Talk:Galaga

Which one came first ? Arcade or MSX version? Is there a common piece of source code or the game was completely re-coded for each of the ports?

The arcade version was released in 1981, and there were not any MSX computers before 1983... I dont know the history of the MSX port (or even who did it), but theoretically it would be possible - both used Z80 CPUs.

--Tjansen 11:08, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Is there a reason Gaplus was taken off of legacy? --Herzog 14:48, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Medals

I'd be interesting seeing some info and/or screenshots of the medals that one obtains the higher up the game goes. I have only gotten yo around 22 or 23, but I hear there is a 50 medal as well as a 100 medal. Thoughts? -Husnock 17:28, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

there's a 10, 20, 30, 40, and 50 medal, and after that the 50 medals jsut accumulate. Though I'd like to see some info on stage 255...--Herzog 09:27, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

10= blue shield with gold eagle 20= purple shield with gold crown 30= gold shield with blue eagle 40= ? 50= AARP memebership. White shield with red letters. A screen comes up with a number to call, and you start getting senior discounts on all future games :-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.225.117.1 (talk) 14:35, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

The anon is silly. :) But in seriousness, the specifics of what you see are not necessary for this article. The "medals" are just there to show you what stage you're on, so knowing what they look like does not contribute to an overall understanding of the game. I would think these would be better suited for StrategyWiki or a similar wiki that focuses on more in-depth information. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 16:00, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Cease Fire Bug

Just spent 20 minutes dodging their shots in the PS2 version of the game- the bug most likely is not present here. If anyone else owns Namco Museum: 50th Anniversary and wants to confirm this, that'd be super. Also- apologies for the anonymous edit, I forgot to log in. -- Toksyuryel ^{talk | contrib} avatar 08:38, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

"Cosmo gang the video"

Should "Cosmo gang the video" be added to the legacy?

I don't think so. They're not mentioned on the KLOV. Even if they use Galaga hardware, it doesn't make them part of the Galaga canon. — Frecklefoot | Talk 13:57, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I am not sure about the hardware but the gameplay is very similar.

I'd still say no. Lots of games have gameplay similar to Galaga (which, in turn, is very similar to Galaxian, it's ancestor). We could mention it inspired lots of games with similar gameplay, but that honor really belongs to Space Invaders. — Frecklefoot | Talk 15:03, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

No it should not, it's not part of the Galaxian/Galaga family. Also running on the same hardware is irrelevant. Many companies started using common hardware platforms in the mid-to-late 80s, for example Galaga '88 runs on Namco System 1 hardware but so does Pac-Mania and 20 other games. By the way Cosmo Gang the Video runs on Namco System 2 hardware (same as Assault).

Pronunciation?

I've always thought that Galaga was pronounced with the middle syllable accented, as in "ga-LAAG-a", but most people in my experience have referred to it as "GAL-a-ga". So, not to pick nits or anything, but is there an official pronunciation for the game's title, and if so, what is it? ekedolphin 05:09, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't think so. I think it's just like the name Lumines ("LOO-mines" vs. "Loo-mi-nez") - both are fine. I think the pronunciation Namco uses when they talk about it in their press conferences is probably the "official" version. FWIW, I've always heard "GAL-a-ga". — KieferSkunk (talk) — 20:08, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

oo != ue. You are illiterate. Lumines = Lumines. It is not English; do not mung English letters with Latin letters, ever. -lysdexia 06:25, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Took me two months to notice your attack. What does literacy have to do with any of this? — KieferSkunk (talk) — 23:09, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

This is all pure speculation. "Galaga" is an invented name. Only Namco can say how they intend it to be pronounced. Unless you can provide a reference for how they prefer, leave it alone. If I named a game "Vimdoba," I couldn't get upset if people didn't pronounce it the way I inteded. I removed the item. Right now, the whole subject is original research, a huge no-no on Wikipedia. — Frecklefoot | Talk 19:40, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

How do I start this game

How do I start galaga? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gregwire (talk • contribs) 17:59, 6 December 2006 (UTC).

