference material
Since I noticed that this was up for GAN, I thought I'd mention that numerous print reviews for the game may be found in the Online print archive. They are as follows:
- Computer Games Magazine
- Electronic Gaming Monthly (Dreamcast)
- GameFan (N64)
- Game Informer (N64)
- Game Informer (PlayStation)
- Next Generation Magazine
- PC Gamer UK
I realize that you already have quite a few reviews in the Reception section, but a wider base of sources never hurts. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 06:00, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for finding those. As you said, the reception section is pretty meaty already, but I'll see if I can find some additional tidbits to add from those. Prime Blue (talk) 12:36, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
- No problem. I just realized that I'd found a couple of previews, too. Here they are: Next Generation Magazine, Electronic Gaming Monthly. Hope they're useful. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 16:41, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
Embedded lists
As pointed out before, indiscriminate lists of differences are not what a Wikipedia article is for. Also, as per the video game project's guidelines, lists of gameplay items, weapons, or concepts, as well as exhaustive version histories are not allowed. Beyond that, embedded lists are not appropriate here because they merely repeat what is already said in prose, the rest being trivial and/or unexplained information that leaves the reader oblivious to its meaning (cheats, technical details etc.). Some of the points added are not backed up by the references used, others use unreliable self-published sources such as GameFAQs contributions, or are not sourced at all. The graphic and sound quality of the individual versions is explained in great detail in the reception section. The version name of the PlayStation rerelease is spelled Dual Shock Ver. as seen on the game's title screen and box covers, and "many" already is a potential POV word, which is why it is to be avoided.
The only thing that could potentially make sense here is a table with ticks and crosses, but this would also require additional reliable sources to be provided for the individual features, as the content in an FA may not deduce anything from other parts of information. Unless more editors agree that such a table is vital to the article, the prose-only version remains as the one supported by the FA reviewers. Prime Blue (talk) 14:40, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
- The lists are not "indiscriminate"...they specifically reference the major changes between ports and provide users with factual information necessary to understand each port. The current way the ports are explained is extremely vague and just lets the reader know certain ports exist. This is not very encyclopedic. I again ask you to consider what the purpose of wikipedia is...it is to inform the reader with factual information in order for the reader to have a better understanding of the subject.
- If you are absolutely opposed to lists, then will converting the lists into prose be acceptable to you? And why did you revert my change of structure (separating ports into their own sections)? Please explain why you don't like this method even though the other Resident Evil pages do have this exact same format. I would think I have a strong case here since the other pages use this method!
- In conclusion, I've read both the indiscriminate lists and video game project's guidelines, but I don't see how my changes contradict any of this. Formatting issues we can discuss but continual reverting of changes that are clearly allowed on other Resident Evil pages seems counterproductive to the goals of Wikipedia. Brumbek (talk) 18:09, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
- As explained in great detail above, there were far more than just formatting concerns to these edits – and if more regular editors were to join this discussion, they would state the same. The article currently addresses the most important added features between the individual ports without going into exhaustive and trivial details ("Infinite Ammo cheat", "Hunter cameo", FPS counts). I won't agree to repeating the same information in the article several times, or a split of the section into nine subs to separate the prose into interruptive paragraphs and short sentences. That said, most of the other Resident Evil articles are in very poor shape and are far from having experienced what is considered good editing around here. Prime Blue (talk) 18:55, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
- ^ www.residentevilsaga.com