1. Insert token
2. Press 1 player button

Is that what you meant? — Frecklefoot | Talk 19:49, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject NINTENDO?

Why was this article tagged for WikiProject Nintendo? Galaga is not in any way, shape or form a Nintendo product. It was created by Namco. The NES saw a port of Galaga, yes, but that doesn't mean it's now a Nintendo game. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 18:45, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Removed the NESProj template for the reasons stated above. Please discuss before adding it again. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 23:06, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Unofficial fan site

Is there a reason it's Japanese? And as far as I can tell, there isn't much content. I'll remove the link after 10 days if nobody responds. --Spixels 21:42, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Namco Museum 50th Anniversary

Noticed a brief revert war in which the title of the console compilation in which Galaga was re-released was being debated. Just wanted to chime in: The real title of the compilation is, indeed, "Namco Museum 50th Anniversary". Whether it makes sense or not is irrelevant - that's what they called it. :) Gamespot.com page — KieferSkunk (talk) — 21:25, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Popular culture

In an effort to prevent an edit war, I'm starting a discussion on the "Popular Culture" section of this article. One user removed it, another editor re-added it. Personally, I don't see what is so important about this section. One, it's too long and, two, some of the entries are so obscure, they don't really fit the "popular culture" criteria. I wouldn't be heartbroken if it was trimmed down to one or two of the most notable entries, or even nixed. Anyone else have any thoughts on this section? — Frecklefoot | Talk 12:43, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't think pop-culture is all that noteworthy in this case. Galaga is a great game, but its influence on popular culture isn't nearly as well recognized as that of Pac Man and Space Invaders. However, I would like to see the trivia section stay, since there are noteworthy references to/from other games and some information that people will find interesting in that section. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 17:11, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Both are unsourced, and riddled with OR. Per WP:TRIV, the trivia section needs to go, and the information should be merged. The information isn't sourced, and is trivial, so it won't be merged. Nemu 18:02, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

With all due respect, how are we supposed to source things that are interesting about the game and can only be seen by playing the game or watching a movie? :P — KieferSkunk (talk) — 02:21, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

You need a reliable source such as a website or magazine article. If that cannot be done, the information isn't suitable for the site. Nemu 02:25, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Game-guide material?

Okay. By now, anyone who knows me knows I'm really not a big fan of WP's policies on game-guide material - I don't see any harm in having information in an article that describes how to play the game, gives point values, basic strategies, etc. But I've seen information like this deleted time and time again from other game articles, so I'm just gonna ask here: Is the information listed in this article TOO detailed for WP's tastes? Or is it good-article material?

I think a balance needs to be struck somewhere. If you remove too much "game-guide" material, people cease to be able to learn what makes the game fun and unique, and why it was such an important milestone in video-game history. Leave too much there, and it becomes bogged down with unnecessary info. I personally lean more toward the "Make it as complete and clean as possible" side, while I've seen others take a more minimalist approach, distilling game articles down to only the essential info needed to describe the game in a general sense.

Could I get some opinions here? Especially from some of the folks who are more actively and aggressively enforcing the policies? Thanks. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 18:54, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

In Popular Culture

Following guidelines that were mentioned in Talk:PONG, I think it's appropriate to mention this here as well. The "In Popular Culture" section should be limited to notable references only, since there may be many trivial appearances of a Galaga machine or references to the game in any number of pop-culture places. Basically, a notable reference is one where Galaga (either the machine or the game as a whole) plays an integral part in the plot of a movie, TV show, comic, etc. - for instance, if part of the plot centers around a Galaga tournament or a character gets sucked into a Galaga machine, or something like that. Just having the machine show up on the set doesn't necessarily make it a noteworthy reference.

(Note that the current LOST reference fits this category - a submarine named after the game and notes about the producers playing the game are significant.)

Discussion is welcome. :) — KieferSkunk (talk) — 19:37, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Is this worth adding? In 1982, the studio of WarGames sent a Galaga machine to Matthew Broderick for him to practice prior to shooting the movie. He is seen playing Galaga in WarGames twice. http://www.matthewbroderick.net/fact.html Acanthopteroctetoidea 22:03, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I think that one's borderline. If he's just playing an arcade game in the movie, but the particular game itself doesn't affect the plot, it could realistically be any arcade game he's playing. However, the fact that Galaga is specifically named in a production note puts it in about the same class as the LOST fact. I'd say go ahead and add it - if others object, we can continue discussion. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 22:09, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Yah, I'd agree with KieferSkunk. Its borderline, but made a little more plausible because of the production notes and verification of that specific game being important to the production. It is the only game he actually plays in the film as well in repeated scenes. The others are just background props. --Marty Goldberg 22:23, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Galaga Maniax - oops...

If anyone comments about galaga maniax not being notable due to the lack of hits... I was trying to boost their hitcount and accidentally reset it somehow. it used to be like, almost 200,000 hits, but now it's 17 hits. SORRY GUYS! I have it set to refresh every 5 seconds or so, so I can fix this mistake of mine and fix their hitcounter. 68.107.96.136 04:03, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Huh? — KieferSkunk (talk) — 06:05, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I hadn't seen that site before - if it's an unofficial fan site, it doesn't belong in this article anyway. There are dozens of unofficial fan sites for this game. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 06:11, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Appearance in Tekken

I was wondering, should someone make a reference to how Galaga appeared as a loading game in the PS1 game Tekken. Its appearance is very similar to the appearance of Galaxian in the first Ridge Racer. If one was to list this reference, where would they put it? SolidShroom 18:35, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Bug wherein enemies stop shooting

Has anyone disassembled the game and figured out why this happens? That would be interesting information to add to the article. tgies 22:24, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I'd say that's unnecessarily detailed information for an encyclopedia. The fact that the bug is present and can be exploited is sufficient - the details on exactly how, why and when it happens would be more appropriate for a gaming site, a programming analysis site, and/or an emulation discussion site such as that for MAME. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 00:18, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

And doing such would definitely be original research, a big no-no. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 15:34, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

On the other hand, if such study is done and published in reliable game sites, there will be no problem using it as a reference for the afore mentioned bug and let interested people follow the reference to see the disassembly study... No actual need to put it right here in wikipedia. Loudenvier 15:42, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Which is what I'm suggesting. tgies (talk) 06:10, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Mod board info removed

I took the following text (modified from its original form) out of the article:

A "rapid fire" modification board can be installed in the original arcade game, allowing the player to hold down the button and fire continuously. Another modification, which replaces one of the game's EPROMs, increases the speed of the player's shots, occasionally causing shots to pass through enemies.

This was in the Legacy section, but it doesn't really seem to fit there, and none of the other current sections in the article seem like a good match either. Furthermore, these mods fall under the "accessories and customizations" category, which are generally not notable. So for now, it's out of the article. If we can find a reliable source that establishes notability for these mods, we can work on finding a good place to incorporate them. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 19:28, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

GBA

Namco Museum: 50th Anniversary Arcade Collection was released on the Game Boy Advance, it had Galaga. Galaga was also released on Namco Museum for the GBA but the Galaga in 50th Anniversary version is far superior, plays more like the original and looks more like the original.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.96.122.175 (talk) 21:35, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Amiga Galaxy '89

Kingsoft updated the version of Galaga they made on the Commodore 64 "Galaxy" as "Galaxy '89" and they released Galaxy 89 on the Commodore Amiga, in 1989. Both Commodore versions look and play very similarly but perhaps you could say Galaxy '89 was meant more as a remake of Galaga 88 rather than another remake of Galaga. I think Galaxy ‘89 plays far more like the original Galaga and was the best remake for the Amiga.